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 04-28-2014, 03:25 PM
 
Location: S.E. US
13,163 posts, read 1,702,384 times
Reputation: 5132

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Everything and everyone? A bit of a generalized statement.
In this case, it's a pretty large size shoe (and well-worn) so... "if the shoe fits..."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-28-2014, 03:25 PM
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
702 posts, read 727,133 times
Reputation: 932
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound View Post
Why does the left call everything and everyone who has a different perspective "bigotry"? I thought you're all for tolerance and valuing differences. Does that just apply to others, but not to you?
Bigot - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Someone claiming homosexuals are (in varying degrees throughout this thread and others) less deserving of the same rights as others, akin to child molestation, a step up from bestiality, etc is being bigoted. Don't try to spin it as "Oh, well you are BIGOTED of my 'different perspective'"... it is just plain bigotry. Same as any other prejudice.

Progressives have dealt with that sort of bigotry before and, just as before, will do away with the structural obstacles that are preventing all citizens from enjoying equal rights. Just as before the same obstructionist bigots will stand in the way bemoaning what "their country" is coming to. Once again they will be cast on the fringes of society with the other zealots, racists and bigots.

Don't be scared.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 03:27 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,198,674 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
I could easily turn it around on you. Why do you get to define immorality? And let's be clear, this isn't a case of my side defining a moral standard. It's a case of your side RE-defining and changing a moral stance that has been in place since the foundation of our country.


Legalization of gay marriage will drastically change society, and that affects everyone. So you are wrong. It will make a difference in my life.
So people you don't know getting married somehow effects your life? I don't follow you here. When my wife and I got married, did that somehow have an effect on you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Montreal, Quebec
15,080 posts, read 14,331,642 times
Reputation: 9789
Quote:
Originally Posted by southward bound View Post
Well, without getting too far into a complex discussion, I'd say that, yes, we could ignore it. Until, as another poster said, it affects us and our lives, which is happening more and more these days:



You see, we can't just live according to our principles and beliefs even while we might like to "live and let live." We're asked to put them aside, and embrace yours, immoral as they may be in our system of faith. That's trampling on our freedom of religion and requiring us to accept that which is unacceptable.

Why do we get to define immorality? What peope think doesn't matter. It's been defined by God. Whether you believe there is a God or not, that is where my definition of morality/immorality comes from. Therefore, I have not usurped YOUR right to define it for yourself. I simply accept God's right to define it, and he's a few pegs higher than any of us, if you know what I mean.
That means about as much to me as your saying that your morality is defined by Spiderman.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Montreal, Quebec
15,080 posts, read 14,331,642 times
Reputation: 9789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro Matt View Post
Just a notch above Beastiality.

I feel sorry for the child if it lives.
If it lives? Why wouldn't it live? What a peculiar thing to say.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 04:44 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,645 posts, read 26,393,631 times
Reputation: 12656
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Oh, then why is the only other alternative to traditional marriage being discussed a sexual union between members of the same sex?

Seems to me the if the criteria is simply that TWO people love each other (or not I suppose) and they want to build a life together and play house with real babies, then any non-sexual relationship could also be justified under the same reasoning.


BTW, you haven't stated your specific criteria for marriage. I don't want to make assertions on your behalf. So spill it. What is now right and what is now wrong according to urbanlife78?
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
You do realize a man and woman don't have to love each other to get married. Also what is a sexual union? Is that another phrase for having sex?


Not going within a mile of it I see.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 05:13 PM
 
Location: Omaha/Lincoln, NE
125 posts, read 143,701 times
Reputation: 96
you've brought up "right" and "wrong" a lot in this thread, and I don't presume to speak for anybody else on this matter, but in my opinion "right" and "wrong" are irrelevant as far as the government should be concerned. As long as all parties are a) consenting and b) adults, meaning that their decisions are of their own free will, what you, I, President Obama, Pope Francis, or anybody else feels about their relationship or marriage is completely invalid. Feel free to think it's "wrong" all you want, but it's their life, not yours, and you have no right to use government force to stop people from living in a way you disagree with
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
46,001 posts, read 35,198,674 times
Reputation: 7875
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Not going within a mile of it I see.
A Civil Marriage is a union between two people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 05:47 PM
 
11,186 posts, read 6,511,514 times
Reputation: 4622
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
A Civil Marriage is a union between two people.
That's what you want a civil marriage to be and it will be someday, but for now in most states, it's still between a female and male.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2014, 05:50 PM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,864,594 times
Reputation: 9283
Congrats to them! I will not support liberals/conservatives to force their values/morals/ethics on others...
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. The time now is 10:11 AM.

© 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