• 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? (PART II)

Gay Marriage, is it right to stop it? (PART II)

  • Total voters
    154
ernst barkmann said:
time to boat this bass .....of a thread
Click to expand...

failed deflection 78, simply stay on topic, stop deflecting and answer the question?

did CC present facts. Yes or no?
 
Moderator's Warning:
Agent J and ernst... if EITHER of you continue with this stupid repetitious reposting, you will get a thread ban AND an infraction. Knock it off.
 
Fletch said:
While that manner of education works well when you are trying to pry in a behavior like homosexuality where the goal is to eliminate any moral or value judgments, it is a horrible to teach history for example. Eliminate morals and values from the conversation and what does the teaching of WWII look like? Cant say the Nazis were bad and we were good because that is a value judgment. Is tyranny a good or bad way of governing? Cant say, that would be a value judgment. The whole issue of human rights would be left untaught since rights are a moral concept in themselves. Or if you were to teach them, countrys that defend rights, like the US, and countrys that suppress them, like North Korea, would have to be viewed in an equal light without any "moral or value judgments" applied. Sorry, but that is not an education.
Click to expand...
History is not a great example; there's definitely my history and your history. If you asked a Nazi or a N. Korean about our country, we are the bad guys. By your argument, the Nazis were moral people; they were taught morals in school and kept them.

The issue with teaching morality in school is that it's extremely subjective, and that's why it doesn't make for good education.

I could be wrong, but what I think Ernst was getting at is that when you have a school teach that homosexuality is normal, moral behavior, the school is making an argument that runs counter to the moral and value judgments that parents have imparted upon their children. So what you wind up with is a government school, to which most children are forced to go, imparting values that run counter to the values of the people who are forced to attend. The idea that homosexuality is even mentioned in public school is the result of a political agenda, thus a value judgment. So he is right in that respect.
Click to expand...
First of all, most Americans accept Homosexuals; According to The Global Divide on Homosexuality | Pew Global Attitudes Project , 74% of 18-29yo Americans say we should accept Homosexuals, 64% of 30-49yo, and 60% of every age group. A similar poll from Gallup puts it at 54% of every age group Gay and Lesbian Rights | Gallup Historical Trends . I couldn't find even one reputable poll that didn't show a majority of Americans saying that it's morally good to accept Homosexuals. If anyone thought this was an unpopular development in America, they're wrong.

Although I'll completely agree with the fact that including Homosexuality in education is a political move, that doesn't make it wrong. If you think back to any minority group that has been discriminated against in our country, we know that the changes always started in the minds of children; if there hadn't been the right teachers, mentors, and friends in the lives of the majority of Americans since the 70's, we'd still have rampant racism across the nation. Racism, like all discrimination, starts with the parents. Was teaching civil rights/tolerance against the wishes of a whole bunch of parents? Probably, but teaching a uniform message to children at school was the only reason racism went into a decline.

The problem with the "parents morals" argument is that it assumes that parents are right by definition. We know this to be false, from any child abuse case ever documented. From the context of discrimination, do we think about racist parents as being morally good? I'm shamed by people who still yell the N word at completely random black people as they go by. Should we have special "racist" schools for the children of racist parents? Segregation? The KKK youth camps? All of these proposals are completely valid under the assumption that parents are always right and society should have no influence over education.

It all comes down to the one moral axiom of this argument; it is moral to teach a message of tolerance over a message of hate, no matter how we teach that message of tolerance, who we're tolerating, or who's doing the hating. To just let hate and discrimination fester due to fear that we'll anger some parents is the only immoral act involved. It would be cowardice.

But, as has always been the case, gay-haters can send their kids to private schools, or home school. It's not true that anyone is forcing you, or your kids, to do anything.
 
The poll results here are not too different from the similarly unrealistic dualistic either-or poll for the nation at large regarding simplistic favor of the oxymoronic application of "marriage" to same-sex relevant relationships (53%) and opposition to that ludicrously oxymoronic application (47%).

Though these two polls do illustrate the obvious deadlock, unrealistic-choice dualistic either-or polls on this matter do not tell the true relevant story.

This thread ( http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/172461-great-majority-opposes-word-marriage-ss-couples.html#post1062303771 ), and in most recent particular, this post in that thread ( http://www.debatepolitics.com/sex-and-sexuality/172461-great-majority-opposes-word-marriage-ss-couples-21.html#post1062318413 ), more realistically present where America is truly at on the issue.

70% support government and private enterprise recognition of same-sex relevant relationships, but 63% do not support recognition under the oxymoronic term "marriage".

Thus, with respect to the question posed in this thread, gay "marriage" should rightly be stopped, as it is not a rights issue and the considerable majority support for recognition exists but this considerable majority only exists under the condition that recognition occur under an appropriate term other than "marriage", like, for instance, "homarriage".

And, considering that's what America really wants, gay activists need to let go of the rabble-rousing and ludicrous gay "marriage" campaign and more intelligently support their bottom-line goal of recognition, and thus effort should be dropped on getting state constitutions changed to support the oxymoronic gay "marriage", and effort should be placed both on getting state constitutions changed to disallow it as well as create statutes in all 50 states called "homarriage" (or whatever term other than "marriage" is descriptively relevant).

This is the right thing to do, for every reason.
 
AGENT J said:
Hello everyone, the other thread reached almost 2000 posts and 192 pages!!!!
It had to be closed because at around 2000 post it becomes taxing on the server, thanks independent_thinker2002

Anyway lets keep it going since we had some great talks, some people even woke up and saw theres no reason and some had some at least semi-sensible new angles but still fell short. Not to mention I wanna continue because its funs and supports my research.

Heres the link below and Ill also repost the OP.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/71580-gay-marriage-right-stop.html

Also just for an FYI the poll was spammed and the new one will be public but last CC (Captain Courtesy) checked it mirrored the results of the others I have conducted under THIS premise or is it right to stop not what you believe and that was AROUND 75% no and 25% yes.

Now on to the OP
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Not only am I looking for your opinion im looking for your reasoning if your answer is yes.

I have discussed gay marriage many many times and have yet to hear ONE sound, reasonable, logical, non-bias, non-selfish, non-arrogant, non-hypercritical, non anti-american reason to "Stop" gay marriage. Almost every reason I have ever heard was also used about women’s rights, equal rights, interracial marriage etc. the reason were dumb illogical then and the most certainly still are today, even more so since not only common sense and facts proves them wrong but history.

now mind you, pay attention to my verbiage, I said reason to STOP it.

That means in America I think its fine for anybody to:
THINK its wrong, gross or offensive etc
TEACH its wrong gross or offensive etc
PREACH its wrong gross or offensive etc
BELIEVE its wrong gross or offensive etc
FEEL its wrong gross or offensive etc
etc

and i also believe and support in your rights to do so but once you try to stop it I think you wrong on so many levels.
I can’t imagine how AMERICANS think they have the right to tell two CONSENTING ADULTS who and who they cant marry lmao

Does it get anymore pompous, arrogant, selfish, hypercritical and anti american than that. How anybody thinks they have the right to tell a consenting adult they cant marry another consenting adult is beyond me.

Also to be clear Im also not saying its wrong for you to VOTE on the subject everybody has that right of course.

I myself am not gay so I REALLY feel its non of my business but has an american I have to call BS on the other so called americans that do think its there business some how.

Anyway maybe this time will be different, it’ll actually be VERY interesting if it is different. So does anybody have ONE sound, reasonable, logical, non-bais, non-selfish, non-arrogant, non-hypercritical, non anti-american reason to "Stop" gay marriage.

Who thinks they have a sound reason why they should get to tell one American consenting adults they cant marry another consenting American adult.


Also for some reference Ill try to list the general reasons people thought of that have been thoroughly debunked.

Religion/god/bible – Meaningless and debunked

Slipper slope argument: I should be able to marry my dog, pedophiles marring children etc. – Ludicrous and debunked

Marriage is between a man and woman – this is a lie/opinion. Meaningless and debunked

Morals – your morals are subjective, shouldn’t be forced on others and your morals aren’t effected one bit, you still get to believe in them as you see fit. Meaningless and debunked

Gay Parents will “turn” their kids gay – LMAO this is also a uneducated fantasy. It has been proven that that children raised by gay parents are no more likely to be or not be gay. It has also been proven that children raised in a multi-parent home on average do better than a single parent home no matter the sex. Ignorant and debunked

Churches will lose their rights – another silly argument that appeals to emotion and could probably be added under the “slipper slope” argument as well. Churches are already protected and will never lose their rights, they discriminate RIGHT NOW against who they want including STRAIGHT couples and will be able to continue to do so under the first amendment. Ludicrous and debunked

Alright heres the most current update and lets have fun!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICIAL COUNTER
how many sound, reasonable, logical, non-bias, non-selfish, non-arrogant, non-hypercritical, non anti-american reason are there to "Stop" gay marriage

GOOD REASONS: 0
Click to expand...

Your personal bias is showing by saying the arguments are all debunked.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Your personal bias is showing by saying the arguments are all debunked.
Click to expand...

nope, two threads and 100s of pages prove they all have been debunked as far as "stopping it"
if you disagre,e like everybody else that has failed so far please being fourth any arguments you think are good enough for discrimination. I cant wait to read them.
 
AGENT J said:
nope, two threads and 100s of pages prove they all have been debunked as far as "stopping it"
if you disagre,e like everybody else that has failed so far please being fourth any arguments you think are good enough for discrimination. I cant wait to read them.
Click to expand...

Take the slippery slope. This is 100% true. Homosexual marriage wasn't accepted until very recently. What is to stop bestiality? What is to stop incest? Nothing.
 
traditionalists are always going to hold onto the hope that they can eventually return to the "glory days". I'm glad this young generation is finally beginning to realize the meaning of equality.
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Take the slippery slope. This is 100% true. Homosexual marriage wasn't accepted until very recently. What is to stop bestiality? What is to stop incest? Nothing.
Click to expand...

nope the slippery slope argument is one of the easiest fails lol
if one actually understands what a slippery slope is

fighting for equal rights and ending discrimination is not a slippery slope.

Bestiality? LMAO
animals cant enter into contracts and the law considers that animal abused and a victim based on lack of consent

Incest?

incest was legal, then it wasn't, now some of it is and that took place BEFORE gay marriage and none of the arguments/precedence line up
so this one fails also, it has nothing to do with equal rights for gays

since you just proved you dont know what a slippery slope is ill explain it.

a slippery slope is when one thing directly leads to another using solely the identical principles, things, etc. In this case it would be arguments and precedence. Both of your examples factually fail those requirements.

your filed logic sounds like the racists and bigots of the past

"if we let women vote might as well let my dog vote, if we let minorities be people my horse might as well be a person, if blacks can marry whites we will be marrying monkeys next."
Sorry these mentally retarded and failed arguments were stupid and uneducated then and the same remains true today.

let me know when you have some more that can get destroyed.

so when you said 100% true if you meant everything after that you were 100% wrong.
 
AGENT J said:
nope the slippery slope argument is one of the easiest fails lol
if one actually understands what a slippery slope is

fighting for equal rights and ending discrimination is not a slippery slope.

Bestiality? LMAO
animals cant enter into contracts and the law considers that animal abused and a victim based on lack of consent

Incest?

incest was legal, then it wasn't, now some of it is and that took place BEFORE gay marriage and none of the arguments/precedence line up
so this one fails also, it has nothing to do with equal rights for gays

since you just proved you dont know what a slippery slope is ill explain it.

a slippery slope is when one thing directly leads to another using solely the identical principles, things, etc. In this case it would be arguments and precedence. Both of your examples factually fail those requirements.

your filed logic sounds like the racists and bigots of the past

"if we let women vote might as well let my dog vote, if we let minorities be people my horse might as well be a person, if blacks can marry whites we will be marrying monkeys next."
Sorry these mentally retarded and failed arguments were stupid and uneducated then and the same remains true today.

let me know when you have some more that can get destroyed.

so when you said 100% true if you meant everything after that you were 100% wrong.
Click to expand...
You think you destroyed it? No, you just showed arrogance and ignorance. Nothing else happened here. :lamo
 
davidtaylorjr said:
You think you destroyed it? No, you just showed arrogance and ignorance. Nothing else happened here. :lamo
Click to expand...


yes you were destoryed as usual

and i challenge you to find one honest and respected poster that agrees with you that equal rights for gays is a slippery slope to bestiality. That is one of the most mentally retarded and intellectually void and dishonest failed arguments against gays one can post.

anybody? any takers?

after that, explain using FACTS how your example fits?

since incest factually fails because it existed before explain how legally, argumentative wise and using the sole and identical precedence for equal rights for gays it leads to bestiality, i cant wait to read this humor. my guess is youll post nothing but deflections but ill be here waiting anyway. PLEASE PLEASE PlEASE proceed.

once again facts destroy your failed and weak posts
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Take the slippery slope. This is 100% true. Homosexual marriage wasn't accepted until very recently. What is to stop bestiality? What is to stop incest? Nothing.
Click to expand...
To me, it's a question of harm and freedom.

In the case of "normal" marriage, we have what has been going on for centuries - 1 man and 1 woman marrying for various reasons, hopefully to raise children and support each other...

In the case of "same sex" marriage, we have the same thing, only instead of 1 man and one woman we have 2 of the same sex. Again, through various slightly more convoluted means, these 2 individuals can raise children and support each other.

In neither case is harm intended (or at least I hope not), although it does happen.

In the case of incest, I think harm almost assuredly does happen. Some argument can be made for very strange situations, but at the same time, there are genetic issues, which I think is a highly probable and fairly fact-based harm to any offspring.

In the case of bestiality...well....I'm sure some harm must occur. Not least optical pain. :mrgreen:

Point is, what/who does "gay marriage" harm? Anyone? Anything?
 
iacardsfan said:
traditionalists are always going to hold onto the hope that they can eventually return to the "glory days". I'm glad this young generation is finally beginning to realize the meaning of equality.
Click to expand...
One problem is that human memory is almost always flawed and skewed towards remembering the good things while forgetting the bad.
 
douglas said:
History is not a great example; there's definitely my history and your history. If you asked a Nazi or a N. Korean about our country, we are the bad guys. By your argument, the Nazis were moral people; they were taught morals in school and kept them.
Click to expand...
That wasn't my argument. Not even close.
 
AGENT J said:
nope the slippery slope argument is one of the easiest fails lol
if one actually understands what a slippery slope is

fighting for equal rights and ending discrimination is not a slippery slope.

Bestiality? LMAO
animals cant enter into contracts and the law considers that animal abused and a victim based on lack of consent

Incest?

incest was legal, then it wasn't, now some of it is and that took place BEFORE gay marriage and none of the arguments/precedence line up
so this one fails also, it has nothing to do with equal rights for gays

since you just proved you dont know what a slippery slope is ill explain it.

a slippery slope is when one thing directly leads to another using solely the identical principles, things, etc. In this case it would be arguments and precedence. Both of your examples factually fail those requirements.

your filed logic sounds like the racists and bigots of the past

"if we let women vote might as well let my dog vote, if we let minorities be people my horse might as well be a person, if blacks can marry whites we will be marrying monkeys next."
Sorry these mentally retarded and failed arguments were stupid and uneducated then and the same remains true today.

let me know when you have some more that can get destroyed.

so when you said 100% true if you meant everything after that you were 100% wrong.
Click to expand...

Don't get caught up in traps. Incest and bestiality are not homosexuality and if people want to discuss those issues then they ought to start threads regarding them.

It isn't the slippery slope fallacy its a bait and switch, a red herring, its a complete switch of topic.

If we are talking about the moral issues of homosexuality and someone brings up some other thing that they have moral objection to it isn't a slippery slope.

Saying that incest or bestiality are anything remotely related to homosexuality is like saying murder its related to heterosexuality.

Don't entertain distractions, its sometimes the only fall back that people have when they have no real argument to make.
 
CLAX1911 said:
1.)Don't get caught up in traps. Incest and bestiality are not homosexuality and if people want to discuss those issues then they ought to start threads regarding them.
2.)It isn't the slippery slope fallacy its a bait and switch, a red herring, its a complete switch of topic.
3.) If we are talking about the moral issues of homosexuality and someone brings up some other thing that they have moral objection to it isn't a slippery slope.
4.) Saying that incest or bestiality are anything remotely related to homosexuality is like saying murder its related to heterosexuality.
5.) Don't entertain distractions, its sometimes the only fall back that people have when they have no real argument to make.
Click to expand...

1.) trust me every educated person knows this but i still like kicking dishonest posters when they are down
2.) you are correct
3.) you are correct again
4.) correct a 3rd time
5.) i dont entertain them, they entertain me :)
 
davidtaylorjr said:
Take the slippery slope. This is 100% true. Homosexual marriage wasn't accepted until very recently. What is to stop bestiality? What is to stop incest? Nothing.
Click to expand...

What does bestiality have to do with homosexuality? Why do you feel the need to distract from the question at hand by bringing up things that aren't related?

Is it perhaps that you have no real reason for supporting discrimination against homosexuality accept through your own make believe that somehow allowing homosexuals to be d equal will magically undo all morals? Why didn't you just go all the way to murder.

One time not that long ago same sex marriage was not legal. what is to stop murder from being legalized.

Homosexuality isn't bestiality, murder, incest, theft, child molestation, arson, or any other sort of action that isn't homosexuality. So instead of pretending that it is some proverbial flood gate being open that you have to throw absurd arguments at to close, stop being a phony martyr and stop with the phony arguments.

Explain why homosexuality should not be legally accepted keeping in mind that the bill of rights clearly states that the state shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) trust me every educated person knows this but i still like kicking dishonest posters when they are down
2.) you are correct
3.) you are correct again
4.) correct a 3rd time
5.) i dont entertain them, they entertain me :)
Click to expand...
Well, i am rather direct, and I don't find the befuddled hurling of any diversion entertaining. I am far more entertained by watching them squirm when they know that they are caught in their dishonest distraction.

Its funny how when you do that it's just dropped and never brought up again. Until some poor silly poster comes up with this same brilliantly dreamed up dodge of the real issue at hand and I get to watch them fail the same way.

Hey, but that is just me, and to each his own I suppose.
 
AGENT J said:
so you have a factual slippery slope from gay marriage to beastilty you can show us then?

we'd love to read it :D
Click to expand...

actually, I found it humorous because when I read from you.. what I quoted.

I reminds me of lost in space, "revolt of the androids"....... "crush, kill, destroy"
 
CLAX1911 said:
1.)Well, i am rather direct, and I don't find the befuddled hurling of any diversion entertaining. I am far more entertained by watching them squirm when they know that they are caught in their dishonest distraction.

Its funny how when you do that it's just dropped and never brought up again. Until some poor silly poster comes up with this same brilliantly dreamed up dodge of the real issue at hand and I get to watch them fail the same way.

Hey, but that is just me, and to each his own I suppose.
Click to expand...

to each his own but i like kicking them when they are down and then forcing them to dig their whole deeper. then usually by that time its a group beat down.
 
ernst barkmann said:
actually, I found it humorous because when I read from you.. what I quoted.

I reminds me of lost in space, "revolt of the androids"....... "crush, kill, destroy"
Click to expand...

translation: no you dont, you got nothing as usual, thanks we knew that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom