• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!

State to Eliminate “Bride” & “Groom” on Marriage Certificates [W:303]

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,699
Reaction score
5,703
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
My point was though, how could decadence have been responsible for their fall if they weren't sinful and decadent when they fell? Remember, all of the sinful stuff had stopped by the time they entered decline.
A house built on a weak foundation is doomed, my point was Rome was built on an immoral-weak foundation and I see us trading in our Judeo Christian foundation for something more resembling Rome.
 

the makeout hobo

Rockin' In The Free World
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2006
Messages
7,102
Reaction score
1,504
Location
Sacramento, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
A house built on a weak foundation is doomed, my point was Rome was built on an immoral-weak foundation and I see us trading in our Judeo Christian foundation for something more resembling Rome.
That's a weak and silly point. How did immorality that existed hundreds of years earlier doom the Roman Empire? It'd be like if America fell and we blamed it on the Japanese Exclusion Act. Listen man, not everything can be blamed on "teh gays".
 

ChrisL

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
47,571
Reaction score
16,958
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
They could just have the couple each circle which word they each want to apply. Or just have more than one form to fill out.
That's what I mean, and what is said during the marriage ceremony? Is it husband and wife, husband and husband, wife and wife, person A and person B, etc., etc. If there is no objection to the terms (husband and/or wife) during the actual ceremony, then why the big deal about what it says on the marriage certificate? I don't get it.
 

joko104

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
62,098
Reaction score
21,885
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
As i stated earlier in this thread I have read quite a few books on Rome and see similarities to their demise and what is going on in America today. The site and quote from it I posted sum up Romes morality issues pretty well for this venue. If you disagree that morality or should I say lack thereof had anything to do with the fall of Rome that is fine but it is one of the many theories out there. Rome fell for a myriad of reasons and IMO their decedent culture was one of them. A society where deviant behavior becomes the norm is doomed and I see us heading in that direction.
You give no logic to "decadence" causing decline. Unless you claim Christianizing is decadent.
 

joko104

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
62,098
Reaction score
21,885
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A house built on a weak foundation is doomed, my point was Rome was built on an immoral-weak foundation and I see us trading in our Judeo Christian foundation for something more resembling Rome.
Except Rome fell AFTER Judeo-Christian values became influential. At that height of Roman power and for a very, very long there was NO Judeo-Christian values. So the FACTS prove you exactly wrong. Using your asserted cause-and-effect, Judeo-Christian values are the last thing America should have.
 

Monserrat

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
1,497
Reaction score
488
Location
US
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
now you are flat out lying

no it is not all factual you said it was "indistinguishable" not only is that not factual its laughable.

by all means though again, when you have anything logical or factual to support your claim by all mean please provide.

Yes i saw your sources they do NOTHING to make your statement factual or logical, nothing.
I'm not lying but I appreciate the name calling, it always is the best way to solve disagreements (that was sarcasm). It's all there in the sources I'm saying the exact same thing that they do so maybe you are just misunderstanding or misreading my posts?
 

sawyerloggingon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 6, 2011
Messages
14,699
Reaction score
5,703
Location
Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Except Rome fell AFTER Judeo-Christian values became influential. At that height of Roman power and for a very, very long there was NO Judeo-Christian values. So the FACTS prove you exactly wrong. Using your asserted cause-and-effect, Judeo-Christian values are the last thing America should have.
I don't know why ypou are so supportive of any and all deviant behavior but you are. To each his own I guess.
 

Monserrat

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
1,497
Reaction score
488
Location
US
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
yes i do disagree because thats not what is happening, its not changing
When marriage in the US has traditionally been between a man and a woman and is now starting to be more inclusive that is a change.
 
Last edited:

Cardinal

Respected on both sides
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
76,586
Reaction score
56,365
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
This is the kind of stuff that predicated the fall of the Roman empire. Watch for the legalization of having sex with children next.
You know, we actually know why the Roman empire fell. We don't have to make up stuff to figure it out.
 

AGENT J

"I'm kind of a big deal"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
60,503
Reaction score
17,401
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm not lying but I appreciate the name calling, it always is the best way to solve disagreements (that was sarcasm). It's all there in the sources I'm saying the exact same thing that they do so maybe you are just misunderstanding or misreading my posts?
yes you are 100% factually lying because you made that statement they were indistinguishable, that is NOT factual that is your opinion based on ZERO facts and ZERO logic lol. Nice try to deflect though and act like somebody called you a name or is disagree with you.

We arent having a disagreement, i simply am pointing out your inaccurate statement you made and you are in denial of it.

It weird i keep asking you for facts and logic to back up your claim and you cant do it, i wonder why? :)
 

AGENT J

"I'm kind of a big deal"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
60,503
Reaction score
17,401
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
When marriage in the US has traditionally been between a man and a woman and is now starting to be more exclusive that is a change.
no its not, why? because men and women can still marry eachother just like before, sorry you are simply wrong
 

ChrisL

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
47,571
Reaction score
16,958
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
no its not, why? because men and women can still marry eachother just like before, sorry you are simply wrong
Allowing gay people to marry makes marriage more inclusive, not exclusive. Just saying. :)
 

AGENT J

"I'm kind of a big deal"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
60,503
Reaction score
17,401
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Allowing gay people to marry makes marriage more inclusive, not exclusive. Just saying. :)
this is very true i agree

but her argument was people are fighting thins because they are worried about "traditional" marriage (which is simply a made up term and subjective) and they dont want it to change.

THe reality is it isnt for them, they arent affected so what ever they view as traditional marriage is still true :)

for example if yesterday i viewed traditional marriage as the man is in charge and i make the rules and the woman obeys as long as i find a women to actually do that, thats what are traditional marriage will be, if equal gay rights are granted tomorrow my view of traditional marriage doesn't change nor is it impacted i still get to do it. Im sure you know this but she seems to be very confused
 

ChrisL

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
47,571
Reaction score
16,958
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
this is very true i agree

but her argument was people are fighting thins because they are worried about "traditional" marriage (which is simply a made up term and subjective) and they dont want it to change.

THe reality is it isnt for them, they arent affected so what ever they view as traditional marriage is still true :)

for example if yesterday i viewed traditional marriage as the man is in charge and i make the rules and the woman obeys as long as i find a women to actually do that, thats what are traditional marriage will be, if equal gay rights are granted tomorrow my view of traditional marriage doesn't change nor is it impacted i still get to do it. Im sure you know this but she seems to be very confused
I agree with that, but she is right in that this is the reason people give for being upset about it. Personally, I don't mind if gay people get married at all. I don't get the controversy over this groom/bride or husband/wife thing, and I haven't heard a good reason for it yet but meh whatever. :shrug:
 

AGENT J

"I'm kind of a big deal"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
60,503
Reaction score
17,401
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I agree with that, but she is right in that this is the reason people give for being upset about it. Personally, I don't mind if gay people get married at all. I don't get the controversy over this groom/bride or husband/wife thing, and I haven't heard a good reason for it yet but meh whatever. :shrug:
what is the reason? nothing is changing

i agree people get upset because they SAY it is changing but its not :shrug:

those people are simply wrong
 

Monserrat

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
1,497
Reaction score
488
Location
US
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
yes you are 100% factually lying because you made that statement they were indistinguishable, that is NOT factual that is your opinion based on ZERO facts and ZERO logic lol. Nice try to deflect though and act like somebody called you a name or is disagree with you.

We arent having a disagreement, i simply am pointing out your inaccurate statement you made and you are in denial of it.

It weird i keep asking you for facts and logic to back up your claim and you cant do it, i wonder why? :)
I never said the two were indistinguishable I said that in the 1970's during the sexual revolution they were a part of the same movement, and they were back then at that time indistinguishable in a way because they were an organization recognized as a gay rights movement organization they were a part of the same entity trying to make their way into mainstream society, I also said that it was a good move on the part of the other gay rights organizations when they started to distance themselves and then when they finally completely distanced themselves from NAMBLA. There's a difference, and then I posted two separate cites saying the EXACT same thing as I, and than I called it history while you denied the whole thing as ever happening when there is a plethora of evidence supporting everything that I said, all you have to do is crack open a book on the sexual revolution in the 1970's specifically dealing with the beginnings of the gay rights movement.

This I why I said you probably just misread or misunderstood what I was saying.
 

ChrisL

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 8, 2012
Messages
47,571
Reaction score
16,958
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
what is the reason? nothing is changing

i agree people get upset because they SAY it is changing but its not :shrug:

those people are simply wrong
I agree. A lot of heterosexual couples get divorced or have crappy marriages, so who the hell are we to talk?
 

AGENT J

"I'm kind of a big deal"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
60,503
Reaction score
17,401
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I never said the two were indistinguishable I said that in the 1970's during the sexual revolution they were a part of the same movement, and they were back then at that time indistinguishable in a way because they were an organization recognized as a gay rights movement organization they were a part of the same entity trying to make their way into mainstream society, I also said that it was a good move on the part of the other gay rights organizations when they started to distance themselves and then when they finally completely distanced themselves from NAMBLA. There's a difference, and then I posted two separate cites saying the EXACT same thing as I, and than I called it history while you denied the whole thing as ever happening when there is a plethora of evidence supporting everything that I said, all you have to do is crack open a book on the sexual revolution in the 1970's specifically dealing with the beginnings of the gay rights movement.

This I why I said you probably just misread or misunderstood what I was saying.
wow you just LIED again you said they used to be indistinguishable from the gay rights movement!

heres your qoute
Actually since NAMBLA was much more active in the 1970's and indistinguishable from and part of the gay rights movement I'm gonna have to go with a resurfacing of that as being the next logical step.

PETA is very anti bestiality since animals can't give consent. I live in an area where this is a very serious topic of discussion. :thinking
so I misunderstood nothing just pointed out how silly and inaccurate your statment was. They were never the SAME movement (because they had different goals) and they were always distinguishable because they are clearly different, sorry.

You posted NOTHING to support that they were indistinguishable, nothing.
 

AGENT J

"I'm kind of a big deal"
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
60,503
Reaction score
17,401
Location
Pittsburgh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I agree. A lot of heterosexual couples get divorced or have crappy marriages, so who the hell are we to talk?
LOL well i agree with that too, that why i also laugh when people talk about the "sanctity" of marriage being at risk, thats a joke to :)
 
Top Bottom