Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: Should Same-Sex Marriage be Nationally Legalized?

Voters
37. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I support it

    31 83.78%
  • No, I don't support it

    2 5.41%
  • Other (no clue what this would be)

    4 10.81%
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 151 to 164 of 164
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    The Land Beyond the Wall, VT
    Posts
    7,141
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    But the marriage they are going for is a governmental and secular definition. Words don't have one meaning, despite the claim that liberals and gay people are trying to change the definition of marriage. No one is claiming a church must marry two men, which is why I am so confused at the outrage.

    As to Pats' comment, I don't know about on this site but when you have 30+ states with constitutional amendments barring gay marriage, I would absolutely say there are people making the anti gay argument.
    I meant in here. I don;t see many others attempting to do what I did, which is to take an argument they vehemently oppose, and try to argue it.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Deutschland
    Posts
    15,946
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by flips333 View Post
    Wow... I love mental gymnastics.
    I do too.

    And by the way, those pants, they belong to my dad.And they're not really pants,
    they're Lederhosen



  3. #153
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    17,415
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by debo View Post
    Here's what needs to happen (and no, there isn't any wiggle room in my policy):

    1. The government establishes a definition of a marriage as a legally binding contract between two (and only two) humans for the purpose of residing and filing taxes together. Restrictions would be placed on polygamous and incestuous marriage (read: none of that **** is happening).

    2. Benefits for marriage reflect today's current heterosexual-only benefits at the national level.

    3. At the state level, marriage abides by all of the national guidelines.

    4. Churches can call a marriage whatever the **** they want. They can not acknowledge marriages nor perform them in their buildings if such a marriage does not abide by their belief. They do not have to be forced to marry individuals they do not want to marry.

    5. Everybody lives happily the **** ever after.
    I was on board until you said this crap. We're talking about marriage, there is no "happy" let alone "happily ever after..."

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,699
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Johann View Post
    I'm pretty sure I did answer the question.

    Back when there were no programs to help people with no money, slavery was their only option.

    Therefore, today, I am against slavery.
    Not sure I understand... you wouldn't have been against slavery then?

  5. 11-28-2012, 09:49 PM
    Reason
    Religiousness

  6. #155
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38,222
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Johann View Post
    Back in the day (1000BC), sure it was. I don't see any Jewish slave owners today. But then again, I don't live where you live.
    This is the entire point. You don't see any slave owners today, because society has advanced to the point that we realize it's wrong to own people, and we realize that regardless of what it says anywhere else. There is no reason we cannot apply the same level of thinking, detached from ancient ideas, to homosexual marriage. None.


    Give me one example of a case where this very naughty child was stoned to death. If it's such an important case, you would be able to find multiple cases of this happening.

    Nowhere does it say "X's child was very bad. The court stoned him"
    I've already addressed this.

    Furthermore, there is no need for an example for my point to still be made. It was commanded. Whether or not it was carried out, and I see no reason to think it wasn't, is entirely immaterial.


    You doubt a lot of things. Just because I don't have the books in front of me, doesn't mean I can't/ or anyone can't contradict you.
    If only there was a network of information, stretched all over the world, that contained the things necessary for you to do this...
    Visit my Blog.



    "Glad the GOP finally came out with an Obamacare alternative. Can't wait to see their alternative to the Iraq War." - @LOLGOP

  7. #156
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38,222
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by homestarunner93 View Post
    Obviously they aren't, but they're also not random. Calling them random is unintelligent.

    Sure, but having an in-state/local degree can be a determining factor if you have multiple similar applicants. It's easy to go to the extreme of the scale with MIT, Cal Tech, etc., but what if it's the difference between Wofford and Mercer or Emory and Duke?

    I can't find any information to confirm or deny whether contracts are actually enforceable across all states irregardless of subject matter, but assuming that is true, states still would only be required to recognize marriage contracts from other states, and would be in no way required to allow these contracts to be created within their own borders. I would imagine legal battles over the enforceability of those contracts in states that don't recognize the ability of male-male/female-female couples to create marriage contracts anyways, at any rate.



    They aren't random. Regardless, there are divisions of countries, states, municipalities, etc., and they're divided for a reason, and always will be.
    Substitute "arbitrary" for "random," if it'll help you sleep at night.
    Visit my Blog.



    "Glad the GOP finally came out with an Obamacare alternative. Can't wait to see their alternative to the Iraq War." - @LOLGOP

  8. #157
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    \_(ツ)_/
    Posts
    64,406
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by BroadwayJoe View Post
    Fair enough. But I think the question really is: do you think your religious beliefs should be forced onto others as secular law?
    Absolutely not, and that's what bothers me the most. Our founding fathers would cringe at arguments like "my religion says it's bad so the law of the land should say so too".

    There is no solid argument to claim that two humans of whatever sex should be allowed to "marry" (we can argue about what we call it) that doesn't come from a religiously backed opinion. And that's why it's wrong for it not to be legal. Period.
    I no longer care about anything here except for the Entertainment Forum, which sucks; the Music forum, which sucks; and the Magic forum, which does NOT suck.

    Love y'all!

    Except for all of y'all.

    #FreePablo
    #FreeManRam
    #FreePablo

  9. 11-28-2012, 10:14 PM
    Reason
    Religiousness

  10. #158
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38,222
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Johann View Post
    Back then was a totally different time. If you owed a debt, you had to return the debt. Call it slavery, or call it a helper. Slavery wasn't American slavery. Slavery was doing the persons house work.

    I'll slap you with some knowledge
    You do know there were non-Hebrew slaves, too, right? They weren't treated quite so kindly. Tribes did not look with great favor on other tribes. This is not a facet of human behavior unique to that time, or that geographic location.




    You're great at analyzing things...

    Because I "said" that I would agree with slavery in 2012. That is exactly what I said.

    I said at the time, when in financial straits, they would sell themselves into slavery. In 2012, I am justifying choice back then.
    What you are attempting to do, still, is justify slavery. The fact that you're trying to justify it's practice in the past makes really no difference at all. You are, as I said, doing this in 2012. I didn't say you were trying to justify modern-day slavery.

    As you have already acknowledge, there were children born into slavery. They, clearly, had no choice in the matter. Neither did their children, or their children, or their children. Whole generations that could be born, live, and die in slavery, because of the choice of a great great grandfather. This is far from the "I'll repay my debt by folding your laundry!" picture you're trying to paint here.


    That's because you believe everything you read on the internet.
    They're called books.
    You have utterly no basis from which to make this statement. Something being printed as opposed to digital does not automatically make it better, give it more authority, or make it more correct.


    And I don't think I said I have any opinion on homosexual marriage; thus I voted option 3.
    Nor did I claim you had.
    Last edited by natepro; 11-28-2012 at 10:25 PM.
    Visit my Blog.



    "Glad the GOP finally came out with an Obamacare alternative. Can't wait to see their alternative to the Iraq War." - @LOLGOP

  11. #159
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Deutschland
    Posts
    15,946
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by natepro View Post
    Nor did I claim you had.
    I thought this was about homosexual marriage

    If you want to continue to discuss, I am open to PMing.

    And by the way, those pants, they belong to my dad.And they're not really pants,
    they're Lederhosen



  12. #160
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    37,502
    vCash
    1750
    Quote Originally Posted by americaspasttim View Post
    I was on board until you said this crap. We're talking about marriage, there is no "happy" let alone "happily ever after..."
    Touche.


  13. #161
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    ****ing Bruges
    Posts
    35,537
    vCash
    1500
    Just my personal thoughts.

    2 men or 2 women is something I struggled with when I was younger. I felt very uncomftorable in the company of blatantly homosexual people. While I didn't dislike them, or think they were wrong for being how they were there was just the feeling of uneasiness in me when in their presense.

    I went on a family vacation in which my moms college friend came and stayed with us a long with his partner. It took me a day or so to process it all but his partner was super cool, and extremely knowledgeable about sports. I sort of gained a familiarity/comfort with them and a bit of a understanding that as simple as it sounds needed to be learned thropugh experience. There is no difference. People are people.

    That being said my roots are extremely catholic. I know my aunt and uncle would probably have a hard time if I was gay. I know that as a whole they don't want gay mariage in their church. My thought is can't both sides be happy? Don't allow gay marriage in the catholic church, due to it conflicting with their beliefs. (I can't gice anywhere near the explanation on how it conflicts that my uncle can.) But allow a marriage certificate to be given to those who want it?

  14. #162
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    65,623
    vCash
    1500
    Ebbs, I suspect that a lot of people have that reaction. People change their opinions, even drastically so in some cases, when they know/meet a gay person. It stuns me how drastic the change can be in some people when an attack on another person hits a little closer to home.
    Member of the Owlluminati!

  15. #163
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Baltimore now, but born and raised on the south side of Chicago.
    Posts
    6,969
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Ebbs View Post
    Just my personal thoughts.

    2 men or 2 women is something I struggled with when I was younger. I felt very uncomftorable in the company of blatantly homosexual people. While I didn't dislike them, or think they were wrong for being how they were there was just the feeling of uneasiness in me when in their presense.

    I went on a family vacation in which my moms college friend came and stayed with us a long with his partner. It took me a day or so to process it all but his partner was super cool, and extremely knowledgeable about sports. I sort of gained a familiarity/comfort with them and a bit of a understanding that as simple as it sounds needed to be learned thropugh experience. There is no difference. People are people.

    That being said my roots are extremely catholic. I know my aunt and uncle would probably have a hard time if I was gay. I know that as a whole they don't want gay mariage in their church. My thought is can't both sides be happy? Don't allow gay marriage in the catholic church, due to it conflicting with their beliefs. (I can't gice anywhere near the explanation on how it conflicts that my uncle can.) But allow a marriage certificate to be given to those who want it?
    This clause was literally part of the legislation in maryland. Churches can not be forced or coerced into accepting gay marriage in thir churches. I think some folks worry that the government will take away tax exempt status, or other dollars if the churches are seen as discriminatory in this.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPoon
    man with hair like fire can destroy souls with a twitch of his thighs.

  16. #164
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    38,222
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by flips333 View Post
    This clause was literally part of the legislation in maryland. Churches can not be forced or coerced into accepting gay marriage in thir churches. I think some folks worry that the government will take away tax exempt status, or other dollars if the churches are seen as discriminatory in this.
    When, really, there are so many better reasons to take away tax exempt status.
    Visit my Blog.



    "Glad the GOP finally came out with an Obamacare alternative. Can't wait to see their alternative to the Iraq War." - @LOLGOP

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •