Reality: Homosexual Marriage

Dixie said:
This thread was started on 6/20... 4 days ago... 4 more days that gay couples have not been able to obtain the benefits of married couples. Have you helped their situation? Are you making any progress in that effort? How many years have we been talking about this, how long has this debate raged on? Ten, fifteen, twenty years? Have you made any progress? ....
Click to expand...

Some unelected judges have forced the issue on people...
 
Southern Man said:
Some unelected judges have forced the issue on people...
Click to expand...

Right, and that's the ONLY way this idea has EVER flown! Judicial Fiat doesn't work, it never has worked in all the history of mankind, and it won't work with this. People aren't going to change their minds, they will continue to support whichever side their belief system leads them to, and we can debate it for centuries and still not have resolve. So why do we continue to do that? It's the equivalent of beating ones head against a brick wall. You will never convince people who are pro-gay marriage to oppose it, and they will never convince you to support it. Yet, another day--another thread--no resolve! Over and over again, in an exercise of futility.
 
Dixie said:
Right, and that's the ONLY way this idea has EVER flown! Judicial Fiat doesn't work, it never has worked in all the history of mankind, and it won't work with this. People aren't going to change their minds, they will continue to support whichever side their belief system leads them to, and we can debate it for centuries and still not have resolve. So why do we continue to do that? It's the equivalent of beating ones head against a brick wall. You will never convince people who are pro-gay marriage to oppose it, and they will never convince you to support it. Yet, another day--another thread--no resolve! Over and over again, in an exercise of futility.
Click to expand...
Judicial fiat, as you like to call it, has worked repeatedly. Brown v. the Board of Education. Excluding evidence seized in violation of the the fourth amendment, Mapp v. Ohio and every state that did that was through doing it. Repeatedly the courts have had to reign in the tyranny of the majority. Issues of speech, school prayer, etc. The courts have been the only ally of the minority populations that are forced to live as the majority thinks they should in issues of personal lives. And lord how the conservatives have moaned.
 
Socrtease said:
Judicial fiat, as you like to call it, has worked repeatedly. Brown v. the Board of Education. Excluding evidence seized in violation of the the fourth amendment, Mapp v. Ohio and every state that did that was through doing it. Repeatedly the courts have had to reign in the tyranny of the majority. Issues of speech, school prayer, etc. The courts have been the only ally of the minority populations that are forced to live as the majority thinks they should in issues of personal lives. And lord how the conservatives have moaned.
Click to expand...

The courts do not have the authority or power to "reign in the majority" and the cases you cite are not examples of judicial fiat.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
this whole debate still comes down to one thing.....liberals find it intolerable that anyone consider something unacceptable which they have blessed as acceptable.....
Click to expand...

Whether you are labelling me as liberal or not, I don't care whether you find homosexuality acceptable or not.

I care whether the gov't treats its citizens equally or not.
 
WinterBorn said:
Whether you are labelling me as liberal or not, I don't care whether you find homosexuality acceptable or not.

I care whether the gov't treats its citizens equally or not.
Click to expand...

No one is being treated unequally, we've been through this a thousand times. It doesn't matter if you are gay or straight, you can't marry the same sex, just like you can't marry a dog or goat! Marriage licenses are issues to any two male and female persons of legal age, regardless of whether they are straight or gay, there is no discrimination there. So all citizens are treated equally, the law applies to everyone the same, no one is getting something that is prohibited from someone else. This is a false perception you have formed, and it remains a false perception regardless of your protests to the contrary.
 
Dixie said:
This thread was started on 6/20... 4 days ago... 4 more days that gay couples have not been able to obtain the benefits of married couples. Have you helped their situation? Are you making any progress in that effort? How many years have we been talking about this, how long has this debate raged on? Ten, fifteen, twenty years? Have you made any progress? Are gay couples any closer to realizing benefits? Are we any closer to resolving the problem? Will another ten or twenty years help? Will it change the minds of those who vehemently oppose Gay Marriage? If you post another ten thousands threads about this, and repeat the same arguments over and over a million more times, will it make a difference to those who remain opposed to Gay Marriage?

While you idiots remain mired in this fruitless and silly debate, gay couples are living out their lives, the time passes by, they still don't have the benefits of married couples, they are no closer to that now than they were 20 years ago. At some point, don't you have to examine what the reality is? Or are you not as concerned with what benefits gay couples can obtain, and more concerned with having a divisive hot-button issue to bash and trash your opponent with?

I'm telling you.... Civil Unions, it's the answer to this problem. It resolves this issue to the satisfaction of all parties, and ends this stupid debate forever, but most importantly, it gives gay couples the benefits they have always wanted to have, and are living their lives without, while we bicker back and forth over something we will never agree on.
Click to expand...

Oh jeez, is this it? Look at the another thousand threads on this website and apply the same logic to it.

Has it been solved by the discussion here?
 
Dixie said:
No one is being treated unequally, we've been through this a thousand times. It doesn't matter if you are gay or straight, you can't marry the same sex, just like you can't marry a dog or goat! Marriage licenses are issues to any two male and female persons of legal age, regardless of whether they are straight or gay, there is no discrimination there. So all citizens are treated equally, the law applies to everyone the same, no one is getting something that is prohibited from someone else. This is a false perception you have formed, and it remains a false perception regardless of your protests to the contrary.
Click to expand...

Yes, you keep trying to make that same point. Gays are allowed to marry someone of the opposite gender. Gee, what a great thing.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
You seem to have no problem in people who engage in the behvior I listed, in getting a marriage license.
That was where this was headed, before you attempted to derail it.
Click to expand...

no one has asked me to redefine the meaning of the word "marriage" to permit them to abuse children or spouses.....if they did, I would object to it as well....
 
Dixie said:
No one is being treated unequally, we've been through this a thousand times. It doesn't matter if you are gay or straight, you can't marry the same sex, just like you can't marry a dog or goat! Marriage licenses are issues to any two male and female persons of legal age, regardless of whether they are straight or gay, there is no discrimination there. So all citizens are treated equally, the law applies to everyone the same, no one is getting something that is prohibited from someone else. This is a false perception you have formed, and it remains a false perception regardless of your protests to the contrary.
Click to expand...

For some reason, you keep bring up the dog issue.
Is this your way of explaining your "animal husbandry"!!

How are you going to handle it, when it's determined that gays do have a legal right to marry each other??
 
WinterBorn said:
Yes, you keep trying to make that same point. Gays are allowed to marry someone of the opposite gender. Gee, what a great thing.
Click to expand...

Well WB, what you keep arguing is false! No one can marry someone of the same sex, it doesn't matter if they are gay or not gay! I can't argue that nudists are being denied their right to roam around in public naked! It's a stupid argument to claim they are being denied a right, because they are nudists who want to run around in public naked and can't! It's stupid for me to argue they are being discriminated against, when NO ONE is allowed to run around naked in public!
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
For some reason, you keep bring up the dog issue.
Is this your way of explaining your "animal husbandry"!!

How are you going to handle it, when it's determined that gays do have a legal right to marry each other??
Click to expand...

That's not going to happen. You can wish and dream and pretend you live in a Fairy Tale Land where things you wish for come true, but Gay Marriage will never be made legal in America. Sorry!!
 
PostmodernProphet said:
no one has asked me to redefine the meaning of the word "marriage" to permit them to abuse children or spouses.....if they did, I would object to it as well....
Click to expand...

But once again, this was about you and your acceptance of the scenarios that I presented.

Of couirse; it now seems that you support any marriage, even terrible ones, as long as it's not between two gays who love each other.
 
Dixie said:
That's not going to happen. You can wish and dream and pretend you live in a Fairy Tale Land where things you wish for come true, but Gay Marriage will never be made legal in America. Sorry!!
Click to expand...

So then; you intend to deal with it, by sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "LA LA LA LA LA LA"!! :good4u:

It's going to happen, so make sure you keep your fingers clean; because it would be a shame, if you got an inner ear infection. :cof1:

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
 
Dixie said:
Well WB, what you keep arguing is false! No one can marry someone of the same sex, it doesn't matter if they are gay or not gay! I can't argue that nudists are being denied their right to roam around in public naked! It's a stupid argument to claim they are being denied a right, because they are nudists who want to run around in public naked and can't! It's stupid for me to argue they are being discriminated against, when NO ONE is allowed to run around naked in public!
Click to expand...

Dixie, you know as well as I do why gays want this. It is about being able to join with the one they love in a committed relationship, and some consideration may be given to the benefits bestowed by the gov't.

And some of those gays, in committed relationships, are involved in churches or other religious groups that have no problem marrying gays.



I have no problem with the CU for all the benefits, and a religious marriage for the religious ceremony and tie. I also have no problem with any religious group who wants to marry two men or two women.



In fact, I fail to see any harm in allowing gays to marry, kicking the gov't out of marriage altogether, or with having two rituals to get to where folks get today with one.


But please don't pretend that allowing a gay man to marry a woman is somehow equal treatment.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So then; you intend to deal with it, by sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting "LA LA LA LA LA LA"!! :good4u:

It's going to happen, so make sure you keep your fingers clean; because it would be a shame, if you got an inner ear infection. :cof1:

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Click to expand...

It's not going to happen, so I don't have to worry about it. You are an idiot and a fool for clinging to the stupid belief that it will. How do you think it's going to happen when 80% of the people don't want it to happen?
 
RStringfield said:
This is just non sequitur, gibberish. Your logic is that of a child.
Click to expand...
it was unavoidable in dealing with your ridiculous attempt to create a parallel...

I really don't know what point you were trying to make other than something about changing definitions. But, it is still a stupid point.
Click to expand...
simply that your parallel was stupid....no one is proposing redefining society's understanding of the meaning of "selling" a house....

Allowing more people to act on their right to contract is not comparable to changing how property is acquired.
Click to expand...
the simple fact is, there is no logical basis for redefining "marriage" at all.....

There is no valid reason to deny homosexuals the right to share their property, liabilities and responsibility for each other with the person of their choice.
Click to expand...

no one has ever proposed to deny those rights.....

Your argument demands that we adhere to an old tradition based solely on religious biases and intolerance.
Click to expand...
the definition of "marriage" is not a religious definition.....it's a societal one....



I don't necessarily believe an employer should be compelled to offer spousal benefits. But they would be no more compelled to provide spousal benefits for homosexuals than they are for any other couple.
Click to expand...
obviously, they would be compelled to provide spousal benefits for a homosexual couple if they did for a heterosexual couple, regardless of their beliefs regarding the normality of the "marriage".....

But you are just using government interference in the contractual arrangements between an employer and an employee as justification for interference in the contractual arrangements between couples.
Click to expand...
are you blind to the fact that it is the exact opposite?......a man and a man can have contractual arrangements between themselves already, and nothing in the law changes that.....what's involved, is that the gay couple wishes to have their contractual arrangement effect (interfere) with the government


You are not compelled to act in anyway as a result of two people marrying.
Click to expand...
given the fact we've been talking about a concrete example of just that for nearly two pages, it is pointless for you to try to deny it.....
 
Dixie said:
Because a union of the same sexes is NOT MARRIAGE!
Click to expand...

Didn't you say in a previous post that you were not trying to tell any religion what they can and cannot do?

Some religions are fine with gay marriages. Some even encourage it, in order to build stronger relationships.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top