The federal marriage ammendent

[Capslock]

Actually, regarding matters of equal rights and justice, NOBODY's opinion should matter. The Constitution enshrines our basic human rights, and shields them from the tryanny of the majority, and may only be ammended by a Constitutional ammendment, which is why we're going throught the circus we are right now.

Until such time as an ammendment is passed, it would be totally appropriate for the courts to mandate legal gay marriage in all 50 states immediately. The rights of citizens of the US are not subject to simple votes.

Capslock

 

[Wesley]

Quote[/b] ]I find it hilarious that this is maybe your 4th or 5th reply about my question, and you STILL refuse to answer it!

I answered it. I told you that I don't know the answer, and that you need to give the answer so that we can answer it the next time you ask.

 

[Finch]

While it may happen with tyour grandmas birds it is erroronious to assume all birds are like that. My cordon bleus males fight vicoulsly if put in the same cage. Male birds very oftetn set up territorys and exclude all other males.


Often when two males are in the same cage, they may seem to be couplating but there is no cocal contact. It is a dominance display, with one bird wanting to be literaly 'on top.' the same thing has happened in my presence, and both birds involved were straight as arrows. The display does not mean their gay

 

[Wesley]

All the answers that aren't answered the way you want them to be answered(oh but that would mean all of them).

 

[scottychaos]

Quote[/b] (Wesley @ July 14 2004,11:14)]

Quote[/b] ]I find it hilarious that this is maybe your 4th or 5th reply about my question, and you STILL refuse to answer it!

I answered it.  I told you that I don't know the answer, and that you need to give the answer so that we can answer it the next time you ask.

Wesley,
thats fine!
but I wasnt talking to you, I was talking to Buckeye..
sorry if that wasnt clear.

Quote[/b] ]I answered it.  I told you that I don't know the answer, and that you need to give the answer so that we can answer it the next time you ask.

So if I answer it, that means you will answer it next time I ask?
ok, I have answered, im not sure what you mean by "so that we can answer it the next time you ask"
I have asked many times! there have been plenty of "next times I ask"..
so far, you are the only one to actually answer..
your answer is "I dont know"..
thats cool!  

thats a fine answer!
I can accept that..
Scot

 

[Wesley]

The only reason I have answered with that, is because all other answers you have been given aren't acceptable.

 

[Finch]

Wesly --->

 

[Wesley]

Sorry, here it is again. It was a bit confusing even to me who wrote it

The only reason I said I don't know, is because you won't accept any of the other answers that we have given you.

 

[Casper]

Quote[/b] (Starman @ July 14 2004,3:18)]

Quote[/b] (Casper @ July 14 2004,2:36)]Your arguement= Homosexuality can lead to worse things such as pedophyle, public nudity and the fall of empires.


My arguement= Religion can lead to worse things such as murder, terrorism and idiots flying planes into buildings.

What the ####?! Why can homesexuality lead to these things?!
Why is being gay so bad?! I have not seen anything more stupid in my life, They are people just like us for God sake!




True, religion does lead to those things. You see, most terroris groups are religious, the palastinians are saying:
"We shall not rest untill every isrealy is dead."
Why do they say that? Because iths their religion to
kill every isrealy!

Quote[/b] ]What the ####?! Why can homesexuality lead to these things?!
Why is being gay so bad?! I have not seen anything more stupid in my life, They are people just like us for God sake!

Hold your horses there kemo-sabi. I was quoting someone else, those where not my words. I was trying to prove how ignorent the statements where.

 

[Casper]

Quote[/b] ]You're wrong on this. People who do this stuff are not following their religion. They are terrorists.

EXACTLY. So, on the flip side of the coin saying the legalizing gay marriage will lead to pedophlyia and incest and all the other things said is EQUALLY AS IGNORENT.

Quote[/b] ]The problem with this is the fact that the first amendment says we have freedom of religion. I don't see where it says anything in the constitution about homosexual marriage being a freedom.

Hot darn, we are really getting places now, once again EXACTLY. That same first amendment you just spoke of says that the gov't CAN NOT PASS LAWS BASED ON RELIGIOUS REASONS.

Can't have it both ways buddy.

 

[scottychaos]

Quote[/b] (Wesley @ July 14 2004,11:25)]Sorry,  here it is again.  It was a bit confusing even to me who wrote it

The only reason I said I don't know, is because you won't accept any of the other answers that we have given you.

Wesley,
no one has given an answer to the actual question being asked! (except you.. "I dont know")
the question is "How will gay marriage effect YOU personally"
I have recieved all kinds of "answers" about stuff it *might* lead to, or about ancient civilizations..(that one is *really* relevent to the question!
or about all kinds of other unrelated stuff..
but no one has given me a direct answer to the actual question being asked!
its like im asking "what is 2+2?"
and people reply with "ancient civilizations have fallen when math questions began to be asked"

no one has answed yet except you..you answered, and I have fully accepted that answer..
If I could only get some other real answers, that are actually based on reality and give a real answer to how it will effect someone personally, I might accept that too!
but so far, only one answer has been given, and I did accept it..
no others have yet been provided..
Scot

 

[Casper]

Quote[/b] ]By banning religion as a whole, you are saying that America should become a comunist country. That destroys all free thought.

Wesley, PLEASE comment on the entire statement instead of picking the one line out and using it out of context. I simply used the same arguement for banning religion that some on here have used for banning gay marriage.

Why doesn't it work both ways? Why must we selectivly use the constitution only when it fits our needs? I'm not really suggesting we ban religion, I am just trying to show you exactly how silly some of these arguements are.

 

[elarwhis]

I've been reading this topic over the past several days and I would like to comment.

So far in this discussion, the suggestion that the legalization of gay marriage could lead to other things like pedophilia, polygamy, etc. has generally been dismissed as being absurd. Let me point out this: 50 years ago, or even more recently, people would be shocked at the idea of legalizing gay marriage. Now many people deem this idea as socially acceptable. 50 years from now, the things that are generally accepted will have changed so much that things like pedophilia, polygamy, etc. that people may be deemed acceptable. One example of what is and isn't acceptable now and in the past can be seen in the media. The movies that are rated PG-13 today would have been rated R in the early 90's. The same thing goes for tv. Things that were censored several years ago are allowed now.

So, basically, my point is that just because pedophila, etc. is now looked upon as something loathsome, doesn't mean that it will be in the future.

I hope I've gotten my point across clearly.

And, by the way, I agree with wesley, zak, buckeye.

 

[Capslock]

How exactly would gay marriage lead to pedophilia but straight marriage wouldn't? What's the logical progression there?

Incidentally, the same arguement was used not too long ago about interracial marriage, which was also banned. Nobody whines about "redefining marriage" in that case nowadays, but they sure did then. Incidentally, it was the courts then, too, that made the call.

Capslock

 

[phlitrapguy]

Not to mention statistically, pedophilia and molestation are more likely among straights than gays. Hello... liking the same sex has NOTHING to do with liking children or other random weird things.

Man/woman
man/man
woman/woman

Nothing in there says CHILDREN

Ugh.

I'm staying out of this one I think.

 

[superimposedhope]

Elarwhis, I give you credit that many social things change but, the thing is that 1) It is generally not accepted by any that sex with anything outside of the human race is OK.
2) While large age gaps are one thing, it is quite another to be attracted to someone physically and mentally immature. To be attracted to children is a perversion and shows some kind of defficiency in mental capability, socially and otherwise.
Having sex and/or a relationship with a consenting adult whithin your maturity and social level is normal. The same with a socially, mentally and physically imature individual is not normal. Everyone has need for a partner to relate life and experiences with regardless of gender, but to say that "allowing" gay marriages COULD lead to acceptance of perverse attractions is totally unfounded. If an adult is attracted to child it shows that the person either has a distorted veiw of sex or is at the same mental wavelenghth, if the last is the case then like a child the person doesn't have the mental maturity to be carring on relationships, if its the first then they arein capable of any normal relationships anyways.

Joe

 

[Capslock]

A child is not capable of informed consent to have sex. This is why it's ALWAYS wrong. And this is why it's totally unrelated to gay marriage, which is only among consenting adults.

This critical difference is why there is no "slippery slope" arguement that is applicable.

Capslock

 

[rubrarubra]

Scot, if you will read my last post, I pointed out that these things affect all of society. Our kids could be taught that what is immoral is okay, our whole world would bombard us even more with temptations to fall into an immoral lifestyle.

May I remind you all, that its not like the gay "marriage" issue is the first step down the slippery slope. It started with legalizing no fault divorce and abortion. These seem normal now, so now we have a new issue to discuss. When gay "marriage" seems normal, people will be fighting for something even worse. This would not necessarily be pedophilia; more likely something such as incest.

Peter

 

[Clint]

get with the times , man! you can't live in the past!

your religion is all about peace and love , but right now your pretty much standing agianst it.


you can't make laws based on any religion, no even christianity, so making a law that says gay's can't get married is absurd because theres no reason for it (other than religion, which no one cares about in politics). however, amending the constitution and redefininf "marriage" is perfectly acceptable because theres no reason not to, other than religion. and remember, no one cares about religion in politics.


being gay has nothing to do with having sex kids/relatives/animals/etc. and like i said earlier and someone said recently, most people who do that are STRAIGHT.

 

[buckeye]

Quote[/b] ]Oh, and buckeye, the ammendment lost 48-50, not 50-48. It didn't even get a simple majority, much less the 60% it needed.

Thanks for pointing this out Capslock. I simply misread it.

Quote[/b] ]well..if my opinion shouldnt influence laws, and your opinion shouldnt influence laws, then I guess we both should get what we want!
Gay marriage will become legal, and gay marriage will not become legal..
great thinking!!
thanks for showing me the error of my ways..your way makes so much sense,
we will just have NO opinions effect any laws! (or was it ALL laws are based on opinions? im not sure..I think you said both..)

Ok, you told me, and I quote, "why should YOUR OPINION become LAW?? there is no reason at all.." Alright, so you just asked me why should my opinion become law. And then you said that there is no reason for my opinion to become law at all. Since you said this to me I decided to throw the question back to you and I asked you "why should your opinion become law?" You didn't answer this question and instead made a bunch of snotty, sarcastic remarks at me. After I asked you that question I then began to talk about how pretty much every law we have is based on opinion. I didn't say that neither of our opinions should affect law or any of the other stuff you wrote. Since you told me my opinion was wrong and should not become a law I then asked you to tell me what makes you so sure that your opinion is right and should become law.

Quote[/b] ]I find it hilarious that this is maybe your 4th or 5th reply about my question, and you STILL refuse to answer it!

I've given many other answers but here's yet another. It will affect me personally if homosexual marriage is allowed because I will have to sit back and realize that America has once again screwed up and made sinful behavior law. There. That's my answer. I'm sure you won't accept this answer just like the countless others, but honestly I don't really care. I'm tired of the sarcastic remarks and the lack of respect you give to people with different beliefs than you. And so with that, the debate between you and me is over.


-buckeye