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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof
America does not owe you the guarantee of feeling happy that your personal religious and aesthetic values are upheld. It owes everyone the opportunity to be treated equally by our system of laws.
In that case don't offer me this argumet again:
Quote:
Gaylenwoof : What you are not free to do, however, is interfere with the pursuit of happiness of other people just because their preferences contradict your religious beliefs, or offend your personal sense of taste.
I don't see a contradiction. Perhaps you can explain what you mean? As I see it, the central point in both quotes is that the issue needs to be focused on the idea that gay marriage is a tangible violation of your rights as an American citizen (and mere religious/aesthetic distaste does not count as a tangible violation of your rights.) And, BTW, I suspect that this is a key aspect of the Senator's epiphany, although I don't know the details of the Senator's state of mind well enough to say for sure.)
Good for Senator Portman. I'm a moderate conservative (conservative on mostly fiscal issues, more liberal on social issues). I believe in equal marriage rights for people that are gay/lesbian. I'm heterosexual so it's not a personal issue for me but I have some friends who are gay or lesbian and I don't like to see their rights violated. I really think there are a lot of Republican politicians out there who, like myself, don't care very much about many of the social issues that the far right constantly gets all worked up about. However, few of them are willing to publicly say they are okay with equal marriage rights. There's a lot of pressure from people within the Republican party to always support traditional values. Even when I talk to some of my fellow Republican friends in casual conversation it can be awkward at times saying that I support equal marriage rights. There's a noticeable social pressure there to uphold traditional values, including marriage just being between a man and a woman.
Most political parties are coalitions. You can't be too vocal in opposition to positions shared by a big chunk of the people in your own party because you are relying on party unity to oppose other parties. The behavior of Republicans supporting other Republicans being against gay marriage even when they themselves aren't against it seems normal to me.
I'd bet my life savings that on each and every issue there are people in both parties that support the other party's position on that particular issue.
The parties even have official Republican Whip and Democratic Whip positions that are specifically assigned the task of getting people to vote along the party line when the people don't agree on a particular position.
Good for him. The sooner our political leaders start focusing on fiscal and economic issues rather than social issues, we will start seeing better results.
would you say the same thing if a liberal would focus on fiscal and economic issues rather than social issues and refuse to support changing the law to allow same gender marriage?
Believe it or not but Christian beliefs have always been a part of traditional American values, Did you know that every single State Constitution mentions God?
Anyway, the topic here is the hypocrisy of this Senator, who is putting his family matters ahead of those values he was voted in to defend. I think he needs to step down ASAP. Out, out, out.... it makes no sense that these people campaign for votes by promoting traditional values, and then when they get into the office they do a U-turn and start promoting the opposite.
God doesn't belong only to Christians. The Hindus have several gods. The Muslims worship God. To argue that Christian beliefs are part of American values, one would have to point out that "every single State Constitution mentions Christ", only that is false.
I don't think the topic is the hypocrisy of Senator Portman. It might be the humanity of Senator Portman. We all see things from our own personal perspective, and we argue from that perspective. Senator Portman's perspective has changed. When any issue hits us as human beings, up close and personal, our perspectives are likely to change. A new perspective, a new position.
I applaud Senator Portman for choosing to support his son and change perspective, rather than choosing to keep his old perspective and damage his relationship with his son.
I don't see a contradiction. Perhaps you can explain what you mean? As I see it, the central point in both quotes is that the issue needs to be focused on the idea that gay marriage is a tangible violation of your rights as an American citizen (and mere religious/aesthetic distaste does not count as a tangible violation of your rights.) And, BTW, I suspect that this is a key aspect of the Senator's epiphany, although I don't know the details of the Senator's state of mind well enough to say for sure.)
Take out your personal POV, and it boils down to you defeating your own argument.
Argument: You are not free to interfere with the pursuit of happiness of other people
Later : America does not owe you the guarantee of feeling happy
Case closed. You argued gay people have the right to pursue happiness, but later you admitted America does not owe anyone happiness.
Take out your personal POV, and it boils down to you defeating your own argument.
Argument: You are not free to interfere with the pursuit of happiness of other people
Later : America does not owe you the guarantee of feeling happy
Case closed. You argued gay people have the right to pursue happiness, but later you admitted America does not owe anyone happiness.
Because there isn't any distinction between pursuing happiness, and being happy?
No government can guarantee anyone happiness. That doesn't mean that they have to pass laws against a specific group of people, who are not harming anyone, and consign them to second-class citizenship. To guarantee someone the right to pursue happiness implies that you won't interfere with that pursuit, as long as it doesn't harm others. Gay marriage harms no one.
Because there isn't any distinction between pursuing happiness, and being happy?
All righty then. Gays can pursue happiness all their want, but don't try to get the government to ensure their happiness, because if you do, it will infringe on the pursuit of happiness of other people.
The whole gay agenda is all about forcing the whole nation to ensure the happiness of the gay people.
Good for him. But why is it that republicans often only come out for something like this if it effects them personally? I suppose if he didn't have a gay son (that says he was born that way and Portman seems to have accepted that) then he would still be crusading with the other republicans against gay marriage and homosexuals in general. Why can't they believe all the others that may not be related to them but none the less want others to believe the same thing? Is empathy such a four letter word to many republicans?
All righty then. Gays can pursue happiness all their want, but don't try to get the government to ensure their happiness, because if you do, it will infringe on the pursuit of happiness of other people.
The whole gay agenda is all about forcing the whole nation to ensure the happiness of the gay people.
Besides, they are already 'gay'.
How does legalizing same sex marriage affect YOUR happiness? That makes zero sense to me.
And, no - the "gay agenda" isn't about "forcing the whole nation to ensure the happiness of the gay people" ("the gay people"?). The "gay agenda," which a whole lot of "the straight people" support, is to allow two consenting adults the same rights and dignity afforded heterosexual couples.
A really rather small gesture, in the grand scheme of things, and which will affect NO ONE (or their "happiness") except the couples themselves, to whom it IS a big deal.
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.
