• 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!

Pa. gov: Gay marriage is like marriage of siblings

The US constitution has nothing in it about interracial marriages. I'm asking you again: Should interracial marriages be discriminated against too?

We can discriminate against it on the same basis which you discriminate against gay marriage: A moral basis.

Yes or no question Mr. Libertarian.

Why is the government involved in marriage? You might find the answer is the same.
 
The US constitution has nothing in it about interracial marriages. I'm asking you again: Should interracial marriages be discriminated against too?

We can discriminate against it on the same basis which you discriminate against gay marriage: A moral basis.

Yes or no question Mr. Libertarian.

I don't give a **** about marriage.... That is a Tenth Amendment issue - NOT a federal issue.
 
I don't give a **** about marriage.... That is a Tenth Amendment issue - NOT a federal issue.

Ah, so now states have the right to discriminate against the interracial marriages of US Citizens? Is that how it works? The states have a right to say - Blacks and whites can't marry because it's immoral. Yes?
 
It doesn't mention the right to breath air either

Well I would consider breathing a basic human function like breathing, ****ting, pissing, sweating..

Nice illogical attempt tho.
 
As the South used to. With their "colored-only" water fountains. My naive British Mother didn't understand that one in Georgia back in the 50's. Unfortunately, she gets the stain of racism now. When you hear the 10th, these "2nd amendment remediers" just want another civil war.
Ah, so now states have the right to discriminate against the interracial marriages of US Citizens? Is that how it works? The states have a right to say - Blacks and whites can't marry because it's immoral. Yes?
 
As the South used to. With their "colored-only" water fountains. My naive British Mother didn't understand that one in Georgia back in the 50's. Unfortunately, she gets the stain of racism now. When you hear the 10th, these "2nd amendment remediers" just want another civil war.

I'm just trying to see where he stands. Are we banning things because of our own morality? Do the states have a right to discriminate against US citizens? He apparently seems to think all things are equal.
 
I'm just trying to see where he stands. Are we banning things because of our own morality? Do the states have a right to discriminate against US citizens? He apparently seems to think all things are equal.

In essence all things are equal - are gays arrested and prosecuted under law for being gay?

Is it ILLEGAL to be gay or engage in gay sex?
 
The right to marriage each other. Heterosexuals have that right.

MARRIAGE IS NOT A RIGHT NOR A CIVIL LIBERTY - is that too difficult to understand?

I know you wish it was but legally it's NOT...

Marriage is NOT a legal right... Not even heterosexual marriage - that is a status quo...
 
In essence all things are equal - are gays arrested and prosecuted under law for being gay?

Since when is arrest and prosecution the only part of the law? There is marriage law, legal guardianship law, benefactor laws - some of which are denied to gay couples.

Is it ILLEGAL to be gay or engage in gay sex?

I'm not exactly sure what is worse - that you think the only law which is applicable is "arrest and prosecution" laws or that you think "sex" is the only part of a relationship. Do you have a girlfriend?
 
MARRIAGE IS NOT A RIGHT NOR A CIVIL LIBERTY - is that too difficult to understand?

Loving v. Virginia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SCOTUS said:
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.

Your statement is false. May I suggest you take classes in the history of law in the US?
 
He stands with all of the Southern Confederate states who wish to continue denying health care to those who don't have it.
They must be mobilized to vote in 2014 no matter what barriers are put up, like the North Carolina ones.
I'm just trying to see where he stands. Are we banning things because of our own morality? Do the states have a right to discriminate against US citizens? He apparently seems to think all things are equal.
 
Mr. Nick, you keep ducking and dodging - if marriage is not a right or civil liberty: Why are blacks allowed to marry whites?
 
My personal opinion on gay marriage is moot - I'm telling yall what the constitution says and the constitution say absolutely nothing about marriage between a woman and woman man and man or man and woman.... DOMA was the closest think and that was Bill Clinton's idea...

Sorry to explain to you that are possibly inept but there are 2) ways to legitimize gay marriage 1) would be to amend the constitution or 2) embrace the Tenth Amendment and allow states to decide...

My moral personal and ethical position on the issue is useless....

All I'm telling you "gay rights" fanatics is that "gay rights" is an epic exaggeration when your entire boggle boils down to a Tenth Amendment issue based on marriage and marriage alone.
 
Last edited:
so... your saying the state should not be using any form of morality?

Subjective morality? Of course the state should not use subjective morality. Do have an agreement that killing people is socially harmful? Yes. Regardless of religion or even creed - most people - with the exception of sociopaths and the mentally ill - are born with the knowledge that killing is inherently wrong. Do we have an agreement that gay relationships are wrong? Obviously we don't - most people who say it's wrong have no actual argument for why it's wrong other than their deity tells them so through a third party. So - why exactly should it be discriminated against? Does it present a problem legally? No. The same laws which apply for heterosexuality would apply for homosexual marriages. That leaves us this litmus test of questions:

Does it present a danger socially?

Is anyone physically harmed by gay marriages? No. Well, only whomever is getting it up the ass. That must be painful. Yet no reason to ban gay sex anymore than straight sex.

Is anyone legally harmed by gay marriages? No. Well, depends - usually the husband gets ****ed on the straight divorce. But gays don't have that problem.

Is anyone emotionally harmed by gay marriages? No. Well, only if your spouse cheats.

So with all joking aside, and seriousness on point - gay marriage does not present a danger to anybody but the people involved in the marriage. That's not a reason to discriminate against their unions.
 
Loving v. Virginia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Your statement is false. May I suggest you take classes in the history of law in the US?

You're comparing apples and grapefruit while attempting to call it "fruit" in general..

Besides the courts are tyrannical to begin with considering their entire premise is to override the state and federal legislature in the processes - so what is the point of a state and federal legislature? to throw dog **** at the wall and see what sticks?
 
Back
Top Bottom