• 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!

Same sex marriage: what is it really?

What is same sex marriage?


  • Total voters
    62
Not conveniently, matter of fact. No mention of "it's for the family" even came up until recent years, after other arguments failed to push the agenda forward. It is exactly as Jerry pointed out.

More like since technological advances of recent years LGBT people having families have increased, and thus that argument has more weight than it has in the past.
 
Not conveniently, matter of fact. No mention of "it's for the family" even came up until recent years, after other arguments failed to push the agenda forward. It is exactly as Jerry pointed out.

So you agree with me there are other arguments, but you disagree with me that there are other arguments. Which is it? Hint: if people have used the "it's for the family" argument in recent years, then in fact people do use arguments other than fairness.
 
So you agree with me there are other arguments, but you disagree with me that there are other arguments. Which is it? Hint: if people have used the "it's for the family" argument in recent years, then in fact people do use arguments other than fairness.

If you can't understand I said nothing of the sort, we are done here.
 
More like since technological advances of recent years LGBT people having families have increased, and thus that argument has more weight than it has in the past.

I agree, but it does not make it a marriage.
 
This is only true if you conveniently ignore every other argument.

It's true because every other argument is an attempt to play silly games just to get a vote. They're all dishonest. All of them. SSM is about validating the gay identity. That's it.
 
It's true because every other argument is an attempt to play silly games just to get a vote. They're all dishonest. All of them. SSM is about validating the gay identity. That's it.

AS some one who makes those other arguments, I think I know my motivation better than you. You are wrong.
 
It's true because every other argument is an attempt to play silly games just to get a vote. They're all dishonest. All of them. SSM is about validating the gay identity. That's it.

All I care about is what is right and what is wrong. There is not one thread or post that I have ever seen that has given valid reasons as to why gay folks should be denied the right to consensually marry each other.
 
More like since technological advances of recent years LGBT people having families have increased, and thus that argument has more weight than it has in the past.

Which is why it's used as the prime surrogate rational instead of being honest.
 
Which is why it's used as the prime surrogate rational instead of being honest.

AH yes, the "If you disagree with me you are lying" argument. Let us know how it works out for you.
 
AH yes, the "If you disagree with me you are lying" argument. Let us know how it works out for you.

Like your "if you disagree with me you're just wrong" argument :lol: Outstanding :peace
 
Like your "if you disagree with me you're just wrong" argument :lol: Outstanding :peace

Actually, my argument has documentable evidence to support it, in that many of us have been using arguments other than fairness. Your argument is that you know we are lying because you know it.
 
You don't like me usurping your justification?

I was about to ask you that exact same thing.

I would love for you to explain to me how you're usurping my justification for support gays marrying.
 
Actually, my argument has documentable evidence to support it, in that many of us have been using arguments other than fairness. Your argument is that you know we are lying because you know it.

Yeah yeah, everyone says that :roll:
 
All I care about is what is right and what is wrong. There is not one thread or post that I have ever seen that has given valid reasons as to why gay folks should be denied the right to consensually marry each other.

I don't think they should be denied, nor was I ever claiming they should be denied. I said their arguments were lies, which they are. The movement is all about validating the gay identity, an identity I strongly believe SHOULD be validated for ANY couple raising a family.

Otherwise you're just another Joe Schmuck and no one has any reason to pay any attention to you because your relationships don't affect others.
 
Last edited:
LMAO at two straight people that 1.5 are against gay rights telling a person, who is in fact homosexual, what THEY are fighting for.
That's brilliant, talk about blind dishonesty LOL no other factual proof is needed beyond those posts to see the obvious dishonesty. It you want to look though there's already plenty of support.:lamo
 
LMAO at two straight people that 1.5 are against gay rights telling a person, who is in fact homosexual, what THEY are fighting for.

Please point out where anyone stated...

#1 They are against gay rights?
#2 Telling them what they are fighting for?

We were talking about the movement as a whole, not individuals, but thanks anyway.

That's brilliant, talk about blind dishonesty LOL no other factual proof is needed beyond those posts to see the obvious dishonesty. It you want to look though there's already plenty of support.:lamo

So it takes only two people to represent and entire movement. Good to know.
 
Please point out where anyone stated...

#1 They are against gay rights?
#2 Telling them what they are fighting for?

We were talking about the movement as a whole, not individuals, but thanks anyway.

Wow this is gonna be so easy, it always is when I deal in reality and the you deal in dishonesty and fantasy.

1. if you are against gay marriage you are against gay rights PERIOD doesnt work any other way.
2. you said and I quote "As for the rest you can think what you like, it does not change the reality that it has nothing at all to do with family."

this is you telling redress what she thinks and in other places she was told she was wrong or dishonest or it didn't matter LMAO :lamo

she IS the gay movement along with all on her side genius, so what she and others think very much matters. What doesnt matter is what YOU think because you are against it, so the decision isnt your to make nor can you. That might be the dumbest and most uneducated ignorant statement Ive read in a long time on this subject.

Thats very funny and dishonest that some how YOU know and speak for all gays and their motives LMAO Also you attempting to backpedal and say you were talking about the movement also doesn't fly because the individuals make up the movement. Do you get some movement news letter or something that told you what the movement is about? LMAO You know how moronic that statement was and it is to make such a dishonest ridiculous claim, it will not work


So it takes only two people to represent and entire movement. Good to know.

Nope never said that, never implied that nor does it matter just more back pedaling and deflection by you. LMAO :sinking:
 
Wow this is gonna be so easy, it always is when I deal in reality and the you deal in dishonesty and fantasy.

ad-homonyms are not an argument.

1. if you are against gay marriage you are against gay rights PERIOD doesnt work any other way.

I am not against gays having all the same rights as married couples, neither is Jerry and we have both in this thread stated as much. I am against the redefining of marriage, period. So you can think what you like but it is not true.

2. you said and I quote "As for the rest you can think what you like, it does not change the reality that it has nothing at all to do with family."

this is you telling redress what she thinks and in other places she was told she was wrong or dishonest or it didn't matter LMAO :lamo

What part of "you can think what you like" are you missing?

she IS the gay movement along with all on her side genius, so what she and others think very much matters. What doesnt matter is what YOU think because you are against it, so the decision isnt your to make nor can you. That might be the dumbest and most uneducated ignorant statement Ive read in a long time on this subject.

She is one individual that makes up part of the movement. She is no more the movement than I am the civil rights movement. No one person represents the whole as we are all different. So she is only one part of a large whole as you said. She does not however represent it as I said we are all different.

Your rhetoric is not much better than blanket statements and assumptions.

Thats very funny and dishonest that some how YOU know and speak for all gays and their motives LMAO Also you attempting to backpedal and say you were talking about the movement also doesn't fly because the individuals make up the movement. Do you get some movement news letter or something that told you what the movement is about? LMAO You know how moronic that statement was and it is to make such a dishonest ridiculous claim, it will not work

I have had and do have many gay friends. So I am not speaking for anyones motives in particular. I am however pointing out an obvious motivation for members of the movement. I have also not said this is good or bad one wayor the other, but I don't agree with it.

I don't know how that is back peddling but you can think what you like.

Nope never said that, never implied that nor does it matter just more back pedaling and deflection by you. LMAO :sinking:

I never said you did? Notice the lack of quotation marks. You did however imply that a single person or two IS the movement. You further qualified my assumption with your "she IS the gay movement along with all on her side." Inferring that because she is part of the movement, her opinion is somehow more valid? :lol:
 
Last edited:
ad-homonyms are not an argument.

FACTS are though :)



I am not against gays having all the same rights as married couples, neither is Jerry and we have both in this thread stated as much. I am against the redefining of marriage, period. So you can think what you like but it is not true.

not only is it true, its a FACT, you are against gay marriage therefore you are against equal rights for gays. You want to discriminate against them. Therefore you are not for gay rights and no matter how bad you want to spin things to make yourself feel better about discriminating against them fellow americans the facts wont change. LMAO again just more blind blatant dishonesty from you.



What part of "you can think what you like" are you missing?
didnt miss anything ,I focused on the where you told her IT DOESNT MATTER lol the nerve of you, you are not gay its not your decision PERIOD lol to think otherwise makes you look VERY foolish



She is one individual that makes up part of the movement. She is no more the movement than I am the civil rights movement. No one person represents the whole as we are all different.

I agree PART and that one movement is made up of ALL the parts so what she says goes and is fact and what you say is MEANINGLESS, you act like she is the ONLY one that feels they way she does, like she is an anomaly. What a joke LMAO again it was just you saying something totally ridiculous and making a totally inaccurate blanket statement. How arrogant and misguided could you possibly be, you now make decisions for her and a movement you have nothing to do with LOL.

Your rhetoric is not much better than blanket statements and assumptions.

Says the guy who says HE knows what all gays think and feel and what thier movement is about LMAO Nice try this is purely you projecting because its exactly what you did, assumptions and blanket statements, only problem is GAYs agree with ME and not with you LOL


I have had and do have many gay friends. So I am not speaking for anyones motives in particular. I am however pointing out an obvious motivation for members of the movement. I have also not said this is good or bad one way, but I don't agree with it.

I don't know who that is back peddling but you can think what you like.

HAHAHAHAHAHA You sound like the racists that say, "I have a black friend" you most certainly did and tried to and are 100% wrong. You made a blanket statement and then tried to say oh I just meant the movement which STILL doesnt apply



I never said you did? Notice the lack of quotation marks. You did however imply that a single person or two IS the movement. You further qualified my assumption with your "she IS the gay movement along with all on her side." Inferring that because she is part of the movement, her opinion is somehow more valid? :lol:

you were wrong last post and you are wrong again because thats not what I did at all LMAO you Assumed.

and yes the fact is her opinion IS more important to the movement because she is gay genius LMAO YOURS is MEANINGLESS.

You are not gay and against gay rights, she is gay and for them so YOU don't get to tell HER what she is fighting for nor people like her, something like that is NEVER your call and NEVER will be. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Wow just wow :roll:

:lamo
 
If the only way to get homosexuals equal rights is to call it a 'civil union' instead of a 'marriage' - then from the point that term becomes law, I will be sure to say that my wife and I are not married, but rather are in a 'civil union'. I would not feel more entitled to the term 'marriage' due to the gender of the person that I married. It just doesn't make sense why I would think I'm 'special' because of the way I was born.
 
No, SSM is argued for the sake of equality. By that note abolishing all marriage makes everyone equal yet does not legally make people family, encourage people to provide a stable home for children, etc. It's all about validating the gay identity, nothing more.

Jerry... how long have you and I discussed this issue? 4+ years? You KNOW that equality is not the only way that SSM is argued. You know that as well as I.
 
Back
Top Bottom