Consenting adults

I’m not having a hard time with anything. I understand exactly what you said. There is not a lot of room for interpretation. To be clear, you said that gays already have equal rights in marriage because, just like straight people because they can marry someone of the opposite sex. I addressed that asinine assertion head on with the following:

For your part, instead of dealing with my response, you accuse me of not understanding what you mean, and of setting up a straw man argument. What straw man? There is no need to do any such thing because you own argument is idiotic and weak to the point where it is easily destroyed which is what I did above. All that you have done is engage in ad hominems by attacking me for an alleged inability to grasp your point, while woefully failing to deal with my argument. All that you want to do is engage in an intellectually dishonest circle jerk.

 

they do have equal rights....


as far as govt is concerned.... love does not fit into the equation.... marraige is a contract.


so, with that said.... the only ways gays would be able to claim discrimination, is if, while trying to

marry 1 person, not of close relation, to opposite gender....

and they got turned down because they were gay.


Is that happening anywhere? Here, let me go ahead and answer that question. No, it's not.

 

You guys can keep repeating that equine excrement in the hope that it will somehow magically become true.....but it wont. Numerous courts have said that gays do not have equal rights when they can't marry someone of the same sex, so what makes you so special?

 

We've seen this "Gays aren't discriminated against....they have the right to marry a person of the opposite gender, same as anybody else."

And the answer to that again comes from the days of bans on inter-racial marriage. Those who argued for that could have said "Blacks aren't discriminated against....they have the right to marry any black person they want."

 

and again.... as soon as you can genetically prove you are born gay, like you are born black.... then you have a point.

 

because I don't base my morality off of which direction the political winds blow.

a liberal in a robe telling me I'm "wrong" is no different than you telling me I'm wrong. Niether are moral compasses

 

You're certainly entitles to continue to cling to your opinion about morality. To me morality is about treating others fairly and equally. You seem to think that you can arbitrarily and unilaterally decide what is moral and what is not. No matter. As far as the courts are concerned it's not about morality at all but about equal protection under the law. You might want to read the 14th amendment.

I would suggest that if you want to oppose marriage equality you might actually get some respect if you simply stick to your moral principals and drop the crap about gays already having equal rights. That is just asinine.

 

your definition of fair and equal is anything but. it's about getting more and payback.... not the same thing at all.


I'm the only one actually wanting equality. if a straight guy is better for the job, hire him.... if the gay guy is... hire him. don't pass up better qualified
people to fill a quota you deem "fair"

until you admit it's already equal and fair... you are just blah blahing

 

So homosexuality is a "choice"?......like religion?

(Now watch the backpedal)

 

So far over 20 judges disagree with you.

They are correct.

You are wrong.

- - - Updated - - -

But the liberal or conservative in a robe has both an actual understanding of the law and the Constitution, and the authority, that you lack.

 

a liberal doesn't tell me what my morals are, whether he's wearing a black robe or not....

plus, if 20 agree with you, 30 are agreeing with me.... does that make you the wrong one

that still doesn't change my morals. I don't base it off of political winds of change.

- - - Updated - - -

Yep.

so whenever a bunch of gays go off and create a country based on their gay beliefs.... be sure to make freedom in the bedroom in your bill of rights....


oh wait, noone is stopping you from doing what you want to do in your bedroom

 

So what? What does that have to do with equality?

 

you have equal.....

 

You can't be serious?!! You are the one who believes in equality? Marriage is already fair.? I could say that the moon is made of green cheese, but that won't make it so. You're so full of excrement that it must be coming out of your ears. As I said before, I might have more respect for you if you would just admit that you don't believe in equality for gays because of your values, rather than resorting to this twisted inane logic in a pathetic attempt to convince yourself and others that you believe in equality.

 

gays aren't allowed to marry
one spouse
no close relations
opposite gender?


if they aren't, then yes, I demand equality in marraige.......

 

Your morals are immaterial when it comes to the Constitutionality of marriage equality.

 

So you'd have to SUPPORT a law that outlawed a Jew from marrying a Christian, wouldn't you?

Wait...no, the Jew's religious freedom is still intact. They are still free to be Jewish under the Constitution, just like a homosexual is allowed to be homosexual under it.

And according to your "They're not discriminated against" Theory....the Jew wouldn't be discriminated against by such a law because "They would have the right to marry any woman they wanted...who was Jewish."

 

no I wouldn't support it because the Constitution protects freedom of religion, not freedom of gay

 

No, they would still have the right to be Jewish and practice their religion.

They just wouldn't have the right to marry a Christian....a state law concerning who can legally enter into a legal contract.

Exactly the same as laws denying a gay man/woman from marrying a person of the same sex....they'd still have the right to be homosexual, just not the right to have a homosexual marriage. Just like the Jew would still have the right to be Jewish, just not the right to a marriage to a Christian.


Throw in this hypothetical....if you believe homosexuality is "chosen"?

You'd have to support the Constitutionality of a law that stated that a member of the Republican Party could not marry a member of the Libertarian Party.

 

Freedom of religion is written in the BOR's Freedom of gay is not.


but again, show me one instance of a gay man (or woman) being stopped at the courthouse from marrying ..... no more than one spouse, opposite gender, no close relations....


just one.....

 

You're not telling anyone anything that we don't already know. However, it you actually understood anything about how our system of laws and government works, you would know that all rights are not enumerated in the constitution and that the courts can create new rights. That has already happened-with respect to gay's right to marriage- in state courts, federal district courts and federal appeals courts. It' s only a matter of time before SCOTUS does the same. You might want to visit this thread :

http://www.politicalforum.com/debat...scotus-will-establish-gay-marriage-right.html

Go to posts 78 and 79 where I lay out exactly how that is going to happen.

 

Keep it up. All you will have is a headache while the wedding bells will ringing for gay folks

 

I keep saying, Javis. A Jew would still have the freedom to practice their religion, attend synagogue, pray, etc. They simply wouldn't receive State sanction to marry a Christian.


But try the other one.....could you argue against the Constitutionality of a state law banning a member of the Republican Party from marrying a member of the Libertarian Party?


Again, this is based on your claim that homosexuality is "chosen", not genetic.

 

Show me an instance where a disables person was told that they could not live in a certain neighborhood-maybe because wheelchairs assailed some peoples sensibilities - but they had equal rights because they can still live somewhere. Do you deny that if that happened, that it would be met with outrage? How is that different than telling a gay person that they can marry "somebody" , just not who they want to marry, so therefore there is no discrimination.?

 

Now, who here said they were for marriage equality for gay people but not others? You're the one arguing the strawman, claiming people that argue for 'marriage equality' are attempting to include gay couples but exclude everyone else.

I think we can see where the intellectual dishonesty lies.