Why are you against same sex marriage?

[CLAX1911]

I was asked my opinion I gave it.

As to why I am opposed. I am not opposed in Maine. It was decided by the voter here.

Nationally it was decided by unelected judges by decree. It was not decided through our elected representatives.

My Maine right to concealed carry should be honored in every state by the judiciary's reasoning.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

The court does make rulings, are you against that? Everything must be voted on, and legislated?

I think the country is a republic and the supreme law of the Constitution. It is not a democracy.

 

[roguenuke]

As it should have; one man one woman..

What raises a sexual proclivity to minority status?



Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

One man, one woman is not a legal necessity. It is a mere preference, no different in reality or effect than only a man and woman of the same race or religion.

The sexual preference isnt what was being discriminated against, the relative sex of the participants was.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[Lisa]

I am for Gays / Lesbians getting married but I also respect the right of the Church to decline to do the ceremony. One cannot raise the rights of some over others, they have the right to get married the Church has a right to say not here!

That is a given. Nobody can force the church to marry anyone, even if they are members of the church.

 

[gooseneck]

This was an interesting discussion I was having with people.

If you are against same-sex marriage I would like to hear your explanation as to why keep in mind if you responding you give an explanation I may ask you to rationalize. I won't call you a bigot or attack you in anyway and I expect the same reciprocated. I can't speak for other posters I would ask that they not do that but sometimes people got to do what they got to do what they do.

That being said please explain if you are against same-sex marriage why you are and be prepared to rationalize.

People who live as homosexuals have a more difficult life than heterosexuals. When same sex marriage is discussed children feel obligated to pick sides on the issue. A person with a low sex drive may falsely conclude that he or she is homosexual when in reality they are a heterosexual with a low sex drive. By the time they figure it out they have already built their life with the reputation as a homosexual. Normalizing homosexuality through establishing same sex marriage increases the number of homosexuals artificially. It is just like abortion, we all agree that abortion should be minimized. The number of people suffering the difficulties of living as a homosexual should be minimized as well. Normalizing homosexuality increases the numbers of homosexuals artificially. It is a cruel trick on young children. Just shut the fish sticks up about the nonsense. If people become homosexual then so be it but don't push it on young people. Heterosexuals wait until adulthood to have sex. Homosexual children should have the same luxury to wait until adulthood to pick sides. I say we should murder all homosexuals than run their mouth about this type of retardation but that violates freedom of speech. Oh well. Misery loves company. Let the children be converted by these miserable bastards.

 

[Eriech]

The court does make rulings, are you against that? Everything must be voted on, and legislated?

I think the country is a republic and the supreme law of the Constitution. It is not a democracy.

I am against courts making law.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[Lisa]

The reason why the court intervened and ruled that same-sex couples can get married, what is because there were States denying recognition of same-sex unions.

The Court couldn't make up something like civil unions and force the states to recognize them.

What is a civil union and how does it differ with marriage or religious matrimony? Every argument that I have heard about civil unions either is an attempt to return to separate but equal or it is a pedantic linguistic argument based on language because religious conservatives vehemently oppose allowing LGBT people to use the word marriage.

 

[Lisa]

I am against courts making law.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

JFS, Did you graduate from high school or were you a home school valedicorian?

The courts cannot possibly fulfill its necessary function as the crucial 3rd leg of the Constitution's system of checks and balances if they cannot make law with decisions.

 

[CLAX1911]

People who live as homosexuals have a more difficult life than heterosexuals. When same sex marriage is discussed children feel obligated to pick sides on the issue. A person with a low sex drive may falsely conclude that he or she is homosexual when in reality they are a heterosexual with a low sex drive. By the time they figure it out they have already built their life with the reputation as a homosexual. Normalizing homosexuality through establishing same sex marriage increases the number of homosexuals artificially. It is just like abortion, we all agree that abortion should be minimized. The number of people suffering the difficulties of living as a homosexual should be minimized as well. Normalizing homosexuality increases the numbers of homosexuals artificially.

I'm not so sure about this theory you're presenting. having a low sex drive and being attracted to the same sex are two very different things so that doesn't follow.

If you've already built your life as a homosexual then it's probably because you are homosexual not that you have a low sex drive in you were just conned into it.

It is a cruel trick on young children. Just shut the fish sticks up about the nonsense. If people become homosexual then so be it but don't push it on young people. Heterosexuals wait until adulthood to have sex. Homosexual children should have the same luxury to wait until adulthood to pick sides. I say we should murder all homosexuals than run their mouth about this type of retardation but that violates freedom of speech. Oh well. Misery loves company. Let the children be converted by these miserable bastards.

Yeah I don't buy into the idea that children are groomed into homosexuality.

 

[CLAX1911]

I am against courts making law.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

What law did they make?

 

[wolfsgirl]

People who live as homosexuals have a more difficult life than heterosexuals. When same sex marriage is discussed children feel obligated to pick sides on the issue. A person with a low sex drive may falsely conclude that he or she is homosexual when in reality they are a heterosexual with a low sex drive. By the time they figure it out they have already built their life with the reputation as a homosexual. Normalizing homosexuality through establishing same sex marriage increases the number of homosexuals artificially. It is just like abortion, we all agree that abortion should be minimized. The number of people suffering the difficulties of living as a homosexual should be minimized as well. Normalizing homosexuality increases the numbers of homosexuals artificially. It is a cruel trick on young children. Just shut the fish sticks up about the nonsense. If people become homosexual then so be it but don't push it on young people. Heterosexuals wait until adulthood to have sex. Homosexual children should have the same luxury to wait until adulthood to pick sides. I say we should murder all homosexuals than run their mouth about this type of retardation but that violates freedom of speech. Oh well. Misery loves company. Let the children be converted by these miserable bastards.

A low sex drive doesn't make you attracted to the same sex. And who is pushing children to have any sex gay or straight?

 

[wolfsgirl]

What is a civil union and how does it differ with marriage or religious matrimony? Every argument that I have heard about civil unions either is an attempt to return to separate but equal or it is a pedantic linguistic argument based on language because religious conservatives vehemently oppose allowing LGBT people to use the word marriage.

Civil unions are not federally recognized, often are not recognized across state lines, and are not available in every state. They are also not recognized for tax purposes and inheritance in many cases. So not at all the same as a legal civil marriage.

 

[CLAX1911]

What is a civil union and how does it differ with marriage or religious matrimony?

Civil Union | Definition of Civil Union by Merriam-Webster

Every argument that I have heard about civil unions either is an attempt to return to separate but equal or it is a pedantic linguistic argument based on language because religious conservatives vehemently oppose allowing LGBT people to use the word marriage.

the point I'm making is that there was an attempt to compromise in the states wanted nothing to do with it. That's why there was a ruling in the Supreme Court.

 

[Lisa]

Civil unions are not federally recognized, often are not recognized across state lines, and are not available in every state. They are also not recognized for tax purposes and inheritance in many cases. So not at all the same as a legal civil marriage.

I agree with you.

Civil unions are an attempt by conservative religious bigots to return to the days of separate but (un)equal. They didn't work in the 1950s and they don't work now.

 

[Lisa]

People who live as homosexuals have a more difficult life than heterosexuals. When same-sex marriage is discussed children feel obligated to pick sides on the issue. A person with a low sex drive may falsely conclude that he or she is homosexual when in reality they are a heterosexual with a low sex drive. By the time they figure it out they have already built their life with the reputation as a homosexual. Normalizing homosexuality through establishing same-sex marriage increases the number of homosexuals artificially. It is just like abortion, we all agree that abortion should be minimized. The number of people suffering the difficulties of living as a homosexual should be minimized as well. Normalizing homosexuality increases the numbers of homosexuals artificially. It is a cruel trick on young children. Just shut the fish sticks up about the nonsense. If people become homosexual then so be it but don't push it on young people. Heterosexuals wait until adulthood to have sex. Homosexual children should have the same luxury to wait until adulthood to pick sides. I say we should murder all homosexuals than run their mouths about this type of retardation but that violates freedom of speech. Oh well. Misery loves company. Let the children be converted by these miserable bastards.

Who told you this nonsense?

You cannot possibly be converted to being LGBT and they aren't LGB or Trans because they have a low sex drive.

 

[CLAX1911]

JFS, Did you graduate from high school or were you a home school valedicorian?

The courts cannot possibly fulfill its necessary function as the crucial 3rd leg of the Constitution's system of checks and balances if they cannot make law with decisions.

The supreme Court doesn't make law, they rule in existing law. In obergerfel v Hodges they ruled discrimination against same sex couples (banning them from marraige) was unconstitutional. They didn't make a law.

 

[CLAX1911]

Who told you this nonsense?

You cannot possibly be converted to being LGBT and they aren't LGB or Trans because they have a low sex drive.

I've heard this sort of thing before. It seems to be a way people try and justify their beliefs regarding homosexuals.

 

[Lisa]

The supreme Court doesn't make law, they rule in existing law. In obergerfel v Hodges they ruled discrimination against same sex couples (banning them from marraige) was unconstitutional. They didn't make a law.

That ruling made new law when it invalidated state-level DOMA laws.

The very first ruling by the SCOTUS in Marbury set a huge legal precedent. They SCOTUS can only set new retroactively but they certainly do create new law.

 

[CLAX1911]

A low sex drive doesn't make you attracted to the same sex. And who is pushing children to have any sex gay or straight?

It seems most of society pushes people into being heterosexual, I remember being a young boy and people telling me that I'll have a wife some day. Much if my life I wanted that. But as I matured that became unlikely.

 

[Lisa]

I've heard this sort of thing before. It seems to be a way people try and justify their beliefs regarding homosexuals.

LGBT people are more visible now but laws didn't create new gays, bi, or transgendered. They are just out of the closet because they feel safe and have rights.

Anyone who has spent more than 10 minutes in a gay bar knows that LGBT people do not have a low sex drive. I hated when I would get hit on by lesbians when I went with my transgendered friends. I liked the fact that they noticed but I felt uncomfortable when they tried to hit on me or buy me drinks.

 

[CLAX1911]

That ruling made new law when it invalidated state-level DOMA laws.

I would hardly call the 14th amendment new. It is 150 years old.

The very first ruling by the SCOTUS in Marbury set a huge legal precedent. They SCOTUS can only set new retroactively but they certainly do create new law.

Well this decision was based on an old law.

 

[CLAX1911]

LGBT people are more visible now but laws didn't create new gays, bi, or transgendered. They are just out of the closet because they feel safe and have rights.

Anyone who has spent more than 10 minutes in a gay bar knows that LGBT people do not have a low sex drive. I hated when I would get hit on by lesbians when I went with my transgendered friends. I liked the fact that they noticed but I felt uncomfortable when they tried to hit on me or buy me drinks.

I know first hand that gay people don't have low sex drive

 

[roguenuke]

I am against courts making law.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Courts strike down laws, they don't make laws. Some laws need to be struck down because they violate our constitution, our individual rights.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

 

[Renae]

This was an interesting discussion I was having with people.

If you are against same-sex marriage I would like to hear your explanation as to why keep in mind if you responding you give an explanation I may ask you to rationalize. I won't call you a bigot or attack you in anyway and I expect the same reciprocated. I can't speak for other posters I would ask that they not do that but sometimes people got to do what they got to do what they do.

That being said please explain if you are against same-sex marriage why you are and be prepared to rationalize.

What if you're more against how Gay Marriage was pushed rather than against Gay Marriage? I, as a person in an LGBT marriage would have been just fine with a legal union rather than "marriage". Changing the definition of Marriage was... pushed through the courts instead of allowed to organically be, and that was a big mistake.

 

[wolfsgirl]

That ruling made new law when it invalidated state-level DOMA laws.

The very first ruling by the SCOTUS in Marbury set a huge legal precedent. They SCOTUS can only set new retroactively but they certainly do create new law.

No, it removed an unconstitutional law.

If there is a law that says women can not get drivers licenses in my state and the courts find that law unconstitutional they are not making a new law they are getting rid of an unconstitutional law that blocks a segment of society from equal access to a state issues license.

 

[wolfsgirl]

What if you're more against how Gay Marriage was pushed rather than against Gay Marriage? I, as a person in an LGBT marriage would have been just fine with a legal union rather than "marriage". Changing the definition of Marriage was... pushed through the courts instead of allowed to organically be, and that was a big mistake.

Some of us didn't want to wait for our rights to be allowed by random peoples votes, we believe that we deserve full constitutional protections just like any other American citizens. People should not get to vote away the rights of other citizens, we are not a democracy where the majority gets to deny rights to the minority.

At the time that interracial marriage was in court there was even lower support for it, about 30% if I'm remembering correctly, but the court ruled that laws can not deny them marriage based on the 14th amendment.