Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What? This post doesn't even make sense. What are you trying to say here?
OK, let me try again.
When I say things that are conservative, you tell me that I'm ignorant because I don't realize that "most Americans" are moderates. That means, by definition, and by your own statement, that they do not necessarily agree with either liberals or conservatives. Now, I can bet that you can name TONS of views on the right that "most Americans" don't agree with. But since "most Americans" are so moderate, why don't you do me a favor and tell me which liberal views they reject, since they are moderate?
When I say things that are conservative, you tell me that I'm ignorant because I don't realize that "most Americans" are moderates. That means, by definition, and by your own statement, that they do not necessarily agree with either liberals or conservatives. Now, I can bet that you can name TONS of views on the right that "most Americans" don't agree with. But since "most Americans" are so moderate, why don't you do me a favor and tell me which liberal views they reject, since they are moderate?
Go!
Supporting illegal immigration. The idea of sanctuary cities. Supporting such wide scale welfare programs. Supporting having no voter ID laws. Supporting stricter gun control. Supporting all abortions (many Americans don't support partial birth or late-term abortions while most staunch leftist liberals would).
None of this matters thought and whatever point you're trying to prove is irrelevant. There have been multiple studies where Americans have been polled and asked questions and the majority are shown to actually be moderates. No one is the same and has the same values, ideas, and priorities. There are people who study this stuff very closely and look at patterns and beliefs and it has been shown multiple times that far more people are on or towards the middle than left or right.
Supporting illegal immigration. The idea of sanctuary cities. Supporting such wide scale welfare programs. Supporting having no voter ID laws. Supporting stricter gun control. Supporting all abortions (many Americans don't support partial birth or late-term abortions while most staunch leftist liberals would).
None of this matters thought and whatever point you're trying to prove is irrelevant. There have been multiple studies where Americans have been polled and asked questions and the majority are shown to actually be moderates. No one is the same and has the same values, ideas, and priorities. There are people who study this stuff very closely and look at patterns and beliefs and it has been shown multiple times that far more people are on or towards the middle than left or right.
Oh, no, I actually agree with you that most of the country is moderate. That's the part that is hilarious. Here's a little think piece for you. Notice how, for views like mine on the right, when people who are moderate disagree, it is widely acknowledged? But for views on the left, when people who are moderate disagree, you'd never know it? I mean, the general belief is that most everyone is for illegal immigration, other than some crazy bigots who hate Mexicans and worship their Nazi overlords. Nobody says "got news for you, liberals, the majority of Americans are opposed to you." And when moderates oppose gay marriage bans, why, look how quickly those bans disappear. But when moderates oppose sanctuary cities ...meh. Is that not odd?
"
Originally Posted by GrandviewGloria As for the question in the Original Post, my Gay friends just shrug their shoulders, whenever the subject of Gay Marriage comes up."
I made that point earlier. Gay marriage is built on a foundation of lies. Gays didn't care about marriage until roughly five years ago, when they suddenly remembered how important it was to them. Then it was like "omg, I would kill myself rather than not be married!!" Then they got gay marriage and about 10 of them got married and the rest continued to just live with each other, like they could before gay marriage.
Well, yes and no. I don't consider Gay Marriage as being "built on a foundation of lies", any more than "Traditional Marriage" is.
And I can remember a moment, a tad over TEN YEARS ago, when a Gay friend was telling about someone (a straight guy who prided himself on telling people what he thought they wanted to hear - a very manipulative opportunist, who wasn't as smart as he thought he was) who went out of his way to let my friend (someone the Manipulator thought he needed to schmooze, in order to get ahead) know he supported Gay Marriage. So, Gay Marriage was a BIG THING, in the headlines, even ten years back. And I'm thinking that it had been a a big thing, in some circles, for a lot longer than that.
But I remember that moment, because it was the first time I heard a Gay man laughing-off the issue: "This little manipulator thought this was some big thing in my life! I couldn't care LESS! So, when Mr. Manipulator realized he wasn't pushing the right buttons with the Gay Marriage thing, being a total Affinity Scammer, he switched to The Environment, and was all gung-ho environmentalist, all of a sudden. Maybe he thinks all Gays are running around advocating for every cause under the rainbow?"
Which leads me to a point I want to make. Being Gay is not like being Catholic. There is no established orthodoxy. There is no entity enforcing an established orthodoxy. Gayness is an observable manifestation of a gender preference. It is NOT AN ORGANIZATION. There is not a set of rules and beliefs, to which one must adhere, if one is Gay. There is no Gay Catechism.
I think that there have been attempts, going back as far as the Weimar Period in Germany, to create what amounts to a Gay Torah - a written and all-encompassing system. And the small percentage of Social Justice Warriors among those affected, may attempt to follow the precepts encoded in those would-be Gay Torot.
But that's only a small subset of Gay people. The rest simply found, at some point, that they were "that way", and set about to cope with that difference, in the best ways they could. By the time they run across the attempted codifications of Gayness, most Gay People have already figured things out, and really resent the "joiner types" trying to tell them what to do, and how to be.
An excellent example of this independence of thought, would be the recent election. Gays were "supposed to" be for Hillary. But here in Lake O', while most Trump supporters were too cowed into silence by all the schmegegge about Trump's supposed racism and sexism, it was Gay men who had the courage to buck the orthodoxy and openly declare Trump as the superior candidate. Back in my old hometown, Madison, Mississippi, a wildly pro-trump community, people were careful to "spare the feelings" of Gay people, whom they assumed to be pro-Hillary - until they saw their Gay friends among those lining the streets, cheering, as Trump's motorcade made its way toward the rally (the auditorium couldn't hold a tenth of his supporters, in that wealthy little town), and inside the rally, among the faces behind the Candidate, on TV - even among those paying thousands to attend the private fundraiser. "You really can't make assumptions about them, can you?"
Like Sinistrality, Gayness is a difference which simply, naturally, comes to be. It is not taught. One does not "convert". One does not need to associate with others who manifest that same difference, in order to manifest that difference.
And it's important to note that a Gay individual will generally be more a reflection of his race and social class, than a reflection of 'The Gay Culture'. In fact, far from being 'rebels', the Gay people in many families are the ones who preserve and enhance/intensify the family homes, the family portraits, the family histories, the family fortunes - and the values of their families, their tribes... ultimately, their nations.
The ones I know are horrified by Gay Pride Parades: "I call them Gay SHAME parades. Those fools are going to get us all put in concentration camps."
But after all the opinions and feelings are aired, the fact remains, that there frequently is a genuine need, from a legal standpoint, for Gay men and women to be able to marry. Marriage is about more than sex and reproduction. This becomes most apparent toward the end of life. Those lucky enough to have life-partners should be able to visit/care-for them in hospitals. Surviving partners should not face undue challenges, concerning the estates of their deceased partners. Nor should they have to "prove" what was paid-for by whom, when greedy (or just-plain-crazy) relatives descend upon homes surviving partners have shared with deceased partners.Gay Marriage is a fair and equitable thing, and of definite benefit for those lucky Gay people who have life-partners.
Last edited by GrandviewGloria; 11-26-2016 at 10:46 AM..
Being Gay is not like being Catholic. There is no established orthodoxy.
Agreed. The problem is, however, that gays are essentially at the mercy of being defined by their most crazed members because those are who are presented (even by the liberal media which supports gays) as their spokespeople. It's a little late to say that many gays aren't really interested in gay marriage because it's already been defined as essentially THE most important thing in a gay person's life. Moreover, they're now chained to the LGTBQ movement which is pushing transsexuals and gender fluidity. In other words, they're only going to be defined as more fringe as time goes by.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandviewGloria
The ones I know are horrified by Gay Pride Parades: "I call them Gay SHAME parades. Those fools are going to get us all put in concentration camps."
Then you know some of the more self-aware and intelligent gays. Because I agree, it's difficult to portray homosexuals as normal when their parades are deliberately trying to offend everyone with the things that I can't even describe at gay pride parades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandviewGloria
But after all the opinions and feelings are aired, the fact remains, that there frequently is a genuine need, from a legal standpoint, for Gay men and women to be able to marry. Marriage is about more than sex and reproduction. This becomes most apparent toward the end of life. Those lucky enough to have life-partners should be able to visit/care-for them in hospitals.
That's raised a lot and it is absolutely true that gays should be able to visit their partners in hospitals. However, that's both possible without marriage and also the way things were even before gay marriage. You could, as a heterosexual, for example, allow even your neighbor to visit you in the hospital. Or, if let's say for the sake of argument, that wasn't the case, then it could and should be easily remedied without needing to alter an entire societal institution.
I misworded. When I said "infidelity is at a all time high" I meant to say they have a higher rate than heterosexual couples. And my point isn't that we should outlaw homosexuality because they cheat on their partners. My point is because they cheat they are more apted to contract and spread STDs. Until they get a hold on that maybe its not such a good idea to openly allow it.
Why not? They're gay so hey, they'd only be spreading it amongst themselves. Unless.....are you worried about catching it?
I am somewhat amused this thread has run for over 43 pages with 426 comments.
Same sex marriage is legal in all 50 states in the US. (It is also legal in Canada, the UK, France, and dozens of other countries for that matter.) Up until the Obergefell decision made by the Supreme Court in June of last year, about 36 states had already legalized it in one way for another; it started with a court decision in 2003 regarding the state constitution of Massachusetts and it was formally legalized in 2004. A comparison could be made with the SCOTUS Loving v. Virginia decision in that the majority of states had already legalized interracial marriage.
The legalization of same sex marriage isn't going anywhere, even with the recent election. Only an amendment to the US Constitution can overturn a SCOTUS decision, unless SCOTUS itself revisits the issue - and that is highly unlikely to happen for many, many years.
I'm amused that you replied to this thread apparently without even having read the original post. I suppose that gives you great satisfaction, however.
I am somewhat amused this thread has run for over 43 pages with 426 comments.
Same sex marriage is legal in all 50 states in the US. (It is also legal in Canada, the UK, France, and dozens of other countries for that matter.) Up until the Obergefell decision made by the Supreme Court in June of last year, about 36 states had already legalized it in one way for another; it started with a court decision in 2003 regarding the state constitution of Massachusetts and it was formally legalized in 2004. A comparison could be made with the SCOTUS Loving v. Virginia decision in that the majority of states had already legalized interracial marriage.
The legalization of same sex marriage isn't going anywhere, even with the recent election. Only an amendment to the US Constitution can overturn a SCOTUS decision, unless SCOTUS itself revisits the issue - and that is highly unlikely to happen for many, many years.
Does gay marriage appeal to you specifically? I'm curious. I'm in a long term monogamous hetro relationship and we just never really felt the need to get married. I do get some of the legal type reasons, but beyond that does it matter to you as an individual????
Does gay marriage appeal to you specifically? I'm curious. I'm in a long term monogamous hetro relationship and we just never really felt the need to get married. I do get some of the legal type reasons, but beyond that does it matter to you as an individual????
There are no legal reasons. The proof is that you are not married and not lacking any legal protections. If "being married" led to extra legal rights, then you, as an unmarried heterosexual, would be just as disenfranchised as an unmarried homosexual. It was an argument that was a farce and only made in order to forward gay marriage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
