Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:00 PM
 
Location: SouthCentral Texas
3,854 posts, read 4,837,469 times
Reputation: 960

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by flguy1192 View Post
Marriage is only supposed to be between a man and a woman.


sup⋅posed –adjective
1.assumed as true, regardless of fact; hypothetical: a supposed case.
2.accepted or believed as true, without positive knowledge: the supposed site of an ancient temple.
3.merely thought to be such; imagined: supposed gains.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:03 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,681,792 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantGardenStater View Post
Again, not everyone has to have the same oh-so "progressive" values of ultra-liberal activists.
I never said you did have to have the same values. I'm just not into social control in the way that some people apparently are. I believe in maximizing freedom for individuals, and allowing them to do whatever they want as long as they're not stealing from anyone or physically hurting anyone.

Quote:
I can't comment on issues of feminism/sexism or slavery as I was not alive in a time when it a major issue, so I have no idea what I would feel, and neither do you.
But I can at least imagine how I would feel, and that's close enough for me to be comfortable expressing my opinions about those issues.

Quote:
Honestly, I'm not going to go rally in Washington D.C. against gay marriage or find local homosexuals to harass, but as I've said many times, if it came down to a popular vote, have no question what side I'd vote on.
That's fine. Keep in mind that the voters won't have the final word, however; the courts will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,980 posts, read 14,570,903 times
Reputation: 14863
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBrown View Post
So now the government should pass legislation so a subset group of society doesn't have their feelings hurt and they'll feel better about themselves. Sorry, I'm not buying any of that foolishness. That's NOT a role of any government body, there are social and psychiatric counselors that can help with that problem.
Great idea - let's send out a memo, from this moment on all minorities go see a shrink. No government assistance for you, and no protection

Don't you get that if the voting public was responsible for the protection of minorities we would never have progressed to where we are today. No equal rights for all races. No equal rights for women. No protection and asisitance for children in need. No protection and assistance for those with physical and intellectual disabilities. And on it goes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:10 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,681,792 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimbochick View Post
Don't you get that if the voting public was responsible for the protection of minorities we would never have progressed to where we are today. No equal rights for all races. No equal rights for women. No protection and asisitance for children in need. No protection and assistance for those with physical and intellectual disabilities. And on it goes.
I'm sure that's the world they would prefer to live in, honestly - a much less egalitarian society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:18 PM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,980 posts, read 14,570,903 times
Reputation: 14863
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
I'm sure that's the world they would prefer to live in, honestly - a much less egalitarian society.
I don't believe "egalitarian" is part of the King of the Hill playbook! Isn't it one of those pinko-commie words anyway?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:21 PM
 
1,638 posts, read 3,640,244 times
Reputation: 1422
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
That's fine. Keep in mind that the voters won't have the final word, however; the courts will.
That's what gay marriage activists thought in California and Maine. Boy, weren't they in for a rude awakening.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:28 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,681,792 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantGardenStater View Post
That's what gay marriage activists thought in California and Maine. Boy, weren't they in for a rude awakening.
I was including the U.S. Supreme Court when I said "the courts". And I'm not saying that the U.S. Supreme Court will rule in favor of same-sex marriage; I'm just saying that they could.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 07:37 PM
 
Location: Houston
3,565 posts, read 4,868,898 times
Reputation: 931
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantGardenStater View Post
I read something interesting a long time ago about humans essentially being born with bisexual tendencies, and nature influencing which way the person in question ends up going. Of course, even heterosexual men and women experience brief moments of same sex attraction at some point in their own lives. I think for the most part sexuality is determined at a young age, but I reject what you say about discrimination. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman as it has been defined by society for centuries on end. Not everyone has to be favor of gay marriage, you know. It seems as if activists just aren't willing to even entertain another opinion. Everyone must embrace these alternative lifestyles or face condemnation and ridicule. Well, I will not.


Youi can hate Blacks, Whites, Asians, Gays, etc. I couldn't care less who you chose to hate.
We are here talking about basic rights that are denied to a certain group because of this hate. Just like slavery was. Nobody gives a fluying crap abolut who you personally hate.
What other opinion is there to entertain? Shoulda asked the M.L. King what he thought about the "other opinion". That's what they were fighting. There's no other opinion.
But I know, you don't get that.
Hate who you want, but butt out of other people's life. I thought that's what Republicans/Conservatives stand for? The hypocrisy is so obvoious, it's not even funny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 08:16 PM
 
Location: St Paul, MN - NJ's Gold Coast
5,251 posts, read 13,823,253 times
Reputation: 3178
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZGACK View Post
People who don't believe in God cannot be married in the true meaning of marriage for to make the commitment in the manner I described requires both a belief in God and the presence of God during the ceremony. Anything less and you're just playing house. It's really that strait forward.
You don't push your beliefs based on your religion and tell others to follow it. Marriage to an agnostic person is a legal way of saying "we're a spouse". Now if you're gay and catholic (as an example) then maybe the situation will be different.

Playing house isn't the term you use to describe agnostic, or in this case, gay people who are married. That is such a selfish statement... People pay bills, pay mortgage, argue, and make lifetime decisions together as a spouse just like any "appropriate" "accepted" spouse. There is no say on what you believe the way strangers should live. These people have all the right in the world to love who they feel is the one, you have no clue what these people are feeling, thinking, and dealing with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-06-2009, 08:21 PM
 
8,762 posts, read 11,577,270 times
Reputation: 3398
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPerone201 View Post
You don't push your beliefs based on your religion and tell others to follow it. Marriage to an agnostic person is a legal way of saying "we're a spouse". Now if you're gay and catholic (as an example) then maybe the situation will be different.

Playing house isn't the term you use to describe agnostic, or in this case, gay people who are married. That is such a selfish statement... People pay bills, pay mortgage, argue, and make lifetime decisions together as a spouse just like any "appropriate" "accepted" spouse. There is no say on what you believe the way strangers should live. These people have all the right in the world to love who they feel is the one, you have no clue what these people are feeling, thinking, and dealing with.
I could not say it any better than you. Thank you

+1

I am so grateful we do not have overly religion maniacs in office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top