• 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!

Cuba gay pride calls for same-sex marriage to become legal

Why does that matter?

Just responding to someone who said that gays were a significant part of the population. I've heard as low as 3% and as high as 10, depending on whose spinning the bull. So I don't know how significant they are numerically.
 
Just responding to someone who said that gays were a significant part of the population. I've heard as low as 3% and as high as 10, depending on whose spinning the bull. So I don't know how significant they are numerically.

Split the difference, let's say 6.5% of the population.

Asian-Americans = 4.8%
Jewish-Americans = 2.6%
Southern Baptists = 5.5%

Are none of those significant parts of the population either?
 

I wouldn't be embarrassed at all.

If the Supreme Court deemed that marriage was not a right and was a state issue for states to figure out themselves then that would be in line with the constitution, which is the legal God of America.

The world's view on our domestic issue in regards to the constitution and the rights of the people are meaningless.
 

Interpretation of the constitution has nothing to do with democracy.

Oh I love it when Europeans think they know America better than Americans!
 
Interpretation of the constitution has nothing to do with democracy.

Oh I love it when Europeans think they know America better than Americans!

Yes it does, unless you consider the Supreme Court un democratic.
 
Yes it does, unless you consider the Supreme Court un democratic.

The justices review it. Not the people nor their representatives, only the justices.

The people can make arguments through a lawyer perhaps, but that's very loose democracy. Hella it ain't democracy at all now that I think about it. The ultimate interpreter is SCOTUS and no one else, not necessarily democratic in and of itself. I'll be happy to reword myself should I need to.
 
The justices review it. Not the people nor their representatives, only the justices.

The people can make arguments through a lawyer perhaps, but that's very loose democracy.

They "interpret" it!!!!!!

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"-These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/constitutional.aspx
 

What does that have to do with democracy?

The court interprets the constitution as is. Many times in the past the court has ruled against what people would call "democratic" such as in the case regarding segregation or even the toleration of slavery since nothing in the constitution forbade it back then.

What would you do if the court rules that SSM is not a right and is a state issue?
 
Phew! Thank goodness Che isnt still there and Fidel is an old old man. In their prime, those guys would have all been made to go bye bye.
 
Just responding to someone who said that gays were a significant part of the population. I've heard as low as 3% and as high as 10, depending on whose spinning the bull. So I don't know how significant they are numerically.

I don't care if they're 0.0001% of the population.
 

Well, non democracies tend not to even have constitutions or supreme courts to interpret them.
 

Are you being funny, or do you mean that you really haven't been following the developments?
 
Split the difference, let's say 6.5% of the population.

Asian-Americans = 4.8%
Jewish-Americans = 2.6%
Southern Baptists = 5.5%

Are none of those significant parts of the population either?

Depends on what your definition if significant is.
 



Not embarrassed at all, fascist dictatorships often can act much faster and whimsical due to the fact they are.... wait for it.... fascist dictatorships.
 
Meh, did you note who organized it?

Now you're making me go back and find where I said that and figure out why, lol. I'm back, not sure of your point though.
 
Now you're making me go back and find where I said that and figure out why, lol. I'm back, not sure of your point though.

First sentence, or just about, in article:

"The event was organised by President Raul Castro's daughter, Mariela Castro."
 
I'm asking for something more concrete from the government, "opinions of the public" in Cuba means little to those in charge.

What have you heard concrete from the US govt re: federally accepted SSM?

Besides that SCOTUS is finally going to examine it, period.
 

Very well said. ALL of it, lol. You'll note there was nothing of substance in either post, just little 'drive bys'.
 

I like the fact that the protesters were not abused and were allowed to protest.

If the Castro regime is gradually loosening its hold, as seems the intent here, I would encourage it in the little time it has left.
 

What about all the people that agree with him that are not gay? And have not experienced it 'personally?' The thread has many, and so do the other threads on SSM. Loads.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…