Poll
![]() | 15 votes (20%) | ||
![]() | 22 votes (29.33%) | ||
![]() | 17 votes (22.66%) | ||
![]() | 41 votes (54.66%) |
75 members have voted
So the poll is: how do you feel about it?
Of course when the headlines die down we'll get the full details. But this is a really, really, really good thing.
Quote: IbeatyouracesWhere is the "I don't care" choice?
That should come with Poll 8.1 "Blue" in 8 months or so. :)
The unintended consequences will be felt for years.
Quote: IbeatyouracesSome of us trust in reality and not fiction.
Interesting.
I don't disagree, but it begs the question: how would you classify trust in the basic decency of people to see the value of other people's lives and happiness?
Quote: IbeatyouracesSome of us trust in reality and not fiction.
No one has a more difficult task, than the atheist in trying to prove something came from nothing. Evil cannot exist since there is no good. So in your reality all selfishness is acceptable. That is your reality, not mine.
Quote: IbeatyouracesSome of us trust in reality and not fiction.
If a person does not believe in something they will fall for anything (see: global warming alarmism.)
On the ruling we can take comfort in the fact that it is narrower than the headline suggests and states still have the right to define marriage.
Today is a lesson in elections having consequences and the danger to come if there are more liberal justices and less originalists on the court in the future.
Quote: AZDuffman
The unintended consequences will be felt for years.
For sure. Or forever, whichever comes first...
Quote: ewjones080I just never got it. Why the hell should I care if two men want to get married or two women? Really, what difference does it make? What's the reason, if you don't say it's religion.
I'd go along with this if I got the same consideration for my choice in keeping firearms. But I never will.
The issue to me (and most on my side I will wager) is that it is unhealthy for society. Real marriage promotes societal growth and stability, huge reasons it came about in the first place. It promotes more mentally healthy offspring, which promotes that same society. Even childless couples help this out.
Sames-sex unions and open homosexuality, OTOH, are less healthy. Gay men will have far more partners and live a more dangerous sex life (as EB has discussed.) Then there are gays with power over teenage boys, like Pat Patterson and Sandusky. There is discussion that gayness is not "born" but rather individuals are "turned out." I know that riles feathers, but until one or the other is proven it cannot be dismissed.
So the more in the open it gets the more it affects our youth. The lower the mental health of the youth the weaker society becomes and the more it accepts as "normal." Eventually anything goes, then society goes.
Quote: AZDuffmanI'd go along with this if I got the same consideration for my choice in keeping firearms.
+1
If "opposing gay marriage" = "bigot", then "opposing firearms equality" = "bigot" as well.
Then I saw the poll choices. Now I don't care.
Here's part of what I say about it on my ReverendDaveMiller.com website:
Quote:Shouldn't gays and lesbians be entitled to a bitter, messy divorce, just like everyone else?
If we care about equal opportunity, why not allow everyone to be happy if the 3 parties are OK with it?
Quote: BozIf we care about equal opportunity, why not allow everyone to be happy if the 3 parties are OK with it?
I don't see a valid moral reason to forbid such arrangements. Also no valid moral reason to engage in one, but that is best left to people to determine freely.
of marriage like the rest of us.
Quote: NareedThe US Supreme Court pretty much struck down DOMA (the full name of that law is so nonsensical I won't repeat it).
So the poll is: how do you feel about it?
None of the above, and your choices mean there's little point in debating this with you.
Does this have any affect on you being a resident in Mexico, Nareed?
Quote: FleaStiffDoes it mean I no longer have to agree with someone that I am happily married?
Happily married, is that the original oxymoron?
ox·y·mo·ron (ks-môrn, -mr-)
n. pl. ox·y·mo·ra (-môr, -mr) or ox·y·mo·rons
A rhetorical figure in which contradictory terms are combined, as in a 'deafening silence' and a 'mournful optimist'.
Quote: HotBlondeDoes this have any affect on you being a resident in Mexico, Nareed?
Well, it's complicated. Short answer is no. Long answer is it might.
But extending the recognition of rights to any people is always cause for celebration.
Absolutely! Great attitude! (And is it effect or affect? I often get those two words confused.)Quote: NareedWell, it's complicated. Short answer is no. Long answer is it might.
But extending the recognition of rights to any people is always cause for celebration.
Quote: HotBlondeAbsolutely! Great attitude! (And is it effect or affect? I often get those two words confused.)
Thanks :)
In this case, it's "effect."
Not rights, license.Quote: NareedWell, it's complicated. Short answer is no. Long answer is it might.
But extending the recognition of rights to any people is always cause for celebration.
Quote: thecesspitNone of the above, and your choices mean there's little point in debating this with you.
You can always debate.
I admit the choices were designed to tee certain people off.
Quote: BozI usually stay out of these debates on here, but I just want to know why I cant have 2 wives now? Or three or whatever I want. Why is it limited to just 2 people? So it is OK to be between a man and woman, or man and man or woman and woman, but not 3? Please explain the logic of that to me.
If we care about equal opportunity, why not allow everyone to be happy if the 3 parties are OK with it?
The way I read it is the Feds must recognize any marriage but the states do not have to. So as of today you may indeed go to a country that will allow you to marry more than one woman and the Feds will have to recognize that marriage. Or most any other limitation.
May be a way to dodge the inheritance tax. Think about it, mom and dad are married. Son and his wife are married. Son's daughter marries dad and inherits the estate, then her and son have it tax-free when both parents die! I mean, as of today whoever wants to get married can, otherwise it is discriminatory!
The possibilities are endless!
Quote: ewjones080I just never got it. Why the hell should I care if two men want to get married or two women? Really, what difference does it make? What's the reason, if you don't say it's religion.
Mathematically, from a totally selfish point of view, I'm completely in favor of gay men's rights. Every gay, male coupling increases my chances of getting dates with women by way of removal of competition :)
Unfortunately, I guess the math works in reverse regarding lesbians as every coupling takes two women out of my dating pool :(
Quote: AZDuffmanThe issue to me (and most on my side I will wager) is that it is unhealthy for society. Real marriage promotes societal growth and stability, huge reasons it came about in the first place. It promotes more mentally healthy offspring, which promotes that same society. Even childless couples help this out.
I have great respect for you AZ, so I hope you’ll see this as attacking the thought and not the thinker. But the argument above is one I hear thrown around by the pro-hetero crowd and it drives me nuts. I’d even say I hate it.
Because I agree with you. I think a stereotypical man and a stereotypical woman is the best situation. From my own experience, I can see it. I got taught honor, strength, and respect from Pops, I got sympathy, sensitivity, and care from mamma. I think it made me a well rounded individual, the best of both worlds.
But I’m a minority. Many kids don’t get what I did, and the supreme majority of kids that get screwed up from family issues are screwed by a hetero family. Abusive, absent, or alcoholic dads. Addicted, disconnected mothers. Couples that had no business being together, let alone bringing children into the world.
My own wife left for little other reason than she was tired of the life she promised herself to. Tell me, which is worse for my son – being 4 yrs old and having to be bounced between WNY and Fla, going weeks if not months between seeing one or another of his parents, and all the stresses of instability and what may come of it, or him seeing two dudes holding hands at the mall?
The biggest enemies of hetero marriages are those who engage in them, plain and simple. The best thing pro-hetero people can do, if they’re really concerned about hetero marriage, is address the issues within their own culture.
“We have met the enemy and they are ours”
Does the man in the mirror agree with you? Just asking, not busting your balls. Alcoholism and drugs use are not exactly
the best foundation for a marriage !
Quote: AZDuffmanI'd go along with this if I got the same consideration for my choice in keeping firearms.
I imagine Dick Cheney's daughter supports the right to bear arms.
Quote: FaceI have great respect for you AZ, so I hope you’ll see this as attacking the thought and not the thinker.
From you I would not think otherwise, we have been on same and opposing sides here for years and always intellectual.
Quote:Because I agree with you. I think a stereotypical man and a stereotypical woman is the best situation. From my own experience, I can see it. I got taught honor, strength, and respect from Pops, I got sympathy, sensitivity, and care from mamma. I think it made me a well rounded individual, the best of both worlds.
But I’m a minority. Many kids don’t get what I did, and the supreme majority of kids that get screwed up from family issues are screwed by a hetero family. Abusive, absent, or alcoholic dads. Addicted, disconnected mothers. Couples that had no business being together, let alone bringing children into the world.
Well of course most will get screwed up from a hetero family, only about 1.5% at most of the population is homosexual. But we also have a illegitimacy problem of the 1st degree. On this it is statistically safe to say the #1 abuser is mom's live-in BF or new husband. #2 mom will cover for said man most of the time. But this is a digression. I have other problems with the homosexual community.
One is that they assume if a male is "confused" the default is to say he should be taught to embrace his homosexual feelings and never, ever be taught that he can get straightened out (no pun intended.) In CA if your male, minor child is molested and confused you cannot send him to counseling to show he is really straight.
So lets take this a step. Homosexuality is now near outright promoted on TV. Show a gay character in anything but a positive light and the gay-mafia/lobby will threaten you with boycott. Then the boy sees gay males holding hands and kissing in public. Say he is one to be a little later in getting interested in girls. So he sees his guidance person at his school, and now that person is not allowed to suggest he is straight but needs some role models, etc.
This is a dangerous path we are going down, and one that will lead to more and more depressed and drugged-out young folks.
Quote: MoosetonToday is the gayest day in American history. And that makes me sad. Gays will always be the weirdos(or substitute a more pc word instead) of society
Wow.
Quote: MoosetonYeah I said it, I know it doesnt go over well but that's what I truly believe.
Well they call anyone who does not support them a bigot (see the survey) so I guess they have to expect a reaction.
Another contentious public issue decided by nine unelected people in Washington D.C. It seems the law in the U.S. is whatever Justice Kennedy decides that day.
I wonder what use there is for elected legislatures anymore. The founders must be scratching their heads.
Quote: CalderIt seems the law in the U.S. is whatever Justice Kennedy decides that day.
Sadly this is quite true. Has the Supreme Court ever been more politically divided like it is today? They mostly vote with their beliefs, not to uphold the Constitution, imo. Kennedy is probably the largest exception to this.
Quote: tringlomaneSadly this is quite true. Has the Supreme Court ever been more politically divided like it is today? They mostly vote with their beliefs, not to uphold the Constitution, imo. Kennedy is probably the largest exception to this.
Remember in 2008 when Obama said he wanted Justices that would "fight for the little guy" or something along that line? Those of us not in the cult of personality that is his base scratched our heads and asked when it became a judge's job to "fight" for anyone. When a strict constructionist is sent up the media claims they want to bring back segregation. It is not good.
Quote: AZDuffmanFrom you I would not think otherwise, we have been on same and opposing sides here for years and always intellectual.
I was hoping so. But when typing, I find it best to make sure =)
Quote: AZDuffmanOne is that they assume if a male is "confused" the default is to say he should be taught to embrace his homosexual feelings and never, ever be taught that he can get straightened out (no pun intended.) In CA if your male, minor child is molested and confused you cannot send him to counseling to show he is really straight.
So lets take this a step. Homosexuality is now near outright promoted on TV. Show a gay character in anything but a positive light and the gay-mafia/lobby will threaten you with boycott. Then the boy sees gay males holding hands and kissing in public. Say he is one to be a little later in getting interested in girls. So he sees his guidance person at his school, and now that person is not allowed to suggest he is straight but needs some role models, etc.
This is a dangerous path we are going down, and one that will lead to more and more depressed and drugged-out young folks.
Yeah, I get that. I think it’s both a problem with our PC culture (the same uber-PC stuff I hate) as well as a lot of grey area in this issue. We may be looking at entirely different issues; I can at least say I have been. I’ve seen people react in many different ways as a result of abuse. Homosexuality is something I could envision being one of the results, and I’d hear an argument or evidence that it is. If so, yes, I think there should be an avenue available to deal with it, both without hyper PC-ism screaming hate and without government or group forcing of the issue. But that wasn’t and isn’t what I typically have in my mind when arguing this issue.
My earliest memory of a gay male came at the age of about 7 or 8 and he was probably 6; it was before I even knew what gay was. Looking back, it’s clear that he was gay from the jump. He came from an affluent family, a respectable family, a proper, solid, good family. He with no doubt in my mind was simply born that way. He went on to be a proper, respectable young man and is now a proper, respectable adult. He’s not the movie stereotype, drugged out man-whore who parades around in panties to illicit shock, he’s just a guy that’s perhaps a little too dainty and a little too hygienic to fit in with all the country bumpkins and rough cut farmers that surround him. He’s kind, he’s very wise; he just happens to appreciate plays more than playoffs.
Whenever I argue for gay rights, it is he who I have in my mind representing the Gay Man. Is he the minority? I dunno. But he is the one and only gay person I’ve known since the way-back, and it’s shown me that gayness is or at least can be just a genetic difference that has no bearing on one’s character. If my support of his culture allows the despicable members to profit, so be it. I’d rather it be that way than punishing good people over the actions of a few.
Quote: NareedSo the poll is: how do you feel about it?
Where's the "don't care" option? And for that matter a meaningful thread title would be appreciated. I wouldn't have even bothered opening this if it was about something that matters as little as this.
Quote: Face
Whenever I argue for gay rights, it is he who I have in my mind representing the Gay Man. Is he the minority? I dunno. But he is the one and only gay person I’ve known since the way-back, and it’s shown me that gayness is or at least can be just a genetic difference that has no bearing on one’s character. If my support of his culture allows the despicable members to profit, so be it. I’d rather it be that way than punishing good people over the actions of a few.
This is an interesting point. You have guys like this, but what you see is the gay-pride whackadoodles dressed in drag, flowers in their ass, basically making jerks out of themselves as the "spokesmen" for the gay movement. You hear demands to keep bath houses and glory holes open. But do you ever hear any criticism of the ones acting like jerks? Never.
The only gay behavior I can remember being criticized recently is Sandusky and maybe the Catholic Priests. Some have sued in CA to force employers not to "hide" guys who choose to wear a dress or female clothes to work, regardless of the effect on business. Others sue to allow high school boys who "identify female" to use the girl's locker room.
When those doing these things are not called out I assume this is all OK with the gay movement. And their "we just want to live a normal life" line is shown to be bunk, they want to force acceptance. They then call those who do not accept and support them bigots. And people ask why I feel the way I do.
I was quite upset about it for a couple of months, but once I was aware, I began to be included in many things I didn't even know were going on; dancing, parties, nightclubbing (it was the height of the disco era, and gay was newly cool pre-AIDS). A huge eye-opener, spending several years in the life: so much sadness masquerading as joy in so many; so many others thrilled to be living honestly for the first time.
And I am really, truly proud that my country has changed so much in such a short time culturally that acceptance continues to grow. Not so much, I think, for the physical side of it; those of us who are straight (at least me and my close friends who are) are still pretty squeamish about that. But the idea that people should be themselves, loving who they love with less fear every day - this is the America I want to live in. If a person is not going to be my intimate partner, it doesn't matter to me who they ARE with; color, creed, sexual orientation are all matters for them and their partner, and not for me to judge.
Got serious on ya, didn't I? Well, I can tell you that gays tell the best, funniest gay jokes by far. What I can't do is tell any of them in here. But it's just one of the surprising things you might find out if you looked at them first as people.
As to the group marriage thing? Great idea! I'd be thrilled to find the right men for that. Think it'll be a while (read:never) before that gains acceptance in the USA, but there are ways around that. Ask Warren Buffett; he was in one for about 30 years, though not in the legal sense.
Times in this generation are so much different than my own generation 30 years ago. I had several friends in high school who turned out to be gay. Today, they would be "out" in high school. I feel horrible for the guilt and mixed emotions they must have gone through trying to 'look' normal in high school and being subject to the taunting and bullying they experienced because they are different. The attitude towards GBL teenagers has changed so much. And I look at lifestyles of many many men and women that I know who are gay or lesbian, and NONE of them fit in the stereotype of man-whore or woman-whore. They are generally caring, thoughtful, and intelligent human beings living normal lives (except they have or do not have a long term partner) and are just being who they are. They love the people of the same sex, just as I love women. And there's very little that they can do about it. It's not a choice for them -- it's who they are.
Yep, a small segment of the gay population are whores, but the same is true with the heterosexual population. We just accept the heterosexual sexuality in the late teen years and early 20s as normal.
And what I can tell you is that children need stability, love and role-modelling from an adult. Whether that adult is gay or straight doesn't matter. Gay parents are just as likely to screw up their kids as heterosexual parents. Parents of all stripes participate in destructive behaviour, be it drug abuse, alcoholism, overworking, having an affair, abuse, yelling, disrespect, etc. It doesn't matter if they are gay or not.
And if for some reason it comes to be that the child of gay parents becomes gay, so be it. Kids today are testing their sexuality (including my own) with both sexes, just like most people did (including me). They will turn out naturally as who they are and will be happier for it. They will gravitate towards what feels sexually right to them.
They are entitled to live their own life, despite what a few controversial passages in the bible says.
What gay people are asking for (and are now entitled to according to the Feds) is recognition to have the ability to claim as married people on tax returns and other federal benefits.
And for those of you who are complaining about SCOTUS, SCOTUS also gave you George W. Bush for 8 years. That 5-4 decision changed the direction of the country forever.
Since I am in the distinct minority please feel free to abuse me at will.
And GO!