Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New York state just passed same sex marriage bill

page: 26
50
<< 23  24  25    27  28 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


So comparing interracial marriage and gay marriage is wrong but comparing gay marriage and incest/pheophelia/legalized drunk driving/legalized violent marriage is ok?Many people believed that the races werent equal and even today many people foolishly still hold that belief just as many people believe that homosexuals are inferior to straight people.Discrimination against any other human no matter what the target reason is both bigoted and in this day and age a backwards way of thinking.




posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 



Originally posted by CobraCommander
The definition of marriage has not changed over time, and has never included homosexuals.


Whose definition? Because even MY definition has changed. I bet you a million dollars that MY definition of my marriage is VASTLY different from yours. There is no one definition of marriage. I define mine and you define yours.

Gay people have been getting legally married in Denmark for 20 years. And before that, they were getting married without the law. Gay marriage is not new. It's just becoming legal.



The only "state of flux" here is the one that is happening right now as part of an insidious agenda to undermine gender identity and the family unit.

As I have said all throughout this thread, I have no issue with a legally binding domestic partnership contract recognized by the state, but it is not marriage.


If gay marriage is going to "undermine gender identity and the family unit", how is it that the "domestic partnerships" you support won't do the same? If gay people are having "domestic partnerships" all over the country, how is calling it "marriage", going to bring on this drastic loss of gender identity and the tragic destruction of the family unit across the nation?

See... logic matters.




Being "color blind" is not progressive, it is degenerative. That primitive African tribe has not evolved far enough to distinguish between certain colors.


Oh, my God! That is such a lie! Did you read your source??? I don't believe you got that twisted and sick interpretation from that story!




But if you teach him the new names for the colors, that one is "pink" and the other is "red," from then on he can identify them when seen by themselves, without the other one for comparison.
...
Likewise, Turkish and Russian both split what we call "blue" into two different colors, for the darker and lighter shades.


Read more: 5 Insane Ways Words Can Control Your Mind | Cracked.com www.cracked.com...


Originally posted by CobraCommander
That primitive African tribe has not evolved far enough to distinguish between certain colors.


So, the Turks and Russians are apparently more "evolved" than us, right?
Just because we name similar colors doesn't mean someone who calls them all one name is backward or colorblind or LESS EVOLVED! Jesus, that's ridiculous! But it does explain a lot.

.
edit on 6/25/2011 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander


Because same sex union is not marriage.


Who says? You? What are your qualifications to tell anyone, anything.

Are you an attorney, a clergyman, an
academic or just a guy with an opinion? I also have an opinion and you know what they say about opinions.

Show us or stfu.

edit on 25-6-2011 by whaaa because: ProtoPlasm...forever



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by krill
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


So comparing interracial marriage and gay marriage is wrong but comparing gay marriage and incest/pheophelia/legalized drunk driving/legalized violent marriage is ok?Many people believed that the races werent equal and even today many people foolishly still hold that belief just as many people believe that homosexuals are inferior to straight people.Discrimination against any other human no matter what the target reason is both bigoted and in this day and age a backwards way of thinking.


Has nothing to do with discrimination against gays. Has to do with definition of the word. If it were about discrimination, then indeed, we should say that incest and polygamy should also be legalized on the very same grounds that gay marriage has been legalized.

Name one reason why gays should be allowed to marry, but NOT siblings.

And as I said, marriage has nothing to do with race, so long as it is a man and woman. Unless, like I said, you choose to subscribe to the belief that marrying outside your race is tantamount to bestiality.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by CobraCommander
Because same sex union is not marriage.


In 6 states and 10 other countries, it is.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by arufon
I have yet to hear a rational argument why same sex marriage shouldn't be legal.

if any of you narrow minded bigots can come up with a rational reason why gay couples
shouldn't marry, by all means, speak up.

I love NewYork!!!!!!!!!!


That's because there isn't any.

All the arguments are projections of either fear based or religious or both.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:45 PM
link   




aka " I am losing - no, have lost this arguement...homosexuality is a sin...let me see, my last resort is to turn on CNN and find another means....oh right "hate""

I never said I hate homosexuals, I said what they are doing is sinful...not sure where you are getting confused?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by TiggersTheMan

Originally posted by goodday123

If your parents weren't divorced, did that effect you personally? Did it change your society?
If your a parent, the decisions made by other parents in society and how they raise their children didn't effect you personally...so being a parent does that effect how you raise your child.

I can't see how changes in your society can't effect you...unless you live in the mountains or elsewhere. Public opinion change ideas, laws and attitudes...and you have to live with it


No, my parents weren't divorced, but they were separated for a short time. For me personally, life pretty much continued on as usual, before and after. Society wasn't particularly impacted by my parents marital status. Rather, I doubt society even noticed.

No, I'm not a parent. If I were, I would raise my child how I chose to, regardless of how others chose to raise their children.

I can't see how someone else's marriage is going to effect me, other than if I'm invited to the wedding, in which case I need a gift and something to wear. If two people, regardless of gender, love each other and want to get married, good for them. I wish them all the best. It still doesn't have any effect on me, personally.

Yes, public opinion can change ideas, laws and attitudes. This topic is just one example. I have to live with your attitude, and you have to live with mine. I choose not to hate or discriminate. It's my opinion the world would be a better place if more people felt the same. Obviously your opinion is different. *shrugs*

Oh, and I do live in the mountains, but that's neither here nor there.


I get it, and day to day it doesn't effect my daily life. Point being you look at the effects divorce - in my example- has had on society and it is now unbelieveable as far as its impacts to all other forms and laws relating to the original occurance in our history.

Homosexual acceptance is just another erosion of our moral fiber...in time it will be evident



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Miraj
 


It is simple advice. Simplicity is the foundation of cerebral rationality.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by krill
I would like to clarify what seems to be a major misunderstanding about the new bill.The bill has an amendment stating that no religous or non-profit orginazation will be forced to perform a gay marriage,Also they may not be taken to court and sued over refusing to perform a gay marriage.There is also in that same amendment a clause stating that any court finds that that amendment to be illegal and overrides that amendment it causes the entire bill to also to illegal.

As for the argument that gay marriage will lead to incest,beastiality, or marrying household items. Just remember at one time the same argument was made about interracial marriage.There is always going to be some people who refuse to believe that people different than themselfs have the same value and therefore should have the same rights as they do.


good to hear those with faith will be respected...which I think we can all agree is the correct choice to make.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by goodday123
homosexuality is a sin...


That is part of your chosen belief. If you believe it is a sin - then don't do it.

But - - you can not force your belief on others.

Since we are a secular government - - your personal religious belief is not relevant to anyone but yourself and others who choose it.

Feel free to condemn those who have chosen the same belief.

It is not my belief - - and I have zero interest in any part of it.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by arufon
I have yet to hear a rational argument why same sex marriage shouldn't be legal.

if any of you narrow minded bigots can come up with a rational reason why gay couples
shouldn't marry, by all means, speak up.

I love NewYork!!!!!!!!!!


I'm too narrow minded to offer any rational argument.

P.S. You are being insulted...



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 




Whose definition? Because even MY definition has changed. I bet you a million dollars that MY definition of my marriage is VASTLY different from yours. There is no one definition of marriage. I define mine and you define yours. Gay people have been getting legally married in Denmark for 20 years. And before that, they were getting married without the law. Gay marriage is not new. It's just becoming legal.


By any definition. Just because they have been doing it in Denmark for 20 years makes no difference. I could call say red is green for the next 20 years, it still won't get me out of a ticket for blowing a red light.

And let's take humans out of this for a second, in order to tone down the rhetoric for a moment. If you say the wine married well with the veal, that would be valid use of the word marriage. If you said the flavor of the veal married well with the veal, that would be stupid. There is no marriage of the flavors, it's just two pieces of meat.


If gay marriage is going to "undermine gender identity and the family unit", how is it that the "domestic partnerships" you support won't do the same? If gay people are having "domestic partnerships" all over the country, how is calling it "marriage", going to bring on this drastic loss of gender identity and the tragic destruction of the family unit across the nation? See... logic matters.


Yes, yes it does matter. And gay marriage is as illogical as saying that both red and green are green.



Originally posted by CobraCommander

Originally posted by beezzer reply to post by CobraCommander
 
I, for one, am glad to see this. It is rather silly. It eliminates any discrimination issue and it also removes a "talking point" that could be leveraged against more conservative pols. I do enjoy your analogy about calling green and red, green. So they call "red", "green". If it makes them happy, then they can call "red" any color of the rainbow (pun). YOU know what color it is, I know what color it is, but if they want to call it green then by golly, let 'em. You raise valid points
but in the end, personal freedoms should take precidence over personal opinions. My 2 cents.


Thanks for your sensible reply. Star for that. But as to my analogy of red and green, let's take it a step further. You are trying to teach your kid how to drive. All of the driving manuals no longer differentiate between red and green lights, and your child has not been taught in school that there is a difference between red and green and they can be used interchangeably. No your child gets out on the highway just learning how to drive, unable to differentiate between a red light and a green light. And now we see where the problems begin to arise.





So, the Turks and Russians are apparently more "evolved" than us, right? Just because we name similar colors doesn't mean someone who calls them all one name is backward or colorblind or LESS EVOLVED! Jesus, that's ridiculous! But it does explain a lot.


Yes, they are indeed more evolved than us. Just as even a painter is more evolved. Or an interior decorator. Now of course that does not make the rest of us socially inferior since the more important elements of our society such as road signs are not dependent on recognition of the more subtle shades, but nevertheless, if we were suddenly forced to make our living defining those shades, we would certainly find ourselves at a distinct disadvantage.
edit on 25-6-2011 by CobraCommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by goodday123

good to hear those with faith will be respected...which I think we can all agree is the correct choice to make.


I wouldn't say faith is being respected.

I'd say the right of choice to have a belief is being respected.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by krill
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


So comparing interracial marriage and gay marriage is wrong but comparing gay marriage and incest/pheophelia/legalized drunk driving/legalized violent marriage is ok?Many people believed that the races werent equal and even today many people foolishly still hold that belief just as many people believe that homosexuals are inferior to straight people.Discrimination against any other human no matter what the target reason is both bigoted and in this day and age a backwards way of thinking.


You are looping too many things together to gain an advantage in an argument.

Lets be clear: race and sexuality can not be used together

gay marrage an incest/etc comment - did you fall off your rocker?

stick on topic



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by CobraCommander


Because same sex union is not marriage.


Who says? You? What are your qualifications to tell anyone, anything.

Are you an attorney, a clergyman, an
academic or just a guy with an opinion? I also have an opinion and you know what they say about opinions.

Show us or stfu.

edit on 25-6-2011 by whaaa because: ProtoPlasm...forever


I am in fact an ordained minister.

But if that is your logic, who are you to tell me that red light was not green when I T-boned your minivan?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


Arguments are for benefits.

This is not about societies benefits. This is about personal rights and freedoms.

Is. "This is the US, land of the Free. We don't Discriminate." Not good enough?

And to counteract. I too have had heard dozens of arguments against. Yet not one had any sense of logic, all were bigoted and born from a sense of disdain or fear. Which is not how we should be deciding another's life for them.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Good for New York. If two people love each other, they should be able to marry and have the same access to benefits as heterosexuals.

/TOA



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
It's a conspiracy! No more a sure way to destroy homosexual relationships than to let them get married!!

On a serious side, if someone wants to torture themselves by getting married, by all means, let them.





new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 23  24  25    27  28 >>

log in

join