User Tag List

View Poll Results: Gay Marriage - Yes or no?

Voters
72. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    67 93.06%
  • No

    7 9.72%
Multiple Choice Poll.
First 123412 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 245

  1. #11
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,805

    Default

    Ftr, I'm done with this topic and won't respond to any other responses to me. I had just wanted to make a simple statement about the constitution and not get dragged into a long conversation. If anyone wants to know my opinion then they can go back and read any of the dozen or so other old threads about this topic.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  2. #12
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Deeply rooted tradition is the judge of what marriage is.
    You are mistaken. Current word usage is the judge of what marriage is. Ironically, since its opponents keep on calling this legal concept 'gay marriage', they have already judged it a marriage. Thanks.

    Apart from that, I'm done with this topic and won't respond to any other responses to me, too.

  3. #13
    Insert witty line here... Ponyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Yes, you are mistaken. You're arguing for using tyrannical means to achieve what you view as equality. You're just looking at the policy and ignoring the broader principles. It's that very view of the constitution as living which exploded the commerce clause and enabled the federal government to control almost every aspect of your life including what you eat, drink, watch, hear, and drive.
    Actually I'm arguing AGAINST policy in favor of the broader principles. And just because I disagree with you doesn't make me tyrannical. Perhaps you should look up the meaning of words before you throw them around at people.


    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    So why do you want to skip the amendment process here? Is this issue more important than slavery or woman's suffrage and thus proponents can't be bothered with the rigamarole of getting an amendment passed?
    I don't want to skip the amendment process, I want to add to it. It should be an amendment, what part of amendments and "stuff we missed before" are you just not understanding? Amendments are ADDED to the Constitution because of the fact that it isn't perfect!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    More importantly, if judges can add to the constitution without an amendment then what's to stop them from taking things away from the constitution without an amendment?
    Huh??



    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    If you don't know why the state sanctions marriage in the first place then why do you care? How do you know people are being treated unequally if you don't even know the purpose of the law? Just because a law discriminates doesn't mean that it's necessarily bad (in fact the purpose of most laws is to discriminate in one form or another).
    I said that in response to your question, I thought you were going to quote some bygone law that nobody has heard of in years. Little did I know that you had no answer either.




    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    I'm not the judge. Deeply rooted tradition is the judge of what marriage is. You can call marriage whatever you want, but as soon as you want state sanctioning of your personal opinion then I think you don't have any reason to whine about people making judgements.
    So its ok to treat some people differently than others just because that's how its always been??

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    Ftr, I'm done with this topic and won't respond to any other responses to me. I had just wanted to make a simple statement about the constitution and not get dragged into a long conversation. If anyone wants to know my opinion then they can go back and read any of the dozen or so other old threads about this topic.
    This wasn't even a thread about the Constitution, but thanks for not answering why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry. I'll add you to a long list of people that refuse to answer despite their vehement oppostion.
    I'm never wrong, I'm just sometimes less right

  4. #14
    Insert witty line here... Ponyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    398

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Ironically, since its opponents keep on calling this legal concept 'gay marriage', they have already judged it a marriage.
    I never even thought of that before!! (Note: This is not an actual response since you won't respond to any responses to you.)
    I'm never wrong, I'm just sometimes less right

  5. #15

    Default

    I was raised Christian (read: my parents forced me to go church until I moved out), so i'm coming from the "homosexuality is of the devil" background. I'm also a fully heterosexual female...altho sometimes I think life would be easier for me if I could be interested in women romantically. And I know this is a real hot button issue for most people.

    Oddly? I am for gay marriage just because I don't care. Pretty much for the reasons @Elfboy stated. It doesn't affect me any more than a heterosexual couple getting married. To me, the mutual love and commitment to one another is the important bit (I say mutual to avoid the argument over people marrying their left shoe because they love it so).

    I just don't get why it's anyone's business who I choose to live with or have sex with as long as they're a consenting adult. And I get that there's tax and health benefit implications, but again, if a person has a spouse, what difference does it make if they're the same sex our not?

    Personally, I see no logical reason it should not be allowed.

  6. #16
    Per Ardua Metamorphosis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    3,466

    Default

    I voted yes, but to be honest, I don't see why the government should have anything to do with marriage, gay or otherwise.
    "You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit."

    Reason is, and ought only to be the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office
    than to serve and obey them. - David Hume

  7. #17
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Like metalmommy, I was raised Christian. I still consider myself Christian and am attending a church that is considered fundamentalist by people who do not call themselves Fundamentalist. The pastor knows my views on gay marriage, etc but he kind of has to put up with me because I'm his sister.

    I'd like to see marriage taken out of the hands of the state and left in the hands of the church. Churches that want to preform gay ceremonies and recognize gay marriages can. Churches that don't want to don't have to.

    I think the state should offer civil unions for secular purposes. Gender shouldn't matter since it's a secular, voluntary legal agreement. It should offer the same protections and responsibilities as marriage does now. I don't even care how many people are in the union. I mean, you would probably have to limit it for practical purposes, but otherwise, who cares?

    We also ought to adress legal rights/responsibilities for those who cohabit without getting married, IMO. People should be able to opt out voluntarily formally and legally. But not *after* the shit hits the fan.

    Since I don't think anything that sensible is likely to happen, I am in favor of gay marriage.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  8. #18
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Metamorphosis View Post
    I don't see why the government should have anything to do with marriage, gay or otherwise.
    Because to get rid of the legal concept of marriage would mean to get rid of all the other legal concepts built on that foundation as well. I imagine not all of these are useless. If we want, as modern-day social practices probably demand, to have institutional recognition of marriage, the choice is really between two institutions: state and church. Today, marriage is no longer just a religious matter, so it cannot be the church.

  9. #19
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    I voted yes and no, for a few reasons.

    Yes because there's no good reason that it shouldn't.

    No because it shouldn't have to be their business in the first place. It's like giving permission on something that they never should have had the right to determine.

    It's like if I said "You can't eat bread on Sunday!" and then after some time decided to change my mind and say "Ok, I give you permission to eat bread on Sunday"
    It's absurd because I never really had the right to forbid you, so giving permission is also something I don't have a right to do since it's giving something back that never should have been taken.


    And also, because multiple choice.

  10. #20
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sprinkles View Post
    No because it shouldn't have to be their business in the first place. It's like giving permission on something that they never should have had the right to determine.
    But is deciding whether something is constitutional not precisely what the Supreme Court is designed to do?

Similar Threads

  1. Gay Marriage. Yes or no.
    By highlander in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 12-09-2012, 12:19 PM
  2. Gay Marriage. Yes or no.
    By highlander in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 12-09-2012, 12:19 PM
  3. Preschool, Yes or No?
    By Tigerlily in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 01-07-2009, 12:18 AM
  4. Homeschooling: yes or no?
    By Oberon in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 04-04-2008, 06:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO