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.
I really don't think so. I certainly would NOT vote for either and don't know many people who would.
I'm not talking about Texas - more like MS, AL, SC. I've been in those states and the racism was insane. I've never heard the "n" word being casually tossed around in TX, like I did in those other states. And I certainly wasn't accusing you of being racist - just using an example where rights weren't granted by popular vote.
I'm not talking about Texas - more like MS, AL, SC. I've been in those states and the racism was insane. I've never heard the "n" word being casually tossed around in TX, like I did in those other states. And I certainly wasn't accusing you of being racist - just using an example where rights weren't granted by popular vote.
Thanks for the clarification and I didn't really interpret your comment as accusing me of being racist.
Btw, I hope you saw my comment that I disapprove MORE of straight people having an endless string of one-night stands and repeated random sexual partners than of gay people doing what they want in committed relationships.
Thanks for the clarification and I didn't really interpret your comment as accusing me of being racist.
Btw, I hope you saw my comment that I disapprove MORE of straight people having an endless string of one-night stands and repeated random sexual partners than of gay people doing what they want in committed relationships.
No, I didn't read all of the posts. Interesting--- you're a difficult person to read into
No, I didn't read all of the posts. Interesting--- you're a difficult person to read into
Not really...
1. I'm personally against all sex outside of marriage. However, I approve MORE of sex within committed relationships than with random partners. Gay or straight...it doesn't matter. (And I do NOT think this should be legislated)
2. I'm against gay marriage because of the family/children issue. I am also against ANYONE living with their BF/GF and raising children. I think the state DOES have a right to legislate here because of society's duty to all children.
Last edited by afoigrokerkok; 02-25-2009 at 04:29 PM..
Our form of government is a Republic, not a Democracy, for just these reasons. The Constitution is meant to guarantee individual liberty against the tyranny of the majority.
"There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism."
John Stuart Mill writing about the tyranny of the majority in his Essay on Liberty
"It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."
James Madison, Federalist Paper 51:
Got it. But the result was the result, and you said that laws on sodomy have been upheld. Maybe they were before the Supreme Court made its decision, but since that was at least a few years ago, there's really no point in debating it now.
I actually don't think that ALL sodomy laws are unenforceable...it's a separate issue between ALL sodomy and only between same sex partners. The only ones that are unenforceable are those that apply specifically to homosexuals. (That said, I do NOT agree with those laws)
Also, FlaGrrrl, I'm sorry if I offended you in any way. I really am. I wasn't trying to "push you around" or anything. I was just pointing out that if you feel so strongly about it, there ARE things you can do.
I was simply saying that if you think ANYONE should be allowed to marry, you should include pedophiles if it's not their choice to be a pedophile.
Well considering they would want to marry CHILDREN -who are not able to give CONSENT- I would say this is a stupid idea and completely illogical as well as ILLEGAL.
Same with Beastiality so let's not go there.
2 consenting ADULTS should be able to get married.
Well considering they would want to marry CHILDREN -who are not able to give CONSENT- I would say this is a stupid idea and completely illogical as well as ILLEGAL.
Same with Beastiality so let's not go there.
2 consenting ADULTS should be able to get married.
Period.
But you could get into an argument about 3+ consenting adults. I probably should have ONLY mentioned polygamy in that post but if consenting adults should be able to marry whomever they please then why not?
I'd bet if rights were put to a vote, some southern states would at a minimum outlaw interracial marriage, if not still have legalized slavery
I bet those would pass too.
Just because the majority wants it, does not make it the RIGHT thing to do.
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.
