It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

More than $83 million spent on Prop 8

page: 8
17
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaNutter

Answer me one question... how is this not a humans rights/equal rights issue? Are you saying that homosexuals are not human or they don't deserve equal rights? Please... just answer me that one question, straight forward, to the best of your ability.


[edit on 4-2-2009 by ImaNutter]


1) Sure Homosexuals are human and yes they should have equal rights THATS why they are allowed to marry someone of the opposite sex JUST LIKE THE REST OF US ! YOU GET THAT NOW! is is the same rules that apply to ALL of us ! so it isn't an eqal rights issue. Trying to shoe horn us into accepting this as a sexual preference to mean a class distinction like race is why this argument falls flat.




You still didn't explain why Christians are allowed to break the rules but homosexuals aren't. God is Love.


2) Because they are not allowed. That doesn't mean they don't break em and as for homosexuals breaking them in marriage, read 1 again

ALL 13 OF BAD ARGUMENTS Asked and answered
www.abovetopsecret.com...




[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]




posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Here is your coherant argument smart guy andf if you would read the thread for once you would know that I have already addressed these yes IGNORANT arguments for the umpteenth time

12 arguments and ALL of them have yet to be refuted

Read em and weep


Well, actually you've addressed nothing, all you've done is cut-and-paste tired old arguments from other, readily available sources. If you're not capable of doing your own thinking, there's really not much reason to debate with you.

As for refuting those arguments, they all rely on assumptions, logical fallacies, and exceedingly narrow viewpoints. Perhaps the biggest howler in that group is the one that relies on a statement from Jesse Jackson as some sort of bedrock proof.

Just for fun, though, let's take a quick stab at this one:




Bad argument No. 1
"Gay marriage is a basic human right."
There are huge differences between constitutional rights with few restrictions (such as the rights to life or free speech) and other rights with important restrictions, which do not carry the right of universal access. We already recognize that not everyone has the right to enlist in the army, but that one must be of the proper age, physical condition, citizenship, and philosophy—anarchists and pacifists need not apply. We also agree that certain persons do not have the right to marriage—children, multiple partners, family members, and those already married.



So marriage is equatable to enlisting in the army? Should people getting married also be subjected to age limits, weight limits, and political litmus tests before being wed?

To the contrary, the army has use for women, the disabled, and even has duties suitable for pacifists. Not everyone has the right to suit up with infantry and head for the front lines, but that's because of the physical expectations that come with that duty. I'm not sure what part of marriage requires 30 pushups in 60 seconds, or the ability to carry a 40 pound pack on a 5 mile hike. Can you enlighten me?

As for the concept of "restrictions", civil rights are only restricted in cases that would cause undue harm or would endanger others. The classic example of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, for example. Or the inability to run some annoying asshole off the road for cutting you off.

Marriage is a social contract available to any consenting adult. Prisoners on death row can be married. Almost any two drunks on the Las Vegas strip can get married at any hour of the day. Allowing two women to marry has zero effect on the lives of the rest of the citizenry. There's nothing that needs to be restricted, because there is no net negative effect.

Not one of your silly arguments puts forward any negative impact (except for one debunked study) that gay marriage poses to society at large. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch. You've listed thirteen reasons why people don't like gay marriage, but not a single one provides any legal basis to deny it.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi


You guys bring up well known Christians that have screwed up in their Christian walk as if being a Christian is an easy thing to do.

IT ISN'T!

In fact YOU should EXPECT Christians, like you should expect ALL mankind to screw up!

Since when did you or anyone else think Christians were perfect?

Ill give you a clue,

THEY AREN'T PERFECT!

When God gave moses the ten commandments, it was the law and it proves to us that man can't even follow ten much less alll those man has made for himself.

It was to show us we can't do it on our own and IF we could, then who needs a savior?



Originally posted by ImaNutter

You still didn't explain why Christians are allowed to break the rules but homosexuals aren't. God is Love.



Where does this say that Christians are allowed to break the rules? To me it looks like he is saying just the opposite. The rules are hard to follow, impossible to keep perfectly, by ALL people.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by detroitslim


So marriage is equatable to enlisting in the army? Should people getting married also be subjected to age limits, weight limits, and political litmus tests before being wed?

To the contrary, the army has use for women, the disabled, and even has duties suitable for pacifists. Not everyone has the right to suit up with infantry and head for the front lines, but that's because of the physical expectations that come with that duty. I'm not sure what part of marriage requires 30 pushups in 60 seconds, or the ability to carry a 40 pound pack on a 5 mile hike. Can you enlighten me?

As for the concept of "restrictions", civil rights are only restricted in cases that would cause undue harm or would endanger others. The classic example of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, for example. Or the inability to run some annoying asshole off the road for cutting you off.

Marriage is a social contract available to any consenting adult. Prisoners on death row can be married. Almost any two drunks on the Las Vegas strip can get married at any hour of the day. Allowing two women to marry has zero effect on the lives of the rest of the citizenry. There's nothing that needs to be restricted, because there is no net negative effect.

Not one of your silly arguments puts forward any negative impact (except for one debunked study) that gay marriage poses to society at large. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch. You've listed thirteen reasons why people don't like gay marriage, but not a single one provides any legal basis to deny it.


You contradict all that data with a crap load of rhetoric and thats it when all that I listed are facts and all 13 of those arguments are NOT logical fallacies and it doesn't matter where they came from and the logical fallacy that they don't apply because someone else thought of them is hysterically desperate. Even for you.

Just because you think you know about the inductive protocols to logical fallacy in critical thinking means your assumptions that this is always about sepration powers or homophobia!

Get a life guy HOWS THIS FOR AN ANSWER

IT's AGAINST THE LAW!

YOU DON'T LIKE IT

TUFF!



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by detroitslim

Originally posted by Aermacchi


Learn the constitution for pete's sake

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]



I would advise you to study up on the constitution as well. My draft of the constitution has a preamble declaring all men are created equal, and have inalienble rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.



However, you left this part out:

"THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS"
And it does not guarantee happiness, just the pursuit of it.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:31 PM
link   
It is easy people to vote no because they are just simply disgusted at something...but I guarantee you that if you have a 30 minute talk about individual rights and what these people ever done to harm you, 90% of them would change their mind.

The people who voted no against this proposition are not bad people. Even I would have said no to something such as gay marriage until I came to a website like ATS and realized that rights are ever so important and that I was the one being selfish.

This needs to be done at one time though. To legalize the marriage of gays only in certain areas would flood those spots with gays. Now, as a straight male so still supports gay marriage, I would want to move out of such an area if all my neighbors were like that. So, legalize it nationally all at the same time, and we have the gay and straight populations in the same exact spots as before, with no true changes to living style.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by UltraAgentGirl

Originally posted by detroitslim

Originally posted by Aermacchi


Learn the constitution for pete's sake

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Aermacchi]



I would advise you to study up on the constitution as well. My draft of the constitution has a preamble declaring all men are created equal, and have inalienble rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.



However, you left this part out:

"THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS"
And it does not guarantee happiness, just the pursuit of it.


Ain't THAT the truth. They think what ever feels good should be a Government entitlement! Ill be damned if Ill pay taxes on anything having to do with that garbage including teaching the tolerance of it because the more they bitch the more intolerant I have become. I already mentioned I had been for gays getting married but seeing them shoving around people in their silly activism and reading about "bashback" the little gay terrorists they are, NEVER AGAIN will I even consider this idea ever.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by FritosBBQTwist
It is easy people to vote no because they are just simply disgusted at something...but I guarantee you that if you have a 30 minute talk about individual rights and what these people ever done to harm you, 90% of them would change their mind.

The people who voted no against this proposition are not bad people. Even I would have said no to something such as gay marriage until I came to a website like ATS and realized that rights are ever so important and that I was the one being selfish.

This needs to be done at one time though. To legalize the marriage of gays only in certain areas would flood those spots with gays. Now, as a straight male so still supports gay marriage, I would want to move out of such an area if all my neighbors were like that. So, legalize it nationally all at the same time, and we have the gay and straight populations in the same exact spots as before, with no true changes to living style.


Yep this is what happened in the state of Mass. Ya know what they did in the state of arizona? They made it a state constitutional statute NEVER to bring this argument up again and I applaud that too

If every state follows Az it would stay like those who want it the definition of marriage to always mean what it was first intended to mean ONE WOMAN ONE MAN to Marry one in flesh like the Church is the Bride of Christ they are one in that symbiotic relationship flesh host to a spiritual God and I don't think he meant the way Gays do it!

That day that brings about life with a soul is the day Ill reconsider until then BACK OFF WHAT IS BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN!



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Get a life guy HOWS THIS FOR AN ANSWER

IT's AGAINST THE LAW!

YOU DON'T LIKE IT

TUFF!



Ah, the last refuge of the scoundrel. When there is no reason in your arsenal, all that's left is name-calling.


Aermacchi, you are the absolute embodiment of the reasons I support gay marriage. You attack it with rancor, instead of logic, compassion, or reason. Then you would dictate how others live their lives by the terms of your religion.


@FritoBBQ - very nicely said, and I agree with you 100%.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by detroitslim

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Get a life guy HOWS THIS FOR AN ANSWER

IT's AGAINST THE LAW!

YOU DON'T LIKE IT

TUFF!



Ah, the last refuge of the scoundrel. When there is no reason in your arsenal, all that's left is name-calling.


Aermacchi, you are the absolute embodiment of the reasons I support gay marriage. You attack it with rancor, instead of logic, compassion, or reason. Then you would dictate how others live their lives by the terms of your religion.



Where is the name calling? All I see is a statement of fact....it IS against the law.

Oh, and Aermacchi's posts ARE filled with logic, compassion and reason, his opinion just happens to be the opposite of yours.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by detroitslim

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Get a life guy HOWS THIS FOR AN ANSWER

IT's AGAINST THE LAW!

YOU DON'T LIKE IT

TUFF!



Ah, the last refuge of the scoundrel. When there is no reason in your arsenal, all that's left is name-calling.


Aermacchi, you are the absolute embodiment of the reasons I support gay marriage. You attack it with rancor, instead of logic, compassion, or reason. Then you would dictate how others live their lives by the terms of your religion.


@FritoBBQ - very nicely said, and I agree with you 100%.


You only contradict logic guy while you know nothing about it and name calling I don't see any there. All I see is the blunt facts that if you don't like the way I said it

TOO BAD!

That means I don't give a ratz azz what you think.

If you think at all



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 





This is about a unique partnership and since the dawn of religion it has been celebrated for its uniqueness as it is the ONLY kind of relationship that requires a further committment to the very life that this and only this kind of sex with this kind of relationship can bring about.


So the nitty gritty with you is the claim that marriage or cohabitation is somehow only defined by you religion ?

Not everyone is religious my friend, not everyone shares your beliefs but everyone is entitled to family and marriage and cohabitation are about family and nothing to do with sex.

Isn't marriage defined by love, care, and attachment ? Isn't marriage extending this family ?

Why would you deny someone love,care and attachment just because of the way they have sex ?


Would you refuse to adopt one of a pair of twins because he or she was gay, why would you deny one love care and attachment ?

If you had a child that you knew would turn out to be gay would you deny it love? Would you deny your attachment to her ? Would you deny him care ?
Of course you wouldn't so why would you deny it someone else ?

These people are human beings (granted some may act extreme) they just want to be family, their not asking to move into your family and are not asking to worship your god.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by UltraAgentGirl

Oh, and Aermacchi's posts ARE filled with logic, compassion and reason, his opinion just happens to be the opposite of yours.


Yes. The flawless logic & reason of "because that's the way it's supposed to be!" is just outstanding. Since most of these "arguments (if you could even call them that)" sprout from religion, I find little point in debating this. They will not be swayed regardless of what argument is made or what evidence is presented.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Why do you think Christians are not acting Christ like? I'm curious. Christ tought against sexual immorality. So why would my opposition to gay marriage by un Christ like? The Bible (God's word)(Christ is God) says that homosexuality is wrong. The Bible says that a man leaves his mother and father and cleaves unto his wife and they become one. How is being anti-gay marriage un Christ like?
True Jesus tought love, but not acceptance. He said " Hate not the sinner, yet despise the sin"



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by detroitslim
 


I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one. Marriage is a union bound by God. It is a religious ceremony. If gay people just want benefits, gay unions should suffice. God will not ordain a gay marriage. That's pretty much cut and dry. If you don't believe in God then have yourself a union and don't attack the sanctity of marriage.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 

OK- Jesus never said a single word against gay marriage. Period.

All this religion has absolutlely no bearing on the law and states rights and equal rights.

The natural argument about sex is false, several other mammals practice homosexuality including but not limited to apes, dolphins, rabbits, lion, moose..

The bottom line here is it was a close vote in one stae on a very poorly written confusing law. Ca will reverse Prop 8 and several other states will follow within the next year or two.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Aermacchi
 


You are selfish.

They do no harm to you. AT ALL. Not your property or your own self-being. Maybe if we all learned to love each other we would not have to worry about going through bad neighborhoods? If we all loved each other as family, we could walk anywhere we want not having to worry about the poverty that envelops you.

A gay couple should not ruin your happiness. A gay couple does NO harm to you. Stop infringing your own thoughts onto others.

Do unto your neighbor as you wish they do unto you. You are being disrespectful and denying basic rights. You want the same to happen to you?

I have made my fair share of jokes. I have done my discrimination. Guess what? They have every right to do the same as me if they wish. I personally do not plan on surrounding myself by gay couples but DAMN, give them some respect as a human being, because last time I checked I am sure they respect you at least.

Why can you not let them be happy? The problem I have with people nowadays is that no matter little (or none at all) someone else's decision affects them, they still refuse to see their side.

I hate with equality being the foundation for drawing the lines. You hate for self-glory.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


The definition of marriage has been distorted so much lately...

Keep in mind Jesus is a biblical image. His ideas do not relate to now.

The founding fathers of the USA are thought to be GREAT people...yet most of them were also racists. Thank god for the amendment process.

I almost feel like the only argument you can give against gay-marriage is bible text when it is clear that you have a personal problem with it. If you want to keep the sanctions of marriage to the teachings of Christianity then explain to me the divorce rate. Surely that is "against" marriage?

To note, I think organized religion is a joke along with literal interpretation of ancient texts. You clinging to quotes so old seems like you would rather live in the past then advancing to the future.

[edit on 4-2-2009 by FritosBBQTwist]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by FritosBBQTwist
 


Think as you will. Just keep in mind that you are on a public board calling the largest religion on the planet a joke. You are attacking people's religion here. That in mind, you may want to back off the organized religion is a joke crap.
I have yet to give my personal opinion on here about anyone's religion or sexuality. I am a Christian. In other words, I believe in Jesus the Christ. I believe that the Bible is the true word of God. The Word of God says homosexuality is a sexual perversion and an abomination. Homosexuality is, not the person,,, just their sin. If we are all of the sudden throwing around our own personal views about it, I think my personal views would really not be accepted too well on here.
Homosexuality is a topic that has been debated to death on this site. No side will ever win this debate. Although religiously speaking, homosexuality is wrong, logicly speaking it makes no sense whatsoever, naturally speaking it is contrary.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by detroitslim

So marriage is equatable to enlisting in the army? Should people getting married also be subjected to age limits, weight limits, and political litmus tests before being wed?


is equitable to it? do you mean fair to it? You don't seem to get it do you. YES there should be age limits to it just like we have age restrictions for voting, drinking, smoking, driving, having sex, should all this be added to your idea of equal rights access? NO! it is absurd and so is your entire argument




To the contrary, the army has use for women


Again YOU MISS THE POINT GENIUS! The point is their are restrictions to joining the army! Not EVERYONE CAN!




and even has duties suitable for pacifists


These I said they need not apply NOT that they COULDN'T but nice try




I'm not sure what part of marriage requires 30 pushups in 60 seconds, or the ability to carry a 40 pound pack on a 5 mile hike. Can you enlighten me?


You STILL DON'T GET IT! what are you willfully trying to appear this ignorant? My example isn't ABOUT marrieds in a comparison of the military but about equal rights and equal access it is common sense!




Marriage is a social contract available to any consenting adult.


YES key word "consenting adult! so we have what here ?

A restriction THAT'S WHAT!




Prisoners on death row can be married.


So what? You don't like it too bad! Ya know what kind of Prisoner cannot get married then?

Two males that's who!




Almost any two drunks on the Las Vegas strip can get married at any hour of the day.


You got a problem with that?
Too bad! being drunk during a wedding is NOT against the law and I am against it as much as you would be but ya know what

THAT's TUFF! Ain't no law against it so picket las vegas and change the laws if you don't like it but I don't see gays doin that now and mormons have poured millions into fighting laws about drunkeness




Allowing two women to marry has zero effect on the lives of the rest of the citizenry. There's nothing that needs to be restricted, because there is no net negative effect.


Laws aren't always predicated on what YOU say they should be this country isn't about YOU!





Not one of your silly arguments puts forward any negative impact (except for one debunked study) that gay marriage poses to society at large. None. Nada. Zero. Zilch. You've listed thirteen reasons why people don't like gay marriage, but not a single one provides any legal basis to deny it.


WRONG! I think once again you have been trumped by simple common sense and your entire argument is BUNK~!



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join