• 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!

Already attacking families in TX[W:277]

ThoughtEx. said:
Wasn't this same argument used to justify and defend segregation. Are you intentionally recycling the arguments of old bigots or is this a happy accident resulting from your own ignorant hate?
Click to expand...

I don't recall that argument being used by segregationist.
 
CriticalThought said:
I am already married, I have kids, and my family is under attack by the GOP and you somehow argue it is my fault? Thanks.
Click to expand...

Well maybe if you just didn't be gay you wouldn't habe Any problems.

You should only wait until your rights are absolutely guaranteed before you exercise them you know since that's the way it works.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Well maybe if you just didn't be gay you wouldn't habe Any problems.

You should only wait until your rights are absolutely guaranteed before you exercise them you know since that's the way it works.
Click to expand...

Oh, is that how it works? I guess we really need to give up free speech, religion, guns, etc. until this whole debate has settled down and we determine it is safe to practice those rights. :doh
 
Henrin said:
There is this thing called risk management. You should avoid putting your family in a bad situation if you can.
Click to expand...

Well with risk management you have to start with something. When you have nothing in this case illegal contact with your spouse you have nothing to lose so that's nothing to risk when entering the contract.
 
CriticalThought said:
Oh, is that how it works? I guess we really need to give up free speech, religion, guns, etc. until this whole debate has settled down and we determine it is safe to practice those rights. :doh
Click to expand...

Well yeah. Standing up for yourself and fighting for your rights and see that's not the American way waiting for Big Daddy government to do it for you is in just the case of same-sex marriage apparently.
 
Henrin said:
I don't recall that argument being used by segregationist.
Click to expand...

Man, those interracial couples shouldn't get married because those laws could get overturned.

That is pretty much the equivalent of the argument you are making.
 
CLAX1911 said:
That's like waiting to buy a gun until after all The gun-control Advocates disappear. Your argument doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

Not really. The only thing buying a gun and losing it will affect is your ability to own a gun, while getting married and then having that marriage taken away affects all aspects of your life.
 
Henrin said:
So who controls the terms of your government marriage contract? Who in fact can change those terms whenever they damn well please?
Click to expand...

Nobody the contract is solid. This Thread isn't about the government taking the contract away. It's about treating people that are different as though they are lesser than everybody else.
 
Henrin said:
Not really. The only thing buying a gun and losing it will affect is your ability to own a gun, while getting married and then having that marriage taken away affects all aspects of your life.
Click to expand...

...

This is the oddest post I have ever read on this forum.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Nobody the contract is solid. This Thread isn't about the government taking the contract away. It's about treating people that are different as though they are lesser than everybody else.
Click to expand...

A government contract is never solid because the terms are never set in stone.
 
Henrin said:
Not really. The only thing buying a gun and losing it will affect is your ability to own a gun, while getting married and then having that marriage taken away affects all aspects of your life.
Click to expand...

They can't be taken away. Even if the Oberfell decision is overturned tomorrow. That contract is still valid and if Texas tries to back out of it they're going to have a massive lawsuit.

If only you do is go back to the way you were before you are allowed to get married you aren't risking anything.

This is more about the state treating people differently because of their sex. They are absolutely going to lose in federal court
 
CriticalThought said:
...

This is the oddest post I have ever read on this forum.
Click to expand...

How? The total possible loss from the action is less, so therefore the risk you take when taking the action is less.
 
CLAX1911 said:
They can't be taken away. Even if the Oberfell decision is overturned tomorrow. That contract is still valid and if Texas tries to back out of it they're going to have a massive lawsuit.

If only you do is go back to the way you were before you are allowed to get married you aren't risking anything.

This is more about the state treating people differently because of their sex. They are absolutely going to lose in federal court
Click to expand...

If the license was no longer legally standing it would be voided.
 
Henrin said:
A government contract is never solid because the terms are never set in stone.
Click to expand...

Well yes they are. Unless you're talking about a coup d'etat or a usurpation of the power, or the current government is overthrown.

Yeah they can't unmarry you.
 
Henrin said:
A government contract is never solid because the terms are never set in stone.
Click to expand...

I am cool with that. If they want to take these benefits from EVERY married couple then let us have that debate. That isn't the problem. They are trying to use the government to selectively pick one group of contact holders and change the terms just for them. That is blatantly unconstitutional.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Well yes they are. Unless you're talking about a coup d'etat or a usurpation of the power, or the current government is overthrown.

Yeah they can't unmarry you.
Click to expand...

They can change the terms to whatever they please. Are you suggest that the government can't change their own laws? lol
 
CLAX1911 said:
That's a pretty big if
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying it was likely, but saying that the government is not bound to keep them around forever just because.
 
Henrin said:
They can change the terms to whatever they please. Are you suggest that the government can't change their own laws? lol
Click to expand...

Terms, what the hell are you talking about? Yeah laws change you ever heard of the grandfather clause?
 
Henrin said:
How? The total possible loss from the action is less, so therefore the risk you take when taking the action is less.
Click to expand...

You are the same person who less than a day ago asked how same sex families could be harmed by reversal of same sex marriage, are you not?
 
CLAX1911 said:
Terms, what the hell are you talking about? Yeah laws change you ever heard of the grandfather clause?
Click to expand...

They don't have to use that.
 
CriticalThought said:
I am cool with that. If they want to take these benefits from EVERY married couple then let us have that debate. That isn't the problem. They are trying to use the government to selectively pick one group of contact holders and change the terms just for them. That is blatantly unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

So you don't believe the benefits to marriage are rights?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom