• 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
CaptainCourtesy said:
Oh, so you are saying that your position of "homosexuality is abnormal" is not a fact, but an opinion. Is that correct?
Click to expand...

no I have stated my position is opinion only...why?.. because I do not read up on the subject of homosexuality as you may do.


I read the founders, federalist papers, constitution, the only reason I got into this thread is because agent j in his op ,stated TEACHING, and I asked who's doing the teaching, any use of force on people who have not violated law is repugnant to me.

again I have opinion and you stated you have facts, and as I pointed out many times, other people in our world think your facts are wrong and there's are right, so again what makes you right compared to there facts....can you answer how you have sole authority on the facts discussed.
 
No. Let it be. Everyone has a right to pursue happiness, including people who are gay or otherwise. Even then, most people are just born that way.
 
Time for some platitude throwing...

It's easier to criticize someone else than face your own problems. Even if their problems are smaller by an order of magnitude or so.
 
ernst barkmann said:
no I have stated my position is opinion only...why?.. because I do not read up on the subject of homosexuality as you may do.
Click to expand...

That is correct. I have read up on it. That is why what I have been saying for DAYS is that there are facts and there are opinions. Fact: homosexuality is normal. Opinion: homosexuality is abnormal. So, therefore, based on what you have said consistently, it stands to reason that you are fine with the fact that homosexuality is normal being taught in school.

I read the founders, federalist papers, constitution, the only reason I got into this thread is because agent j in his op ,stated TEACHING, and I asked who's doing the teaching, any use of force on people who have not violated law is repugnant to me.
Click to expand...

OK.

again I have opinion and you stated you have facts, and as I pointed out many times, other people in our world think your facts are wrong and there's are right, so again what makes you right compared to there facts....can you answer how you have sole authority on the facts discussed.
Click to expand...

Other people do not have facts. That's the point. The facts that demonstrate that homosexuality being normal are both through definitions and through research that has been peer reviewed and accepted as valid for quite some time. Therefore, since it is a fact that homosexuality is normal, and that you are OK with having facts taught in schools, you obviously have no problem with the fact that homosexuality being normal being taught in schools.
 
Deimos said:
No. Let it be. Everyone has a right to pursue happiness, including people who are gay or otherwise. Even then, most people are just born that way.
Click to expand...
Three rather powerful words...
"Let it be".
And, "everyone" does have the right to pursue happiness.

.......................
As to homosexuality being "normal" , define "normal" .
Or, if so, then so is the common cold and cancer.
JMO
Abnormal is anything that deviates from the norm....in this case, human health...
I think the term "abnormal" has negative connotations.
 
Last edited:
ernst barkmann said:
no I have stated my position is opinion only...why?.. because I do not read up on the subject of homosexuality as you may do.


I read the founders, federalist papers, constitution, the only reason I got into this thread is because agent j in his op ,stated TEACHING, and I asked who's doing the teaching, any use of force on people who have not violated law is repugnant to me.

again I have opinion and you stated you have facts, and as I pointed out many times, other people in our world think your facts are wrong and there's are right, so again what makes you right compared to there facts....can you answer how you have sole authority on the facts discussed.
Click to expand...

No "like" given.
IMO, OPINIONS can never be right nor wrong, but FACTS can be...This is we we dig for evidence......and this changes over the millennia..
Its not good just to read the ancient writings(Constitution, Fed papers, Bible) of man....nor the selected writings(conservative or liberal)...this is a trap many, if not all of us , fall into...
 
davidtaylorjr said:
You are the one who doesn't know truth.
Click to expand...

These quoted and quoted from posts are "tit-and-tat-isms" .
IMO, homosexuality IS a disorder....at this point in time, I consider this to be opinion, not necessarily fact.

................. ....................... ................................ ....................
And if my child were "gay" , I'd treat what I could and accept what I can...
The "treatment" lies someplace in the far future..
Today, we should be working on mental illness...and borderline......which is difficult enuff...
 
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...


After all is said and done, why not allow it, if at the same time all subsidies for marriage are cancelled? If tax money is involved? Then I see no reason to allow it.
 
joG said:
After all is said and done, why not allow it, if at the same time all subsidies for marriage are cancelled? If tax money is involved? Then I see no reason to allow it.
Click to expand...

dont know what you are trying to say.
subsidies? taxes?
 
Stopping people from having equal rights is wrong. Absolutely wrong.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Stopping people from having equal rights is wrong. Absolutely wrong.
Click to expand...

yep and some people simply dishonestly say or have themselves dishonestly convinced its not an equal rights matter, the same way people did with minorities, women and interracial marriage.

"IF" a person is trying to STOP others from having equal rights it just makes them feel better to deny that fact and say its not really equal rights. Very convenient but nobody falls for it.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
That is correct. I have read up on it. That is why what I have been saying for DAYS is that there are facts and there are opinions. Fact: homosexuality is normal. Opinion: homosexuality is abnormal. So, therefore, based on what you have said consistently, it stands to reason that you are fine with the fact that homosexuality is normal being taught in school.



OK.



Other people do not have facts. That's the point. The facts that demonstrate that homosexuality being normal are both through definitions and through research that has been peer reviewed and accepted as valid for quite some time. Therefore, since it is a fact that homosexuality is normal, and that you are OK with having facts taught in schools, you obviously have no problem with the fact that homosexuality being normal being taught in schools.
Click to expand...

i believe i stated very clearly other people opposite of you....not including me, say you are wrong and they are right, and i am sure in their minds they have read about it to.

i again am against the idea of force, any force used to teach something other people opposite your facts..... is repugnant to me.

force is repugnant.
 
earthworm said:
No "like" given.
IMO, OPINIONS can never be right nor wrong, but FACTS can be...This is we we dig for evidence......and this changes over the millennia..
Its not good just to read the ancient writings(Constitution, Fed papers, Bible) of man....nor the selected writings(conservative or liberal)...this is a trap many, if not all of us , fall into...
Click to expand...

they are not ancient, and your play on words, to make it sounds as though we need to get past it [as some age of mystery] fails.

again i stated opinion, CC stated what he has is facts.

i am sure even you can find very easily find other people in our world who say his facts are wrong, and they have the facts........so with a fact vs fact......what makes CC side fact?

becuase he, agent j, or you say it is?

i am against ANYONE ,ANYONE, who would use force of government on other people, who have not violated the rights of other citizens.............force is an abomination to me!
 
ernst barkmann said:
i believe i stated very clearly other people opposite of you....not including me, say you are wrong and they are right, and i am sure in their minds they have read about it to.

i again am against the idea of force, any force used to teach something other people opposite your facts..... is repugnant to me.

force is repugnant.
Click to expand...
But, in a sense, force is an inherent part of teaching children - whatever schooling environment they are in.

In many cases, children would rather be doing something other than studying, I'm sure.
 
The Mark said:
But, in a sense, force is an inherent part of teaching children - whatever schooling environment they are in.

In many cases, children would rather be doing something other than studying, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

well children are not adults, and they do not get to set policy on what is taught,

however parents whom send these children, some would like them taught a certain moral position, while other parents object that that certain position.

now why should one position be taught over another since both claim they have the facts.

the idea that the one that objects and is told, don't like it leave!........or your child will be taught this!

you will notice that [position]......can be from either side.

that is why government is not a moral authority, ...moral values comes from ones parents....not the government.
 
joG said:
Then get rid of marriage and the benefits. Use a civil contract.
Click to expand...

uhm already done, marriage is a type of civil contract. Its specific for its purpose like the majority of other contracts.
 
AGENT J said:
uhm already done, marriage is a type of civil contract. Its specific for its purpose like the majority of other contracts.
Click to expand...

Then why be up tight? No subsidies, no tax privileges.... Why call it marriage at all? Just to rial the Christians and other traditionalists? That sounds low to me.
 
joG said:
1.)Then why be up tight?
2.) No subsidies, no tax privileges....
3.)Why call it marriage at all?
4.) Just to rial the Christians and other traditionalists?
5.) That sounds low to me.
Click to expand...

1.) whos uptight? people just want their equal rights granted by marriage.
2.) this has very little to do with equality
3.) because thats what it factually is
4.) I am a christian and it doesnt rial me up at all because im not a moron. I understand the fact that legal marriage has nothgin to do with religious marriage.
5.) see 4# nothing low about it
 
joG said:
Then why be up tight? No subsidies, no tax privileges.... Why call it marriage at all? Just to rial the Christians and other traditionalists? That sounds low to me.
Click to expand...

Christians nor religion in general own the term marriage. They don't get it just because they want it. They have no copyright of the term marriage. They have no legal claim to it. It has been used much more for legal partnerships than it has religious ones, despite common belief.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) whos uptight? people just want their equal rights granted by marriage.
2.) this has very little to do with equality
3.) because thats what it factually is
4.) I am a christian and it doesnt rial me up at all because im not a moron. I understand the fact that legal marriage has nothgin to do with religious marriage.
5.) see 4# nothing low about it
Click to expand...

-You sounded so. If not that's fine.
-What rights?
-Well, factually the word meant something else. It entailed a factual difference between man an woman.
-Then you were brought up and call yourself Christian, while demanding Unchristian things. That is fine by me, but your being a Christian is no argument except in canonical law.
-I did not expect you to see it that way.
 
joG said:
1.)-You sounded so. If not that's fine.
2.)-What rights?
3.) Well, factually the word meant something else. It entailed a factual difference between man an woman.
4.) Then you were brought up and call yourself Christian, while demanding Unchristian things. That is fine by me, but your being a Christian is no argument except in canonical law.
-I did not expect you to see it that way.
Click to expand...

1.) nope just support people wanting equal rights
2.) marriage is a right and when one enters into a marriage contract about 1200 federal rights/protections are granted alone
3.) no, thats only opinion that has no barring on the legal contract
4.) who says its unchristian? regardless of that why on earth would i want my morals forced on others in america which is a free country that would be stupid. And i didnt bring me up being christian as an argument i brought it up to show how meaningless your failed statement was about "rile up Christians"
5.) of course not i have a habit of seeing facts and ignoring fantasy
 
roguenuke said:
Christians nor religion in general own the term marriage. They don't get it just because they want it. They have no copyright of the term marriage. They have no legal claim to it. It has been used much more for legal partnerships than it has religious ones, despite common belief.
Click to expand...

Of course they don't own the meaning. But the word had a meaning, when the original laws were written. If the meaning is changed, the laws need to be adapted. That is fine.

As it is probably out dated to have taxes and subsidies granted to married couples in any event, maybe we should just have everyone stand on his own. One person, one tax, one social security etc.
 
I just wanted to mention here that the definition of marriage is now up for grabs at ebay.

Better get your stealth bidding programs up to snuff, because this one is going down to the wire.
 
AGENT J said:
1.) nope just support people wanting equal rights
2.) marriage is a right and when one enters into a marriage contract about 1200 federal rights/protections are granted alone
3.) no, thats only opinion that has no barring on the legal contract
4.) who says its unchristian? regardless of that why on earth would i want my morals forced on others in america which is a free country that would be stupid. And i didnt bring me up being christian as an argument i brought it up to show how meaningless your failed statement was about "rile up Christians"
5.) of course not i have a habit of seeing facts and ignoring fantasy
Click to expand...

Thing is that equal rights require equal entities. Boys and girls are different.
Why is marriage a right? I really do not see any reason for that.
1.200 rights etc? They all cost something. So we have to cut them all. Then I don't really care. But why should I pay for someones sexual dreams?
Christian beliefs are relatively well defined. But maybe you can demonstrate some esoteric christian church that likes gay marriage? I would honestly like to read the link.
Really? ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom