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)
View Poll Results: I believe the estimate of 9 million is...
Overinflated! 24 15.48%
Undercounted! 61 39.35%
Irrelevant! 53 34.19%
Shocking! 7 4.52%
Fantastic! 10 6.45%
Voters: 155. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-10-2011, 01:31 PM
 
17,291 posts, read 29,399,972 times
Reputation: 8691

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
Even in a population of 300 million, that is only equivalent to about 3%. That's not enough reason to redefine marriage and give special rights to them.
Oh? 3% is more than the population of Jews and Muslims in this country, yet we afford Jews and Muslims protections based on their chosen religious affiliation. It's also close to the population of Asians, and I believe "3%" are "self identifying," (i.e., those who have ADMITTED IT), with another couple points for closet cases and those with "tendencies."

Also, there are no clamour for "special rights" --- for someone who likes to repeat the nonsensical argument that gays can get married too, you fail to realize that the rights gays want apply equally to ALL people. Non-discrimination based on sexuality, etc. works in all directions under the letter of the law.

"Redefining marriage" is also a stupid way to look at it, since the purpose of the contract itself DOES NOT CHANGE... only the parties able to be a party to the marriage contract. If we raise the consent age for marriage from 15 to 14, we do not CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE. We merely expand the parties who are able to enter into to the marriage contract. The rights and responsibilities attendant with that contract REMAIN THE SAME as to the parties involved, regardless of sex.

Your failure to grasp that simple concept means you continue to make spurious and unconvincing arguments.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2011, 01:37 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,480,794 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriMT7 View Post
Oh? 3% is more than the population of Jews and Muslims in this country, yet we afford Jews and Muslims protections based on their chosen religious affiliation. It's also close to the population of Asians, and I believe "3%" are "self identifying," (i.e., those who have ADMITTED IT), with another couple points for closet cases and those with "tendencies."

Also, there are no clamour for "special rights" --- for someone who likes to repeat the nonsensical argument that gays can get married too, you fail to realize that the rights gays want apply equally to ALL people. Non-discrimination based on sexuality, etc. works in all directions under the letter of the law.

"Redefining marriage" is also a stupid way to look at it, since the purpose of the contract itself DOES NOT CHANGE... only the parties able to be a party to the marriage contract. If we raise the consent age for marriage from 15 to 14, we do not CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE. We merely expand the parties who are able to enter into to the marriage contract. The rights and responsibilities attendant with that contract REMAIN THE SAME as to the parties involved, regardless of sex.

Your failure to grasp that simple concept means you continue to make spurious and unconvincing arguments.


just get rid of marriage and unions all together

do you really need PERMISSION(and a fee) and a piece of paper from the government to validate your love????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Up in the air
19,112 posts, read 30,626,028 times
Reputation: 16395
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun View Post
I say Irrelavent, but the numbers are confusing, especially if you add Bi into the equation. The other confusing one is woman who identify thereselves as Lesbian only to go back to men later. Were they ever really Lesbian? Was it out of convenience or expectation of their Lesbian lover. Who knows sure?
My thought process on this topic is based on a really close friend of mine. She honestly and truly falls in love with the person, regardless of gender. She's dated both men and women but does not consider herself bisexual. It's not for attention, its not because she's confused... I think she really just sees people on a different level than most.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 03:09 PM
 
16,087 posts, read 41,159,147 times
Reputation: 6376
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
do you really need PERMISSION(and a fee) and a piece of paper from the government to validate your love????
Well if you want Social Security survivor benefits and FEW other things...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 03:22 PM
 
Location: USA
31,033 posts, read 22,070,533 times
Reputation: 19080
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetJockey View Post
My thought process on this topic is based on a really close friend of mine. She honestly and truly falls in love with the person, regardless of gender. She's dated both men and women but does not consider herself bisexual. It's not for attention, its not because she's confused... I think she really just sees people on a different level than most.
And some people fit that discription too. Personally I can't identify with it as I am purely heteralsexual, but I am open to the idea that it exists and I have no right to interfere with it even if I am not exactly comfortable with it. There are all types of variation on the Bi theme and variations in gays to. As recently as ten years ago gays(in general) were not so accepting of people who were Bi, now we have the whole GLBT thing. I don't find myself comfortable with much of their agenda or at least the part that deals with exposing kids to it at an early age (Kids in puberty are confused enough as it is), but as adults I see no reason why I should interfere with their lifestyle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 03:33 PM
 
Location: Dallas
1,365 posts, read 2,608,665 times
Reputation: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
There's what? 300 million or so people in this country?

That's about one in 30...maybe 3% of the population. Probably fairly accurate. It's also a good illustration of the fact that we should not reorder society for a group that small.
yeah oppress the minorities, you should run for president of Uganda. You'd fit in perfectly I bet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 03:35 PM
 
Location: Dallas
1,365 posts, read 2,608,665 times
Reputation: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigskydude View Post
Since when has a democracy been a tyranny?

Majority rule should always be the order of the day .. regardless of who or what you personally might like this week.
Don't like the gays, let's kill them. Well majority rules right? That's what Uganda says. Maybe you'd have a better life there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Dallas
1,365 posts, read 2,608,665 times
Reputation: 791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
What "rights" are being denied? Honestly...stop your whining until you can tell me what the "tyranny" is denying you. Gay people can vote, drive, get married, buy a house, etc, etc.....everything that the other 97% can. Seriously...your whining is just silly.
Get married to someone I'm not attracted to romantically? Yeah that makes sense, you're Grade A something for sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 04:11 PM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,667,610 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist View Post
Even in a population of 300 million, that is only equivalent to about 3%. That's not enough reason to redefine marriage and give special rights to them.
The line about "special rights" is garbage. Wherever same-sex marriage is legal, it's open to all. It's not a special right. You can be heterosexual and enter a same-sex marriage, if you wish.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2011, 04:13 PM
 
Location: Dallas
31,290 posts, read 20,737,754 times
Reputation: 9325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero View Post
And I'm quite certain the statistics on bisexuals is way off, since I think being 100% hetero or 100% homosexual is very uncommon and most people fall somewhere in the middle, even if they will never admit it.

That is total bunk and silly speculation. Or maybe it's wishful thinking.
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:42 PM.

© 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