Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? - Page 6

GuidoHunter · 11-29-2006, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ckj846

Then ask every single homosexual person that you know and they'll give you the same answer.

It's nice to know that every single homosexual is a geneticist/understands things about human physiology that the scientific community doesn't know.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

**Kilgamayan** · 11-29-2006, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

jamuko, Kilga:

That's the problem is suits going to the right judges who can circumvent the will of the people and turn down such laws.

If incestuous marriage ever gets to the Supreme Court they would shut it down. I would bet money on it.

If it gets to and stays on a state-by-state basis then all this arguing is moot.

ckj846 · 11-29-2006, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

It's nice to know that every single homosexual is a geneticist/understands things about human physiology that the scientific community doesn't know.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

Not everything has to be proven with science. Look at the Bible. Are you going to say EVERYTHING IN THERE IS WRONG BECAUSE SCIENCE HASN'T PROVEN IT? Of course not, that is blasphemic. Are you going to laugh at cultures and their oral traditions because it hasn't been proven with science that their people's stories and anecdotes are true? Just because homosexuality is "thought" to be caused by genetic mutations doesn't mean that it is neccessarily true. There are some things in life that are unexplainable, and using that argument of WELL SCIENCE HASN'T SOLVED IT YET is really quite elementary.
O_o

FoJaR · 11-30-2006, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

You seem to think pretty highly of yourself in terms of political and governmental influence.

that's not it, i'd just have a plan.

Quote:

It has already been pointed out that religion has zero place in this particular argument.

not for me. religion always has a place.

and cypher: that's fine man, you can think what you want of me, marriage is just something that's special, to me and a lot of people (not as many as it should be, and i'm talking straight people). but yeah, lose respect for me if you want, nobody else is taking a stand on here so i felt like i had to, however badly i'm representing my side.

**darkshark** · 11-30-2006, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoJaR

nobody else is taking a stand on here so i felt like i had to, however badly i'm representing my side.

you dont even have a feasable argument other than "ohlolol jesus said so"

GuidoHunter · 11-30-2006, 04:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkshark

you dont even have a feasable argument other than "ohlolol jesus said so"

He doesn't need one to justify his stance, you know.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

**SpookG** · 11-30-2006, 04:19 AM

I skimmed through this as best I could before wanting to cry at some of the responses, so if I trot over something someone said (I haven't found anything yet that shows this) then well, whoops.

It shouldn't be illegal for two people to be married in the United States, regardless of orientation. In the legal sense of the word, being married gives the spouse several legal rights you wouldn't have regarding things with health and taxes, and a big issue for gays is that they entitled to those privileges and rights, and they are absolutely.

However, Christianity doesn't seem to want to support gay marriage, as their definition is that of one between a man and a woman. That is a religious ceremony, not a legal one. They can decide whether or not to allow same sex couples to wed, since it is, afterall, their religion, and shouldn't be dictated by the State at all what they decide is proper or not, because in all honestly, who gives a ****?

It's not really discrimination, its the rules of the club. Want to be a part of it play by the rules. Don't want to be, don't expect a priest to give you a Christian wedding ceremony.

Supreme court can't force the church to change their viewpoint, but it is unfair that a religious mindset influences the legal rights of a citizen in this country, and that's what the whole argument is about more or less.

What bothers me is the arguing point focuses more on the actual ceremony and less about the legal version of the word, which is where the rights come in and the conflict arises and I find it hard to justify denying rights to a human being while granting them to another, especially when it is stating we are all equal in the Constitution. Focusing on things like whether or not it is a disease, disorder, or other inhibitions or feelings are moot compared to that point. They are people, they deserve rights just like you do.

I don't know..maybe that's just me..but that's how I see it all..my two cents, pretty much.

ToshX · 11-30-2006, 10:26 AM

I actually came to CT, WTF.

Banning gay marriage is like taking our rights away. It's not like it's really harming anyone else, it's just giving people what they want. There is no reason to stop it from happening. It's not like we have a problem with population growth, or like it'd stop gay sex anyway. The only people that could disagree with it are people who cannot stand different people, and that's not a realistic reason to get rid of it.

FoJaR · 11-30-2006, 11:11 AM

nah, i'm fine with gay people.

**talisman** · 11-30-2006, 11:20 AM

there's really just no reason not to allow it. I refuse to buy into slippery slope -- that logic is unfounded and not supported by existing examples.

Furthermore, churches need not administer the ceremony to homosexual couples. But the courts could; that's all. And then they'd have the same rights as everyone else. I fail to see what the big deal is.

As it is, this nation is rather homophobic. Hell, my state doesn't even allow civil unions, although I'd have to look that up to make sure.

**Squeek** · 11-30-2006, 11:41 AM

See, if this were a true democratic nation and the citizens were really running the country, we could have a say in this and actually be heard instead of posting text on a flash game's forums.

**Shashakiro** · 11-30-2006, 12:22 PM

About the "slippery slope" thing:

The REASON gay marriage is even an issue is because there are a LOT of gay people, statistically. Let's say that it's 3% of people (no idea about the actual figure).

What percentage of people are..."bestial", i.e. would want to marry animals? I think even .0001% is generous. Same with willfully incestuous people, and pedophiles, and even fewer for any of the other weird things that the "slippery slope" argument claims will happen if gay marriage is allowed.

If .0001% of people were gay instead of 3% or whatever, I guarantee you the idea of gay marriage would be as laughable to people (including judges) as legalizing marriage for any of those other weird fetishes people have.

So yeah...basically, none of those things will ever happen beacuse there is no public support whatsoever for them, and there never will be. Tons of people are either gay or personally know someone who's gay, and that's why gay people get support.

FaughtNWon · 11-30-2006, 12:22 PM

Nothing wrong with homos. Banning gay marriage is an infraction of rights. Though i dont see eye to eye with homosexuals, I dont hate them. I dont understand why everyone wants to pry into there affairs and thier business, its no one else's right to tell you what you can and cannot do. If someone wanted to marry a ****ing pig i wouldnt give a ****. Let people do as the please. But that will never happen in this land of so many "freedoms".

Anyone who says otherwise, needs to be deported to a Dictatorship rules country. Since in esence its the same thing.

esupin · 11-30-2006, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MilfeulleSakuraba

Being a black Democrat, I highly doubt Deval Patrick is going to crap all over any minority present in Massachusetts.

Yes, and thank the Lord. I could've done a better job than Romney.

I am talking about ROMNEY because Patrick doesn't become gov until January 4th or something. He's doing weird stuff to look good for a presidential run, which is why he didn't run for reelection. I don't know if anyone brought that point up already.

5 pages too late, but I just wanted to throw that out there.

**talisman** · 11-30-2006, 01:55 PM

squeek, the U.S. isn't a democracy... it's a republic. Last democracy I can remember was ancient Greece (where, incidentally, homosexuality/bisexuality was quite prevalent).

edit: come to think of it, ancient Greece wasn't a pure democracy either. It's a bit too unfeasible, unfortunately, to have everyone vote on everything. And I have a feeling that even if everyone in this nation were to vote on gay marriage, it would get shot down, due to the strong cultural conservative presence in America.

esupin · 11-30-2006, 02:25 PM

Look back to cases like Brown v Board of Education- you can't have the majority get what they want every time. People are bitching because the Supreme Court decision was 4-3 (unlike Brown), but that's too bad for them.

**Squeek** · 11-30-2006, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by talisman

squeek, the U.S. isn't a democracy... it's a republic. Last democracy I can remember was ancient Greece (where, incidentally, homosexuality/bisexuality was quite prevalent).

When did that change?

I was always taught that we were a democratic republic.

Freakin' public schools.

FaughtNWon · 11-30-2006, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squeek

When did that change?

I was always taught that we were a democratic republic.

Freakin' public schools.

Ahh Public schools. That explains it.
Liars.

ToshX · 11-30-2006, 10:14 PM

I've attended both public and private schools, I have to say that private are far superior <.< Even if they're inexpensive.

Pikachu655 · 11-30-2006, 10:24 PM

Gay Marage should continue to stay legal becuse just becuse you like people of the same sex doesn't mean you're preverted or sick! The People that like the same gender shouldn't be labeled at all becuase of their belifes or likeings but for who they are! TAKE AWAY THE WORD GAY AND LEZBO DAMN IT!

11-30-2006, 04:19 AM	#107
SpookG (For Great Justice!) Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, California Age: 42 Posts: 829	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? I skimmed through this as best I could before wanting to cry at some of the responses, so if I trot over something someone said (I haven't found anything yet that shows this) then well, whoops. It shouldn't be illegal for two people to be married in the United States, regardless of orientation. In the legal sense of the word, being married gives the spouse several legal rights you wouldn't have regarding things with health and taxes, and a big issue for gays is that they entitled to those privileges and rights, and they are absolutely. However, Christianity doesn't seem to want to support gay marriage, as their definition is that of one between a man and a woman. That is a religious ceremony, not a legal one. They can decide whether or not to allow same sex couples to wed, since it is, afterall, their religion, and shouldn't be dictated by the State at all what they decide is proper or not, because in all honestly, who gives a ***? It's not really discrimination, its the rules of the club. Want to be a part of it play by the rules. Don't want to be, don't expect a priest to give you a Christian wedding ceremony. Supreme court can't force the church to change their viewpoint, but it is unfair that a religious mindset influences the legal rights of a citizen in this country, and that's what the whole argument is about more or less. What bothers me is the arguing point focuses more on the actual ceremony and less about the legal version of the word, which is where the rights come in and the conflict arises and I find it hard to justify denying rights to a human being while granting them to another, especially when it is stating we are all equal in the Constitution. Focusing on things like whether or not it is a disease, disorder, or other inhibitions or feelings are moot compared to that point. They are people, they deserve rights just like you do. I don't know..maybe that's just me..but that's how I see it all..my two cents, pretty much. __________________ Royal For Great Justice! Electronic Music est. 1999 . kerBLAM Last edited by SpookG; 11-30-2006 at 04:21 AM..*

11-30-2006, 10:26 AM	#108
ToshX FFR Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 5,111	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? I actually came to CT, WTF. Banning gay marriage is like taking our rights away. It's not like it's really harming anyone else, it's just giving people what they want. There is no reason to stop it from happening. It's not like we have a problem with population growth, or like it'd stop gay sex anyway. The only people that could disagree with it are people who cannot stand different people, and that's not a realistic reason to get rid of it.

11-30-2006, 11:11 AM	#109
FoJaR The Worst Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: space ghost is dead to me Posts: 2,816	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? nah, i'm fine with gay people. __________________

11-30-2006, 11:20 AM	#110
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? there's really just no reason not to allow it. I refuse to buy into slippery slope -- that logic is unfounded and not supported by existing examples. Furthermore, churches need not administer the ceremony to homosexual couples. But the courts could; that's all. And then they'd have the same rights as everyone else. I fail to see what the big deal is. As it is, this nation is rather homophobic. Hell, my state doesn't even allow civil unions, although I'd have to look that up to make sure.

11-30-2006, 11:41 AM	#111
Squeek let it snow~ Join Date: Jan 2004 Age: 39 Posts: 14,444	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? See, if this were a true democratic nation and the citizens were really running the country, we could have a say in this and actually be heard instead of posting text on a flash game's forums.

11-30-2006, 12:22 PM	#113
FaughtNWon FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: H-Town Posts: 314	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? Nothing wrong with homos. Banning gay marriage is an infraction of rights. Though i dont see eye to eye with homosexuals, I dont hate them. I dont understand why everyone wants to pry into there affairs and thier business, its no one else's right to tell you what you can and cannot do. If someone wanted to marry a **ing pig i wouldnt give a . Let people do as the please. But that will never happen in this land of so many "freedoms". Anyone who says otherwise, needs to be deported to a Dictatorship rules country. Since in esence its the same thing. __________________ I'm a filthy slut.**

11-30-2006, 01:55 PM	#115
talisman Resident Penguin Join Date: May 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 4,598	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? squeek, the U.S. isn't a democracy... it's a republic. Last democracy I can remember was ancient Greece (where, incidentally, homosexuality/bisexuality was quite prevalent). edit: come to think of it, ancient Greece wasn't a pure democracy either. It's a bit too unfeasible, unfortunately, to have everyone vote on everything. And I have a feeling that even if everyone in this nation were to vote on gay marriage, it would get shot down, due to the strong cultural conservative presence in America. Last edited by talisman; 11-30-2006 at 01:57 PM..

11-30-2006, 02:25 PM	#116
esupin FFR Player Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Alphabet City, Manhattan Age: 37 Posts: 1,756	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? Look back to cases like Brown v Board of Education- you can't have the majority get what they want every time. People are bitching because the Supreme Court decision was 4-3 (unlike Brown), but that's too bad for them. __________________ http://www.youtube.com/esupin

11-30-2006, 10:14 PM	#119
ToshX FFR Player Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 5,111	Re: Gay Marriage Unconstitutional? I've attended both public and private schools, I have to say that private are far superior <.< Even if they're inexpensive.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)