• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it?

  • No

    Votes: 99 79.2%

  • Yes, explain

    Votes: 26 20.8%
  • Total voters
    125
Status
Not open for further replies.
Much better. I HATE badly formatted posts.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
A very interesting study. I've read the Swedish study that it referenced. Interestingly enough it points that there may be a biological link to sexual orientation.

Oh, and btw, your assessment of what it means is completely absurd and the article theorizes nothing close to it.

I've seen you argue this before. My position would be pretty similar.
Click to expand...

To me, and of course I could be wrong, this is someone who is against gay marriage trying to make it seem like they are truly for it, but because it could in some mixed up way be bad for society, they just can't be completely for it.

Haven't read any studies, and don't care to cause this whole deal probably doesn't really need studies in my mind. It's a common sense issue.

Truth is gays are just like everybody else except they fall for their own sex instead of the majority way of opposite sex. This means they can rear kids just as well as same sex couples and all it's variations.

I don't believe in the "it takes a village" theory because most people are very territorial about their children, and don't really like interference from outside parties, including family members.

Also, the majority of Americans who are against gay marriage is very small the way I'm seeing it, and as soon as the younger people take over the "majority" as far as voting goes, the gays will get "marriage", and it will be marriage not some wording that is equivalent, but different.
 
Blackdog said:
:lol:

I did not even notice until you said something.

Poet and don't know it.
Click to expand...
I've found that the best are unintentional.
 
Jerry said:
Here's the down and dirty of it, and no I don't care to respond to those of you who will troll me for this post.

When it comes down to it, homosexuality is seen as some kind of malfunction or error because the sex drive is incongruent with the actual functions of the physical body parts. Gay man have the sexual attraction of hetero women, and gay women of hetero men.

"Sexy" Smells Different for Gay, Straight Men, Study Says

On an instinctive level, gay men are trying to impregnate other men and lesbian woman are trying to have the children of other women. This is why many traditional sources call homosexuality "confusion", as confusion doesn't always refer to your ability to reason.
Click to expand...

1+1=orange

This is why I hate biological evidence of homosexuality. Social Conservatives simply cannot accept it as a natural and normal thing. If it were proven conclusively to be biological, then they would argue that it should be treated as a disease that needed to be cured. They cannot accept it as just another variation in human nature. To them, it has to be treated as something evil and wrong. With such a strong animosity towards something that does relatively little harm to society, you have to wonder why social conservatives are so threatened by it.

The only positive to biological evidence, as far as social conservatives are concerned, is that they can no longer blame gays for being gay. Of course, that won't stop them from treating gays like some sort of plague.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
Here's the down and dirty of it, and no I don't care to respond to those of you who will troll me for this post.

When it comes down to it, homosexuality is seen as some kind of malfunction or error because the sex drive is incongruent with the actual functions of the physical body parts. Gay man have the sexual attraction of hetero women, and gay women of hetero men.

"Sexy" Smells Different for Gay, Straight Men, Study Says

On an instinctive level, gay men are trying to impregnate other men and lesbian woman are trying to have the children of other women. This is why many traditional sources call homosexuality "confusion", as confusion doesn't always refer to your ability to reason.

It is felt by many that gay marriage, by extension, will be just as incongruent, that it will mirror the biological error compelling people to it.

Even if we went as far as to shake hands and agree that born-homosexuality were some kind of genetic error or deformity, so what? Other couples with genetic error or deformities are allowed to marry and they do just fine.

If it can be demonstrated that gays as a demographic are a high-risk-of-divorce group, just like mixed race and mixed religion couples are, then let's make it harder for anyone to marry with the same pen stroke we give gays "marriage".

The real problem is not who has what wrong with them, it's who can create relationships beneficial to society.
Click to expand...

"In the United States there still are disparities between Black female and Black male exogamy ratios: According to the 2006 census, 286,000 White female-Black male and 117,000 Black female-White male marriages were recorded. Marital stability studies published on the Education Resources Information Center found that White female-Black male unions are more prone to result in a divorce than White-White marriages are, while Black female-White male marriages show substantially lower rates of divorce than White-White marriages. It should be noted that the studies revealed this trend to exist in near equal proportionality in all interracial marriages of every ethnic group.[7] In 2007, 4.6% of all married Blacks in the United States were wed to a White partner, and 0.4% of all Whites were married to a Black partner."

Looks like the end of white on white marriage! :mrgreen:
 
Blackdog said:
"In the United States there still are disparities between Black female and Black male exogamy ratios: According to the 2006 census, 286,000 White female-Black male and 117,000 Black female-White male marriages were recorded. Marital stability studies published on the Education Resources Information Center found that White female-Black male unions are more prone to result in a divorce than White-White marriages are, while Black female-White male marriages show substantially lower rates of divorce than White-White marriages. It should be noted that the studies revealed this trend to exist in near equal proportionality in all interracial marriages of every ethnic group.[7] In 2007, 4.6% of all married Blacks in the United States were wed to a White partner, and 0.4% of all Whites were married to a Black partner."

Looks like the end of white on white marriage! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

PS I actually agree with Jerry that getting married and divorced should be harder.

I just thought that was funny buddy! :2wave:
 
Blackdog said:
"In the United States there still are disparities between Black female and Black male exogamy ratios: According to the 2006 census, 286,000 White female-Black male and 117,000 Black female-White male marriages were recorded. Marital stability studies published on the Education Resources Information Center found that White female-Black male unions are more prone to result in a divorce than White-White marriages are, while Black female-White male marriages show substantially lower rates of divorce than White-White marriages. It should be noted that the studies revealed this trend to exist in near equal proportionality in all interracial marriages of every ethnic group.[7] In 2007, 4.6% of all married Blacks in the United States were wed to a White partner, and 0.4% of all Whites were married to a Black partner."

Looks like the end of white on white marriage! :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I don't see that anywhere in my link :confused:

Were you using your own source and forgot to link or what?
 
Jerry said:
I don't see that anywhere in my link :confused:

Were you using your own source and forgot to link or what?
Click to expand...

It is not from your source. It is from studies mentioned on Wikipedia.
 
Jerry said:
Which study, exactly?
Click to expand...

I don't know, it was a joke. Not like I memorized it. :roll:

"PS I actually agree with Jerry that getting married and divorced should be harder.

I just thought that was funny buddy!" - Blackdog
 
Blackdog said:
I don't know, it was a joke. Not like I memorized it. :roll:

"PS I actually agree with Jerry that getting married and divorced should be harder.

I just thought that was funny buddy!" - Blackdog
Click to expand...

...'cuz what I see in your link is:

Blackdog said:
"In the United States there still are disparities between Black female and Black male exogamy ratios: According to the 2006 census, 286,000 White female-Black male and 117,000 Black female-White male marriages were recorded. Marital stability studies published on the Education Resources Information Center found that White female-Black male unions are more prone to result in a divorce than White-White marriages are, while Black female-White male marriages show substantially lower rates of divorce than White-White marriages. It should be noted that the studies revealed this trend to exist in near equal proportionality in all interracial marriages of every ethnic group.[7] In 2007, 4.6% of all married Blacks in the United States were wed to a White partner, and 0.4% of all Whites were married to a Black partner."
Click to expand...

...kinda like how gay couples are less stable than hetero couples while lesbian couples are more stable than heteros.

It's another demonstration on how viewing policy through identity politics is dysfunctional.
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
...'cuz what I see in your link is:



...kinda like how gay couples are less stable than hetero couples while lesbian couples are more stable than heteros.

It's another demonstration on how viewing policy through identity politics is dysfunctional.
Click to expand...

Thats not what it says. You are using white hetero marriage as your litmus test. Well it says when Black females marry white men it results in a lower divorce rate.

So by your reasoning it would make for the best marriages.

Either way, it was a joke.
 
Blackdog said:
Thats not what it says. You are using white hetero marriage as your litmus test. Well it says when Black females marry white men it results in a lower divorce rate.

So by your reasoning it would make for the best marriages.

Either way, it was a joke.
Click to expand...

What does it say about a black woman with a white woman?
 
Jerry said:
What we are talking about is the total sociological institution of marriage in which the law is a sub-division of.

This conversation can apply to individuals who were never, are not and never will be subject to US laws in the slightest, because it regards human social institutions present throughout the species.
Click to expand...

As far as staying on the actual topic of the poll, then we are talking about legal gay marriage. There is no other way to stop it except from a legal standpoint.

Gays can currently join together in a union, going through a marriage ceremony without having the legal marriage certificate, and call themselves "married". You do not have to call them married and they don't currently have the legal rights of a heterosexual marriage, but they certainly can say they are married. Just like the Catholic church (for the most part, and I think some other religions) do not recognize divorces, so to such a church, a person who got divorced and remarried would not have their second marriage recognized by the church as an actual marriage (the only difference is that legally, the hetero couple is married and the homo couple is not, by the federal government).
 
Jerry said:
Sure they can, it depends on the state.
Click to expand...

Not recognized by the Federal Government. Also not recognized by other states. :2razz:
 
Blackdog said:
I guess you somehow missed this?

"Now you are baiting and making personal attacks.

Have a good evening."

I don't have to protray you as anything.

So again

Good evening.
Click to expand...

In what world does "Have a good evening" mean "I am done with you"?
 
Hello All

Wow I had a lot of catching up to do

65 pages and 640+ post and still at ZERO sound, reasonable, logical, non-bais, non-selfish, non-arrogant, hypercritical, non anti-american

Seems like more typical results nothing solid.

Also thanks to the mod who cleared up the REAL poll results of:

86% no, do not think its right
14% do think its right but still no good reasons to force their views on others

thanks again guys and girls ill keep checking back
 
Centrist77 said:
Hello All

Wow I had a lot of catching up to do

65 pages and 640+ post and still at ZERO sound, reasonable, logical, non-bais, non-selfish, non-arrogant, hypercritical, non anti-american

Seems like more typical results nothing solid.

Also thanks to the mod who cleared up the REAL poll results of:

86% no, do not think its right
14% do think its right but still no good reasons to force their views on others

thanks again guys and girls ill keep checking back
Click to expand...

Scorched-Earth-Denial is a tired out debate tactic, I was hoping for something new...I guess I'll have to check back in a while to see if you have any sound, rational objections to any specific argument :2wave:
 
Jerry said:
Scorched-Earth-Denial is a tired out debate tactic, I was hoping for something new...I guess I'll have to check back in a while to see if you have any sound, rational objections to any specific argument :2wave:
Click to expand...

what do I need new LMAO
theres nothing in this thread to debate it has all been laid to rest logically, only clinging to emptiness is left with SELF reasons, some good I might add but NOTHING "worthy" of stopping gay marriage, being oppressive and discriminating.. If you need proof of that just reread the thread LMAO No biggie though this is very much the norm and what happens every time I ask this question. heres only denial on one side, I cant make to many sound rational objections to oppression and discrimination based on madness, selfishness, arrogance and hypocrisy because quite frankly those ears, eyes, and brains are deaf blind and dumb to reason and logic :D

but like I said by all means if somebody thinks they have something please continue to post new reasons
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom