Pennsylvania gay marriage ban struck down-

Discussion in 'Gay & Lesbian Rights' started by Gorn Captain, May 20, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,438
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In all and every single way you can conceive of children of a gay couple benefitting.
     
  2. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    That's only because you're choosing to play stupid. You are playing, right?
     
  3. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    Nice dodge. Be specific! The child you describe already has family ties to both caretakers. A child in the care of a gay person has, at most ties to that one person unless the parent is allowed to marry his/her partner and/ or the partner can adopt.
     
  4. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    You might want to chew on this for awhile Dixon:

    Have a nice day
     
  5. Flintc

    Flintc New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2010
    Messages:
    11,879
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So are you saying you are in favor of BOTH same-sex marriage AND a guy marrying his front door, or are you saying that you are ONLY in favor of same-sex marriage IF this right is extended to marrying the front door?

    In our imperfect world, rights are granted to formerly second-class citizens one small and painful step at a time. This small step is what the entire discussion is focused on. Attempting to change the subject shows you have no case. Insisting that a different subject is not different only emphasizes this.
     
  6. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Perhaps you have a vision problem? Or a reading comprehension problem.

    I no more object to your single mom and grannie marrying because I believe that same gender couples should have the right to marry, than you are advocating for black slavery to return when you promote discrimination in marriage for same gender couples.
     
  7. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since you are calling for marriage to be extended to the single mother and grandmother- can I put you down on the record as supporting same gender marriage now?

    Quote Originally Posted by dixon76710 View Post
    I am the one who calls for marriage to be extended to the single mother and grandmother raising their children /grandchildren for over a decade, because of my "concern for the wellbeing of children"
     
  8. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Strawman/ red herring

    - - - Updated - - -

    Procreation is irrelevant to who can marry.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Banning same sex marriage has been repeatedly found unconstitutional.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Strawman/red herring

    - - - Updated - - -

    Strawman/red herring
     
  9. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You've been shown your definition is bunk. Marriage, by definition, is also between a man and a man, or woman and woman.

    This identical argument failed against interracial marriage as well
     
  10. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Marriage isn't only between a man and a woman
     
  11. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Procreation is irrelevant to who can marry. Nothing in this wall of text is an argument for prohibiting same sex couples from marriage.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Nobody is saying it shouldn't.
     
  12. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Neither can millions of Heteros. Which is why procreation is irrelevant to marriage.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Strawman/red herring

    - - - Updated - - -

    Strawman/red herring
     
  13. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    False. Homosexuality is a sexual orientation. Interracial marriage is not.
     
  14. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But discrimination because of one couple happens to be the same gender and discrimination because one couple happens to be two races is both marriage discrimination.
     
  15. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What are you claiming is false? I never said interracial marriage was an orientation so I have no idea what you're talking about.

    But you are using the identical argument used against interracial marriage.
     
  16. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    What was the arguement used against interracial marriage?
     
  17. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Whether it's discrimination or not is irrelevant to what I'm trying to argue. I am trying to argue that my arguement against gay marriage is totally different from the arguement against interracial marriage, because interracial marriage is not a sexual orientation, unlike homosexuality.
     
  18. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    'interracial' is not 'homosexual'- no disagreement there.

    But in one case we have the law forbidding marriage between two people because the state does not approve of a White man having sex with a Black woman, and in the other we have the State not allowing marriage between a man and a man, because they are sexually attracted to each other?

    So tell me again why you think that the discrimination is okay when it happens to one couple- but not okay when it happens to the other?
     
  19. ProgressivePatriot

    ProgressivePatriot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    Messages:
    6,816
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    So what the f*C* does it matter if it's not a sexual orientation? How does that make it not discrimination. What the hell is wrong with you?
     
  20. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    that it was bad.

    There were even preachers who said it was against Gods will.
     
  21. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    There is no significant difference between a white man marrying a white woman and a white man marrying a black woman-because both situations involve 2 people of the opposite sex getting married. However, there is a significant difference between a man marrying a woman, and a man marrying a man, or a woman marrying a woman.
     
  22. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Blacks aren't discriminated against. They can marry anyone of the same race, just like whites can.

    Your argument "gays aren't discriminated against. They can marry anyone of the opposite sex, just like heteros".

    Just as dumb, and just as invalid.
     
  23. SFJEFF

    SFJEFF New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30,682
    Likes Received:
    256
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Right- one is homosexual and the other is not.

    But both are discriminatory.
     
  24. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is no difference. Two consenting adults, presumably in love, entering into a legal institution with over 1,400 rights and privileges associated with that legal contract.

    No difference at all and no legal argument has been presented that would allow it. The 14th amendment specifically precludes banning them from marriage.
     
  25. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Blacks were allowed to marry each other, even when interracial marriage was illegal. There was never a law which stated black people couldn't get married. Your comparing arguements which justify banning interracial marriage, to my arguements for justifying banning gay marriage, doesn't make any sense.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page