• 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!

[W:3596] Arguments Against Same-Sex Marriage

Lursa said:
I did not legitimize the law. I wrote that they were mostly based on medical reasons...which they are/were.

Take up your ridicule with them...you're still wrong even if you disagree with their reasoning.
Click to expand...

You are still chasing after that silly strawman. NO ONE IS SUGGESTING we get rid of the CRIMINAL LAWS that punish incest. An we are speaking of marriage between closely related in the present, not the past. You claim there are now medical reasons and their are none.
 
dixon01767 said:
Genetic diversity is healthy for the human race and this is just my personal taste but half white half black women have a high frequency of extreme hotness. Isnt any biblical issue with race mixing purely in the old testament?
Click to expand...

Yes race-mixing increases genetic diversity, however phenotypic diversity will decrease, for the simple reason that traits like blond/red hair, blue/green eyes are recessive and will be mixed out of existence if a white procreates with a black. Surely this is not a good thing.

Also I am not religious.
 
dixon01767 said:
No, NONE of them as much as mentioned sexual orientatio. YOU need to read Lawrence v Texas. No equal protection even involved.

Heres a good summary

Do the criminal convictions of John Lawrence and Tyron Garner under the Texas "Homosexual Conduct" law, which criminalizes sexual intimacy by same-sex couples, but not identical behavior by different-sex couples, violate the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection of laws? Do their criminal convictions for adult consensual sexual intimacy in the home violate their vital interests in liberty and privacy protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Should Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), be overruled?

Conclusion
No, yes, and yes.
{{meta.fullTitle}}
Click to expand...

Wow you really are not connected to reality
Yeah they specifically mention every state had anti-homosexual laws and SOME (not the word that does not mean all) had laws that pertained to heterosexuals

Sodomy laws in the United States - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
dixon01767 said:
You are still chasing after that silly strawman. NO ONE IS SUGGESTING we get rid of the CRIMINAL LAWS that punish incest. An we are speaking of marriage between closely related in the present, not the past. You claim there are now medical reasons and their are none.
Click to expand...

No one is suggesting that...why did you write it? Are you unable to follow the thread of our conversation? Feel free to show where I even implied such.

And the medical reasons still exist...the possibility of genetic defects didnt just disappear. But the emphasis on that in the face of equality and other social factors means it may no longer be the main reason. There are tests that any couple can take to help screen out some issues.
 
Wan said:
Yes race-mixing increases genetic diversity, however phenotypic diversity will decrease, for the simple reason that traits like blond/red hair, blue/green eyes are recessive and will be mixed out of existence if a white procreates with a black. Surely this is not a good thing.

Also I am not religious.
Click to expand...

Why is that a problem? Why is it 'not a good thing?'
 
dixon01767 said:
You are still chasing after that silly strawman. NO ONE IS SUGGESTING we get rid of the CRIMINAL LAWS that punish incest. An we are speaking of marriage between closely related in the present, not the past. You claim there are now medical reasons and their are none.
Click to expand...

Lursa said:
No one is suggesting that...why did you write it? Are you unable to follow the thread of our conversation? Feel free to show where I even implied such.
Click to expand...

Do you lie now or simply forget what you have stated.

Lursa said:
So only one other group then, one with legitimate genetic concerns? Since there are legitimate medical reasons, why do you believe it's discrimination?
Click to expand...


Lursa said:
I wrote that they were mostly based on medical reasons...which they are/were.
Click to expand...

In the present tense.
 
Lursa said:
Why is that a problem? Why is it 'not a good thing?'
Click to expand...

Perhaps he likes blond/red hair, blue/green eyes. Why do you see their elimination as a good thing?
 
dixon01767 said:
Do you lie now or simply forget what you have stated.






In the present tense.
Click to expand...

And I posted nothing...and you found nothing...where I even implied criminal acts or laws. There's a delusional quality to what you did post, as it fulfills nothing I requested or that you claimed :doh
 
dixon01767 said:
Perhaps he likes blond/red hair, blue/green eyes. Why do you see their elimination as a good thing?
Click to expand...

They wouldnt be eliminated...just perhaps less common.
 
 
Wan said:
More people than you realize are "racial separatists". They might not say anything in public but in private they only want to associate with other white people.
Click to expand...

Lol. I love this old klan tactic of assuming they have a crystal ball into the minds of everyone. Sorry cupcake, you lost. Get over it.
 
Wan said:
Yes race-mixing increases genetic diversity, however phenotypic diversity will decrease, for the simple reason that traits like blond/red hair, blue/green eyes are recessive and will be mixed out of existence if a white procreates with a black. Surely this is not a good thing.

Also I am not religious.
Click to expand...
Opinion noted.
 
Wan said:
More people than you realize are "racial separatists". They might not say anything in public but in private they only want to associate with other white people.
Click to expand...

And so you, as a racial separatist, approve of this.

Not surprising, really, you being nakedly and proudly racist.
 
Lursa said:
And I posted nothing...and you found nothing...where I even implied criminal acts or laws.
Click to expand...

No one claimed you had. Looking for your next strawman to glom onto?
 
bomberfox said:
Lol. I love this old klan tactic of assuming they have a crystal ball into the minds of everyone. Sorry cupcake, you lost. Get over it.
Click to expand...
I don't claim to know how other people think, I just go by what I have observed. And my observation is that most white people tend to only want to associate with their own. Can I say for sure it's for racial reasons? No I cant. But I can draw my own conclusion from it.

Tanngrisnir said:
And so you, as a racial separatist, approve of this.

Not surprising, really, you being nakedly and proudly racist.
Click to expand...
I am indeed nakedly and proudly racist.

Also, I am not white.
 
Quag said:
Try again
https://www.gsafewi.org/wp-content/uploads/US-LGBT-Timeline-UPDATED.pdf
LGBT history in the United States - Wikipedia
The Immigration and Nationality Act and the Exclusion of Homosexuals: Boutilier v. INS Revisited Current Developments and Overview
5 Immigration and Nationality Law Review 1981-1982
It doesn't take much googling to see your claim is bogus
I suggest you stop digging
Click to expand...

You should just copy and paste a few RELATIVE sentences from the statute. But you may have found one single example. The immigration law I was not aware of. Probably the one and only example within your collection of links. But you feel free to copy and paste any other.
 
Lursa said:
They wouldnt be eliminated...just perhaps less common.
Click to expand...

And why do you view this as a good thing? You seem fond of focusing on the irrelevant to avoid the relevent parts.
 
dixon01767 said:
You should just copy and paste a few RELATIVE sentences from the statute. But you may have found one single example. The immigration law I was not aware of. Probably the one and only example within your collection of links. But you feel free to copy and paste any other.
Click to expand...

Feel free to admit you were wrong
 
Wan said:
I don't claim to know how other people think, I just go by what I have observed. And my observation is that most white people tend to only want to associate with their own. Can I say for sure it's for racial reasons? No I cant. But I can draw my own conclusion from it.


I am indeed nakedly and proudly racist.

Also, I am not white.
Click to expand...

You have not proven your claims. Whether or not you are white is immaterial as i referred to a tactic that the Klan used. Again your observations are anecdotal, therefore useless. Want a cookie cupcake?
 
bomberfox said:
You have not proven your claims. Whether or not you are white is immaterial as i referred to a tactic that the Klan used. Again your observations are anecdotal, therefore useless. Want a cookie cupcake?
Click to expand...

I don't care to prove to you that white people don't want to associate with minorities, because what you think means nothing to me.
 
Wan said:
I don't claim to know how other people think, I just go by what I have observed. And my observation is that most white people tend to only want to associate with their own. Can I say for sure it's for racial reasons? No I cant. But I can draw my own conclusion from it.


I am indeed nakedly and proudly racist.

Also, I am not white.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. People don't have to be white to be racist, only stupid.
 
dixon01767 said:
And why do you view this as a good thing? You seem fond of focusing on the irrelevant to avoid the relevent parts.
Click to expand...

Who wrote it was a good thing? IMO it's neutral. I see no negative effects from it...more a matter of preference, but that's opinion.

I did direct the question to someone else however, because I was interested in her opinion on it...so it was relevant to that conversation.
 
Wan said:
More people than you realize are "racial separatists". They might not say anything in public but in private they only want to associate with other white people.
Click to expand...

I hope you're not proud of that...it's shameful and ignorant, based on deplorable lack of knowledge and generally, displays the low-esteem of people that need to believe that there is someone that they are "superior" to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom