Decision on Prop 8 pending

[MobBoss]

So you chose to be straight? If that is so, i ask you to try to change your sexual orientation to that of a homosexual. Come back when you do this and prove your views correct otherwise stop spouting a blatant mistruth.

Do you really doubt that there are indeed people that have done this?

 

[useless]

Jews had it worse as then the blacks thus they do not deserve the same rights as white people and should shut up.

 

[MobBoss]

Jews had it worse as then the blacks thus they do not deserve the same rights as white people and should shut up. I am using his logic.

I think your understanding and comprehension of my 'logic' is extremely flawed.

 

[CaptainF]

Out of all the things so called small-government conservatives could gripe about, THIS is what they focus their fervor on?

Today's family-values republicans must be doing it for the lulz. Everyone else is certainly laughing at them and their thinly veiled arrogance.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Mobby, do you really think people choose to be gay?

 

[MobBoss]

Out of all the things so called small-government conservatives could gripe about, THIS is what they focus their fervor on?

Today's family-values republicans must be doing it for the lulz. Everyone else is certainly laughing at them and their thinly veiled arrogance.

Again, I point out the simple, SIMPLE, fact that people apparently dont want to recognize. Prop 8 would not have passed solely with just conservatives voting for it in California. Someone needs to stop kidding themselves that this is some kind of conservative issue. Its backed by a bit more than just that.

 

[useless]

Do you really doubt that there are indeed people that have done this?

I'm waiting Mob. You make it sound so simple but the reality is you really have no idea of what you're talking about. Sexuality is an agonising topic and you insult me personally with your simplistic and politically backed view on it. You think gay people choose to be: ostracised by society , insulted, looked down upon others and risk abandonment by their family if they find out? Do you have any idea or understanding?

 

[emzie]

The big difference there was that those in favor of racial civil rights at that time were a decided majority....those opposed a minority.

Thats simply not the case right here and now. In fact, its the opposite.



No, I dont think its a civil rights issue because there is no 'right' to marriage that I know of in the consitution. I think the closest thing that comes to that is 'pursuit of happiness' with emphasis on 'pursuit'.

If there's no right to marriage, please explain why yours should be recognized.

 

[sumit1207]

The big difference there was that those in favor of racial civil rights at that time were a decided majority....those opposed a minority.

Thats simply not the case right here and now. In fact, its the opposite.

In 1968, the year after Loving v. Virginia, Gallup shows that 73% of Americans opposed miscegenation. A decade before it, 94%! This is soooo much more backwards compared to recent polling about gay marriage.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/28417/most-americans-approve-interracial-marriages.aspx

It shows that the majority began to favor interracial marriage in 1990, three decades after it was completely legalized. The majority in favor of gay marriage is right around the corner... It's definitely time.

 

[MobBoss]

Mobby, do you really think people choose to be gay?

I knew a kid in college that said he did...he had been basically asexual in high school, and experimented in college and said he made a cognizant choice in regards to his sexuality. He was one of several gay friends my wife and I had when we were in college and still quite liberal. Do I think that the norm? No. In fact, its probably very uncommon if not outright rare. But it did convince me that some people absolutely do make a concious decision in regards to their sexuality.

If there's no right to marriage, please explain why yours should be recognized.

Well, there is no right to drive either, so tell me why you should get to. Or, for example, we dont allow siblings to marry do we? Would you argue that they have a right to?

 

[useless]

Anecdotal evidence? Pff.

Ah the old "IF GAYS CAN MARRY WHAT MARRYING ANIMALS/COUSINS?". Completely ridiculous and the hallmark of an intolerant person. Keep spouting those old arguments!

 

[MobBoss]

I'm waiting Mob. You make it sound so simple but the reality is you really have no idea of what you're talking about. Sexuality is an agonising topic and you insult me personally with your simplistic and politically backed view on it. You think gay people choose to be: ostracised by society , insulted, looked down upon others and risk abandonment by their family if they find out? Do you have any idea or understanding? You are the problem, not the homosexuals.

Actually, if I am not mistaken, there is a national group of former homosexuals that have made a choice to be heterosexual instead. Cant google it right now, but if I have time later, and you cant find it, maybe I will look it up for you, just to prove the point. Plenty of others who go through life, marry have kids, get divorced 20 or 30 years down the road, and then embrace the gay lifestyle. If you didnt notice, those are sexuality choices being made right there.

I dont expect you to actually like the fact that sexuality can indeed be a choice for some people. But I would appreciate you not calling me a 'problem' either. Its not nice.

 

[useless]

Strange how the vast majority of them are christian. Degaying totally works. Closeted people marry to avoid the stigma of being gay and to prove they aren't "gay". But those that are closeted find it difficult to deny their true sexuality, in fact many anti-gay politicians have been caught with same sex prostitutes.

 

[emzie]

Well, there is no right to drive either, so tell me why you should get to. Or, for example, we dont allow siblings to marry do we? Would you argue that they have a right to?

I've proven myself capable of operating a motor vehicle to the state of Ohio's requirements. Thus, they licence me to drive. The state of Ohio doesn't have any group-based discriminatory requirements for licensing.

Now unless you wish to argue marriage is primarily a reproduction license, then I really don't see your point.

 

[MobBoss]

Strange how the vast majority of them are christian.

In proving the point of choice in sexuality, does it matter?

Degaying totally works. Closeted people marry to avoid the stigma of being gay and to prove they aren't "gay". But those that are closeted find it difficult to deny their true sexuality, in fact many anti-gay politicians have been caught with same sex prostitutes.

It seems you are apparently having a hard time accepting the fact that some people do view their sexuality as a choice.

And yes you are part of the problem because your vies are the type that fuel the intolerance and lies spread about homosexuality.

I asked nice. Now stop.

 

[MobBoss]

I've proven myself capable of operating a motor vehicle to the state of Ohio's requirements. Thus, they licence me to drive. The state of Ohio doesn't have any group-based discriminatory requirements for licensing.

Really? What about blind people? They are a group, arent they?

Now unless you wish to argue marriage is primarily a reproduction license, then I really don't see your point.

Nice dodge on the sibling question. Care to try again? And no, I dont view marriage as a reproduction license. I just want to see how far you are willing to follow your logic path to. If everyone has a right to marry, what right do we have to forbid siblings from marrying each other?

 

[useless]

Do you agree that people can be "de-gayed"?

Just because people view it as such does not make it true, many homophobes believe homosexuals recruit young children, does that therefore render it true?

 

[emzie]

Really? What about blind people? They are a group, arent they?

You know what I mean.

Nice dodge on the sibling question. Care to try again? And no, I dont view marriage as a reproduction license. I just want to see how far you are willing to follow your logic path to. If everyone has a right to marry, what right do we have to forbid siblings from marrying each other?

Personally, I don't care what two adults do as long as what they are doing is consensual.

However, your argument is a strawman, and I'm not going to bother with it unless you show some statistics on the rate of siblings in romantic relationships, not merely a sexual lust thing (which is quite more common than some people may realize).

 

[bhsup]

you can literally replace homosexual marriage with inter-racial marriage or black rights and the argument would still be the same from those who oppose it

No, you cannot, not at all. It isn't in any way the same thing. You're trying to compare a choice with genetic coding. IT isn't at all the same thing and to be honest to try to to say they are the same thing is like trying to say oil and water are the same thing.

 

[El_Machinae]

No it wont. It will just be that way until the next argument is made to redefine it even further....i.e polygamy and onwards.

Sigh. Yes, there will be other civil rights issues after this one is settled. The fact that there are other civil rights issues that are unsettled does not change the fact that equality between homosexual marriages and heterosexual marriages can happen through redefining marriage.

Actually, in California, where all this is coming from, they absolutely did. Remember, they approved civil unions with equal rights years ago.

Nothing significant has changed, legally, since you were last lead patiently to the realization that Californian marriages are not equal in rights to Californian homosexual civil unions. And so, redefining marriage continues to be a viable step in pressing for equality in marriages.