• 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!

Anti-gay marriage rallies as NY ceremonies begin

Paschendale said:
Maybe we should start protesting church wedding and see how quickly the religious folks cry foul... No one likes a taste of their own medicine.
Click to expand...

Actually, they should be protested. It's the heterosexuals who are ruining the sanctity of marriage. After all, who's getting all the divorces? (Hint: it's not the gays)

:twisted:
 

:lol:


Man, thanks for a good laugh... that was great! :lol:
 
Иосиф Сталин;1059684329 said:
Not when it's meant to help society. And this is meant to protect those who don't have yet a fully conscious capability to detect evil.
Click to expand...

Yet we aren't censoring you...
 
roguenuke said:
Star Wars and Star Trek can coexist. They do so quite nicely on both my DVD shelf and book shelf.
Click to expand...

I have employed the Separate but Equal doctine in my house for Star Wars I, II, III... they sit on a different shelf than Star Trek and Star Wars IV, V, VI and whenever we move, they have to gtravel in a separate box.
 
“About 1/3 of all lesbian women and 1/4 gay men have children.” - Redress

Not together they didn’t.

“Many more would like to” - Redress

So would many straight couples. And as one who has attempted to adopt I can tell you that it is extremely expensive and all of the children seem to be owned by lawyers.

“Studies conclude conclusively that the gender of parents is irrelevant to how children turn out.” - Redress

And studies show how the children of homosexual parents suffer issues they need not have to. Look, folks like you like to show studies (all inconclusive at this point) that show that gay parents can raise kids and nobody is questioning that. I’ve no doubt that gay parents can love and nurture their children and while this is another debate the ultimate question that has to be answered in that debate is “what is best for the children”.

And what is best for kids is to have a mommy and a daddy. Homosexual couples raising kids deliberately excludes one of these.

“Marriage promotes stability.” - Redress

No it doesn’t. A quick look at the divorce rate proves you wrong immediately on this point.

“Furthermore, marriage brings a large number(thousands) of federal benefits that enhance married households, which would benefit children in those households.” - Redress

I’ve no problem with gay folks getting benefits but this is a good reason to change the laws…not marriage.
 
“A conclusion is not an argument.” - Aderleth

Correct and ultimately that is what we are trying to get to…a conclusion.

“What do you understand to be the reasoning at issue in both, and why don't you think that reasoning is analogous?” - Aderleth

Marriage is an institution establishing a life-long union between a men and women. Loving vs. Virginia did nothing to fundamentally change this construct of marriage as the race of the parties involved do not fundamentally change the nature of marriage.

“Obviously, yes SCOTUS will eventually decide this issue. Current precedent, however, supports my position.” - Aderleth

Agreed and I will submit that I believe that SCOTUS will eventually legalize homosexual marriage.
 
“Actually, this is not true. There are historical examples of same sex unions and marriages in Native American tribes, some areas of China, Greece, and Rome.” - Dustmop

You forgot certain tribes in Africa.

And none of these examples of “homosexual marriages” (some of which are argued to be better examples of initiation rites for men, etc.) have never had any impact on the institution of marriage which is why we are able to say that regardless of time, culture, religion, heritage, history, ancestry, whatever marriage has been between men and women.
 
Baron, I am genuinely impressed by you.

I've never seen anyone who can read hard facts and conclude the exact opposite as often and without fail as you.

I'm truly amazed.
 
The Baron said:
Trolls aren't welcome here.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to be a troll, debating an issue with you is next to impossible though.

You ignore every piece of supporting evidence people have shown you on this thread.

You're not disagreeing with us, you're refusing to accept the facts that we've stated and backed up with documentation.

From this I can only concluded that you are not interested in an actual dialogue but in maintaining your dogmatic bigoted beliefs.
 
Paschendale said:
Maybe we should start protesting church wedding and see how quickly the religious folks cry foul... No one likes a taste of their own medicine.
Click to expand...

Actually, I think those opposed to SSM would love to see just this happen. If public opinion matters, this would be a really dumb thing to do. Just sayin'.
 
X Factor said:
Actually, I think those opposed to SSM would love to see just this happen. If public opinion matters, this would be a really dumb thing to do. Just sayin'.
Click to expand...

Yea, I agree. Don't protest their church.

They have a constitutional right to be as bigoted as they are.
 
"...you are not interested in an actual dialogue but in maintaining your dogmatic bigoted beliefs." - SlackMaster

If you have something intelligent to say then do so but, once again, trolls are not welcome here.
 

The Baron said:
"...you are not interested in an actual dialogue but in maintaining your dogmatic bigoted beliefs." - SlackMaster

If you have something intelligent to say then do so but, once again, trolls are not welcome here.
Click to expand...

You know, neither of you is currently commenting on the actual point of the thread anymore. If trolling is commenting on points irrelevant to a thread, you're both engaging in it. Maybe if one of you either stops trying to get the last word, or actually made a point regarding the topic of discussion, the accusations of trolling would quietly go to the wayside.
 
So you have nothing intelligent to add, either?

Geeeez!
 
The Baron said:
So you have nothing intelligent to add, either?

Geeeez!
Click to expand...

If you're referring to me, this is my only addition:
The only difference between a gay coupling and a straight coupling is that the gay people can't create children. The same is true of infertile straight couples. The state allows infertile straight couples to get married, ergo gay couples should be able to get married.
 
“If you're referring to me…” - Belgarath

I was referring to you.

“The only difference between a gay coupling and a straight coupling is that the gay people can't create children. The same is true of infertile straight couples. The state allows infertile straight couples to get married, ergo gay couples should be able to get married.” - Belgarath

Infertile heterosexual couples still consists of men and women and does not alter the fundamental nature of marriage.

Homosexual couples do alter the fundamental nature of marriage and should never be allowed.
 



So what you're saying is that the fundamental marriage is a man and a woman. What gives you that impression? Only since Christianity decided to make marriage an institution between one man and one woman has that been perceived as the case by any group of people. There are records going back to ancient Greece and Rome that indicate that marriage was simply any two individuals who found someone who satisfied their requirements re credentials and class level, and then they would hold varying ceremonies depending on what those two individuals desired. Some people believed the full moon was a lucky indicator, some people believe that marriage should or should not be oriented around love or finance...but one thing is for sure, marriage is utterly subjective to the will of the people marrying it. The idea that only one man and one woman should be able to marry is mildly ridiculous- it's like my saying that because aliens don't exist, if they ever show up I'm simply going deny their existence because it's fundamentally wrong. I can be delusional until I die, but that doesn't change reality.
 
Last edited:
“So what you're saying is that the fundamental marriage is a man and a woman. What gives you that impression? Only since Christianity decided to make marriage an institution between one man and one woman has that been perceived as the case by any group of people.” - Belgarath

Not true. Marriages between men and women existed long before Christianity.

“There are records going back to ancient Greece and Rome that indicate that marriage was simply any two individuals who found someone who satisfied their requirements re credentials and class level, and then they would hold varying ceremonies depending on what those two individuals desired.” - Belgarath

Then please provide them to evidence your claim.

And also know that I’ve already stipulated that there have been some instances where two people of the same sex have “married” in the past. Such instances have been isolated and in some instances that “marriages” were better defined as male initiation ceremonies particular to a culture and were not sexual. And such instances never made any influence cross-culturally and seemed to have been limited to a particular time.

But please do provide your sources.

“Some people believed the full moon was a lucky indicator, some people believe that marriage should or should not be oriented around love or finance...but one thing is for sure, marriage is utterly subjective to the will of the people marrying it.” - Belgarath

Regardless, such beliefs never impacted what a marriage fundamentally is which is a life-long commitment between men and women.

This is what is has always been around the world regardless of time, culture, religion, whatever and the odd exception found across history has never changed or influenced that.
 
Gay Marriage Is As Old As History
Gay marriage goes way back - Technology & science - Science - LiveScience - msnbc.com
Timeline of LGBT history - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Origins of Homosexuality
Homosexuality in Ancient Greece - ReligionFacts
There are tons of books on the subject, and so many websites I wouldn't even know where to begin. What I am offering is really just a snippet of the large volume of works on the subject- there's no question about it. Homosexuality has been prevalent since the dawn of man. You will find, however, that what I was saying is not that that there were not marriages between man and woman. God forbid I argue against that. My point is that you will find that there were simply also equal records of homosexuality and marriage for them as well.
 
A few more...

http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/...sex unions legal or cultural status marriage"


The origins and role of same-sex ... - Google Books

Ritualized Homosexuality in Melanesia - Google Books

Passions of the cut sleeve: the male ... - Google Books
 
"So did marriages between people of the same sex." - Critical Thought






Boring.​






 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…