• 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!

On gay marriage, America's house may not stay divided for long [W:29, 210]


Meaningless personal attack to discredit my point.
 

Interesting how multiple attempts in my part to find this study online were unsuccessful.
 

I'm not sure how one can conclude that heterosexuals engage in more deviant behavior than homosexuals considering that by definition homosexual engage in deviant behavior 100% of the time.

deviant
— adjective

deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation: deviant social behavior.
 

Because there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals. Plus, it is not abnormal to engage in sodomy. Not when a majority of the population, heterosexual and homosexual engage in some form of it when they are sexually active. Deviant sexual behavior would be engaging in something besides just sodomy or even homosexuality.
 

It's a definition of terms. If less than 10% of the population identifies as homosexual i think that qualifies as deviating from the norm. You have an Interesting opinion about sodomy though
 
clownboy said:
You're too uneducated to make comments like this without exposing yourself yet again to the forum as a know nothing know it all. 40-50 years ago was the debate about openning marriage to cousins. Many states started to allow it.
Click to expand...

In order to refute the slippery slope fallacy, you must show a causal relationship between the thing and the thing that you believe will occur. Since SSM is not analogous to incest, polygamy, or marriage to minors, the causal relationship fails and the logical fallacy exists.
 

No doubt you can "inundate" this thread with bogus studies designed to push the homosexual agenda. I have full confidence you can do that.

But it's like the man caused global warming hoax. People with common sense had big doubts and were very skeptical of peer reviewed report after peer reviewed report that told of disasters to come if everybody didn't change their ways. But it just never made sense to those that thought about it instead of jumping on the politically correct bandwagon. And of course come to find out most of those reports were packed full of lies, half truths and other nonsense by so called "scientists".
 

In the slippery slope fallacy, CAUSAL relationships are key, not correlational. This is why the fallacy exists in this case. You cannot prove causation without an accurate analogy. Also, the arguments used in supporting SSM have been used by minorities for centuries.
 
LuckyLarry said:
Correct. And any man has the option to marry any other woman and any woman has the option to marry any other man. Fair and equal application.
Click to expand...

I've seen this stupid argument for years. It's dishonest. It omits the reason that most people marry someone else... which then demonstrates that it is not a fair and equal application.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
No doubt you can "inundate" this thread with bogus studies designed to push the homosexual agenda. I have full confidence you can do that.
Click to expand...

YOU'RE discussing bogus studies??? :lol: That's pretty ironic.

I've posted plenty of studies on parenting by gays as has CT. Peer reviewed, repeatable, and valid methodology. That makes the studies valid. All accepted by major groups such as the APA, AMA, and WHO. And what does your side have? Exodus International? Oh, wait... they closed up shop and apologized for presenting lies about gays. NARTH? Hmmm... Cameron as one of their important contributors... someone who was thrown out of the APA for falsifying data in order to push his anti-gay agenda, there's not much credibility there. Who else have you got?
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I've seen this stupid argument for years. It's dishonest. It omits the reason that most people marry someone else... which then demonstrates that it is not a fair and equal application.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It acknowledges why people marry. It just further defines parameters if marriage.

Regardless, I hope you don't really believe that everything in life should be fair. The abundance of unfair circumstances will drive you mad.
 
LuckyLarry said:
I disagree. It acknowledges why people marry. It just further defines parameters if marriage.
Click to expand...

No, as I said, it omits the reason which is why the argument is both stupid and invalid.

Regardless, I hope you don't really believe that everything in life should be fair. The abundance of unfair circumstances will drive you mad.
Click to expand...

You presented "fair and equal". Not my argument. All I did was show how it didn't apply.
 

No, no thanks I'll pass on any of the studies you pick out. I've seen enough already.

Using a study of only 20 men to determine that 25% of them (or whatever it was) didn't know how to put on a rubber took the cake. And I'm sure you had a straight face on when you were typing it all out in the post you stuck it in. Very selective study if you ask me and is even if you don't.

Very ironic of you to pretend credibility on studies you select. So no. I'm not interested in anything else you have.
 

I am not even talking about APA studies. This is an issue that have been studied and is currently being studied in countries across the world by varying health, pediatric, and mental health organizations. It is one thing to say, "well this one particular organization has no credibility on this topic" and quite another to suggest there is no credibility for the dozens of scientific organizations across the world who have studied it.
 

LET ME MAKE SOMETHING CLEAR RIGHT NOW! I DID NOT MAKE THE ORIGINAL CLAIM. LUCKY LARRY MADE THE CLAIM. HE STATED THAT INSTANCES LIKE CHILD MOLESTATION ARE MORE COMMON IN HOMOSEXUAL HOMES! HE MADE THAT CLAIM WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER TO BACK IT UP AND STATING HIS VIEW WAS INFORMED BY STUDIES AND ARTICLES. NOW IF YOU WANT TO GET ON ANYONE ABOUT "BOGUS CLAIMS" WHY NOT START ASKING HIM TO POST HIS RESOURCES SO THAT WE SEE HOW VALID THEY ARE.

I seriously detest people who are all too willing to rescue those who lie through their teeth.
 

:lamo

I think every unbiased critical thinking mind would agree that your comments are BS and a feckless attempt to discredit anyone who presents such an argument in regard to the consequences of changing the definition of marriage to include same sex. Though those arguments based in slippery slope analogies may be conjecture, that doesn't mean they are invalid. On the contrary their analysis based on sound thought and theory disclose the consequences that many are not willing to accept in our society. And because of that becomes a real threat to those who advocate for same sex marriage.
 
ItAin'tFree said:
No, no thanks I'll pass on any of the studies you pick out. I've seen enough already.
Click to expand...

Of course you don't. It wouldn't work out well for you.


That was ONE study. There are scores of them that show that signficant portions of the population have no idea how to use a condom correctly. Here you go:

Condom use 101: Basic errors are so common, study finds - NBC News.com

This is now twice out of two times I've show you to be incorrect.

Very ironic of you to pretend credibility on studies you select. So no. I'm not interested in anything else you have.
Click to expand...

No, as I showed, the irony is on you. You posted a refuted study. You have now been shown by a METAstudy that errors in condom usage is pretty common.
 

Anyone who knows how to discuss an issue rationally and logically knows that everything you have said in this thread has no credibility. You cannot prove cause and you cannot prove an accurate analogy. Your argument is nothing more than a logical fallacy and no matter how much you scream "nuh, uh" it doesn't alter the fact that you have proven that you don't know what you are talking about.
 
But you fail to recognize the many instances where the same so called experts are called in on a hearing reporting information that has been found to be false yet is used to influence to change law to benefit homosexual relations. There is a reason why a good portion of the gay community do not support Gay Marriage. They know exactly what is going on. They know the crap being presented as some type of truth to alter laws is bogus.
 

LET ME MAKE SOMETHING CLEAR (LOL). Makes no difference to me one way or another who you detest. None.

You made a comment about how you would "inundate" this thread. I made a comment directly related to your comment.

I don't know that Lucky Larry did lie. Far as I know, he told the complete truth. You may not think so, but I'm not you. So I see no need to question him about anything, so I won't.
 
vesper said:
...the consequences that many are not willing to accept in our society.
Click to expand...

Here is the beauty of the "slippery slope" argument. I can just as easily argue the proposed consequences to society will occur as a result of NOT legalizing same sex marriage.

For example, pretty much every country that has legal polygamy does NOT allow same sex marriage. Maybe if we DON"T legalize same sex marriage it will lead to the legalization of polygamy. Makes about as much sense as the arguments I hear people making that legalizing same sex marriage will lead to polygamy.

You believe that homosexuals are rampant child molesters in waiting? Perhaps NOT legalizing same sex marriage is irresponsible then because that puts those dangerous homos in consensual, adult relationships.
 

Here is the fact. Lucky Larry cited he could post studies that gay parents are child molesters. You didn't say a word to him. I posted that I could refute that if he didn't back up his claim. You then argue that ANYTHING I would post would inevitably be "bogus". Fact is you completely destroyed any credibility you had in this thread because you made it perfectly clear you don't give a crap about evidence. If it does not agree with what you believe, you will deliberately ignore it. That is by definition, confirmation bias. You are free to do it, but don't pretend that you are anything less than biased as all hell on this issue.
 

Paranoid much? Please substantiate your arguments. Let us see some examples of all these experts called in to hearings. Or how about a major gay organization that is opposed to same sex marriage?

To put it simply, you are full of crap. Prove me wrong.
 
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…