Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"Gay Marriage" apparently not all it was cracked up to be

page: 30
16
<< 27  28  29    31  32 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by Annee
 


I can only call it like I see it.

Truthfully, I'm bored with this topic.

Currently the laws in the United States and the majority of citizens agree with me.

I have not seen a valid poll that shows a majority of Americans are pro same sex marriage.

Good luck trying to change the laws.

I'll check back later and will only respond to coherent, intelligent posts or questions.

DENY IGNORANCE


Can you show us a valid poll that shows a majority of Americans are against same-sex marriage?




posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Honestly - every one should look up how and why government marriage licenses in America came to be.

Sanctity of marriage my ass. Well maybe - - but certainly not for the Glory of God.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 03:11 PM
link   
There is a problem with polls, as they never show the entire picture, nor are accurate. They numbers are often skewed, and any poll can be given to show what the person taking the poll wants to show. Often where the issue comes from, is not the actual poll, but like the laws, the language that it is written. The question should be simple, the reality is that they ask it in ways to confuse or direct a person to the answer that they want to hear.

Think about it, it is how the question is asked, that the answer would be dictated, if asked:

Do you agree with Gay marriage? Of course the answer would be no.

But if you ask this:

Do you agree that all in the USA should enjoy the same rights as every one else. The same people would answer with a resounding yes.

The reality is that the politics in this country is purely reactionary, and based off of how the question is posed, not the actual question.



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Marriage is not a right. Why? Because it wasn't bestowed at birth, it is not god-given or otherwise attributed to your person. Marriage is conferred by the state or church through law. Marriage is a lawful tradition with clear definitions. It's original purpose was to be the union of a man and woman and to be the foundation of a family. Homosexual couples are incapable of creating a biological family alone therefore the term homosexual marriage is an oxymoron and subverts the purpose and meaning of the tradition. A relationship between consenting adults is a right, and you should not have to hide in this respect. Marriage is not a god-given right, nor is stealing traditions clearly meant for very different purposes. Just because you could theoretically do such a thing does not mean it is the right thing for you to do, either.

edit on 2012/2/16 by SteveR because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by SteveR
 


Who is stealing what tradition from whom now?



posted on Feb, 16 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
Marriage is not a right. Why? Because it wasn't bestowed at birth, it is not god-given or otherwise attributed to your person. Marriage is conferred by the state or church through law. Marriage is a lawful tradition with clear definitions. It's original purpose was to be the union of a man and woman and to be the foundation of a family. Homosexual couples are incapable of creating a biological family alone therefore the term homosexual marriage is an oxymoron and subverts the purpose and meaning of the tradition. A relationship between consenting adults is a right, and you should not have to hide in this respect. Marriage is not a god-given right, nor is stealing traditions clearly meant for very different purposes. Just because you could theoretically do such a thing does not mean it is the right thing for you to do, either.

edit on 2012/2/16 by SteveR because: (no reason given)


Voting isn't a god-given right, nor is it bestowed at birth. All citizens of a nation have the right to vote, as long as they are of age. All citizens of a nation should have the right to marry, as long as they are consenting adults. If a church (any church) is willing to marry two people "in the eyes of God", then why couldn't those people be able to get a license from the state?
edit on 16-2-2012 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)


No one is "stealing" anything away from anyone. You want to marry someone of the opposite sex in a big church wedding? Go right ahead, no one is taking that right away from you.
edit on 16-2-2012 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sigismundus
reply to post by zerimar65

Hi Zerimar -

My point is : What is the basis for your jejune stance on the definition of 'marriage' being between ONE woman and ONE man?

In other words, is your opinion on this (e.g. what you wrote " if gays wanted to get married they should have been born straight" or other such jejune nonsense) based on anything 'biblical' i.e. from the post exilic priestly writings from the cults of the post-exilic clan god of the Jews (the YHWH of the 'bible') or are you attempting to base your ignorance on 'nature' alone (forgetting or just not knowing that homosexuality is absolutely RAMPANT in the animal kingdom from doves to rams 'getting it on with the same sex')?

If your silly statements are based on a pseudo-biblical stance you're in for a BIG surprise - especially when you bother to take the time closely to read the mangled paleoHebrew texts of the 'holy' scriptures of the Jews - and discover - oh the shock and awe ! - that persons like 'David' about whom is written such garbage as 'behold David my servant, a man after mine own heart saith YHWH' - not only had a blatant homosexual affair with another male - his boy toy Jonathan about which was made the most outrageous homosexual accusations (1 Sam 18:1-4, 1 Sam 20:30, and also the love poetry Daviid wrote for him 2 Sam 1:24-26)

As well as having numerous wives (can you say: polygamy ? what about ONE man and ONE woman?) but also was a cold blooded Murderer (he killed Uriah the Hittite) and an Adulterer (with Bath-Shebiti, ('bathsheba') the Jebusite wife of Uriah the Hittite).

David was also a Defector against Yisro'el (he in fact spent a few years living amongst his former 'enemies' the Filistin / Phlistines, who had rival anti YHWH cult temples all around the area of present day Gaza - all busilly worshipping the bearded man-fish-god 'Dagon')

Technically, David was also a Blasphemer (being of the tribe of Judah (and not LEVI) who dared to dance NAKED in front of the Ark of the Covenant - something only the priestly LEVITES of the cult of YHWH were ever able to approach, let alone dance naked in front of - !!)

And last of all - but certainly not least, David was (through his grand-mother Ruth) racially speaking, a 'Moabite', and therefore NOT an 'Israelite' at all, at least according to the Torah ('no Ammonite OR Moabite shall ever enter the Assembly of YHWH not even beyond the 10th Generation', says the book of 'Deutero-nomy' part of the supposedly ancient Torah of the Jews).

Not that you'd know any of these little factoids or anything.

Also, if your stance on 'heterosexual marriage only' is in any way 'biblically based' in the 'christian fundamentalist sense'I sure hope, yes sir, that there is no DIVORCE any where in your family - like there was among the family of Anita Bryant - otherwise according to R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir (Gk ho 'Iesous'), and also to Saul of Tarsus, the purported founder of 'Pauline Christianity' in the NT 'epistles' bearing his name, there are charges of 'ADULTERY' that MUST be laid against any divorced perpetrators - and we all know what stoning to death for Adultery meant in those days !!

So what DO you base your ignorant assumptions on anyway? Something your mommy once told you about the 'sanctity of marriage' when you were little ?

edit on 14-2-2012 by Sigismundus because: a stuttering coooommmputtterrrrrr keyyyyboardddddd


If my comments are so jejune and ignorant, why do they bother you? If anything, they gave you an opportunity to drone on with a lecture on the history of the world. If you have something to say, stick to the point and get to it. You're all over the place.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


why would they? maybe the gay Mexicans might marry another guy, but I doubt the straight Mexicans would go gay just for the chance at citizenship. But even if the straight Mexicans pretend to be gay, they won't be. They're just pretending.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 06:22 AM
link   
reply to post by zerimar65
 

How about you stay on topic, if you are going to be the thread police?

As for your sick comments, the only way people like you can sleep at night without the incredible burden of shame that you should feel for such thoughts is likely due to sheer stupidity.


Originally posted by zerimar65

If the gays wanted to get married, they should have been born straight.


Of course, there have been far stupider things said and written, I am merely presenting a quote.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Ah yes - - marriage. LEGAL MARRIAGE as in Legal Government Marriage License.

From the beginning it was a contract. Originally arranged between families. Contracts are individual and independent - - which means the contract could be anything - for any reason.

Women were property - - bought - sold - exchanged - bartered - used for political alliances - etc. They had no rights.

(The "License" was created to make something legal that wasn't. In other words - if there was a waiting period law - a license would override that)

The Catholic church adopted the practice of issuing marriage licenses - - when they realized it was a money maker.

In America the Legal Government Marriage License was about exclusion not inclusion.


But marriage licenses were not required until after the civil war. Marriage licenses from their inception have sought to establish certain prohibitions on the institution of marriage. These prohibitions have changed throughout history. In the 1920s, they were used by 38 states to prohibit whites from marrying blacks, mulattos, Japanese, Chinese, Indians, Mongolians, Malays or Filipinos without a state approved license. At least 32 nations have established significant prohibitions on same-sex marriage en.wikipedia.org...


The American government officially adopted the term: "Marriage License". And it certainly wasn't for any Sanctity of God reason.

With this despicable history of Aryan type mindset of "purity" and exclusion - - - Damn Straight! It should be called Marriage for everyone. If there was ever any Sanctity - - this blows it to Hell.

MARRIAGE - - - Marriage License is a secular government contract. Period! There is no god or religion involved.

I guess the "Free Men" - - should have thought of that before they made it an official government contract.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I think a lot of people don't seem to understand how statistics and polls work, or what margin of error means. In the polls I listed, the margin of error is 2.1-3.5%...which is SMALL. Twist and turn it as you want, saying the majority of US Americans are against gay marriage is blatantly wrong.

Margin of error (important for the OP too, because he clearly has no clue about statistics)

That's why people claiming the polls aren't representative simply show off their lack of knowledge when it comes to statistics.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I absolutely know about polls and statistics.

You obviously are a sheeple and believe everything you are told.




rt.com...

Opinion polls in the U.S. distort the truth about public opinion. They cover up the truth about the number of undecided voters and distort the perception of which policies people support. Thats according to David Moore former senior editor of Gallup Poll, a world renowned polling agency.





truthaboutpolls.blogspot.com...

We are bombarded with poll results daily during this election season. What do polls really represent? The news media always uses percentages to report results. What do those percentages actually represent? Polls are based on a sample population. How many people are in the sample? There are over 140 million registered voters in this country. Are we being deceived by the media? What is your opinion?



online.wsj.com...

It's not unusual that polls conducted in roughly the same time period will conflict with each other, though such conflicts are still treated as aberrations. Usually, one can attribute the apparent contradictions to different interviewing dates or to dissimilar question wording. And, of course, there is always the possibility that one poll was just plain wrong, an explanation most likely to be heard if one of the polling organizations has a poor reputation anyway.

The conflicting results by Gallup and Pew, however, could not be explained away by any of the usual excuses. These were two titans in the polling industry, both highly respected among the news media, and neither poll could be immediately dismissed out of hand. Moreover, the dates of interviews for both surveys were almost identical, and there was no issue of question wording because each poll included the industry's standard question about which candidate a respondent would vote for if the election were held "today."



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by MathiasAndrew
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


I absolutely know about polls and statistics.

You obviously are a sheeple and believe everything you are told.


Again you resort to intended insults and name calling - - when another poster has a different opinion.

You really can not handle opposition - can you?

So YOU - - ABSOLUTELY KNOW - - about polls and statistics. I'd love to hear this. What is your expertise?

Me? The GALLUP POLE is a long standing organization with credibility. Excuse me if I believe them over you.

edit on 17-2-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by MrXYZ
 


You say 3.5% is SMALL

Let's actually look at the numbers

US population is 313,031,000

# of people polled is 1004

3.5% of 313 031 000 = 10 956 085 people

3.5% of 1004 = 35.14 people


So basically the margin of error based on USA population is almost 11 million people

Let's use 3 examples Gallup, CNN & PEW

Your Link
------------------------------------------------
Gallup poll .... 53% support 45% oppose .... 53 + 45= 98% so we will assume 2% undecided

Adding 3.5% as maximum possible margin of error

support 49.5%

oppose 48.5%

undecided 5.5%
--------------------------------------------------------
CNN poll .... 51% support 47% oppose ...... 51+47=98% so we will assume 2% undecided

Adding 3.5% as maximum possible margin of error

support 54.5%

oppose 50.5%

undecided 5.5%
-------------------------------------------------------------
PEW poll 45% support 46% oppose ....... 45+46=91% so we will assume 9% undecided

Adding 3.5% as maximum possible margin of error

support 48.5%

oppose 49.5%

undecided 12.5%
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Let's test the margin of error and manipulate the numbers

Gallup Poll

if we manipulate in your favor

support 56.5%

oppose 41.4%

with a possible undecided range of 2% - 5.5%

if we manipulate in my favor

support 49.5%

oppose 48.5%

with a possible undecided range of 2% - 5.5%
--------------------------------------------------------------------
CNN poll

if we manipulate in your favor

support 54.5%

oppose 43.5%

with a possible undecided range of 2% - 5.5%

if we manipulate in my favor

support 47.5%

oppose 50.5%

with a possible undecided range of 2% - 5.5%
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
PEW poll

if we manipulate in your favor

support 48.5%

oppose 42.5%

with a possible undecided range of 9% - 12.5%

If we manipulate in my favor

support 41.5%

oppose 49.5%

with a possible undecided range of 9% - 12.5%
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seems to me 3.5% is not such a small margin of error after.

What numbers are the correct ones??????

Maybe now YOU understand polls and statistics better.

1004 people is not a sufficient sampling based on a population of 313,031,000 people

Big difference between 35 people and 11 million people as a margin of error



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


Then you should make it so the term marriage is limited to religious contracts between a man and a woman. When people get married now, it is through a state sanctioned contract, however they call it marriage. If you deny a state sanctioned contract based on sexual orientation that would be discriminatory, and therefore illegal. Unless your for unequal rights.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 


young homosexual here.
Big whoop they got divorced, it was bound to happen. Personally, I would never get married because of how everyone is making it look. We stole the term marriage? why because it says on some paper somewhere that it is only aloud between a man and a woman? Whatsup with all these rules? Why is there a rule that determines if you are aloud to love someone or not based on the persons genitals? redic.

People are sexual, statistically 1 out of every 2 people are bisexual or gay. Its a natural thing that is found not only in humans but all throughout our animal kingdom. So gays are apart of us as a species. I think we should be aloud to marry, divorce and do every thing that everyone else does because we are all the same. Humans have a problem with diversity its not just gays, it is about religion and race and a bunch of other factors. Every person is the same and should have equal rights between them all, anyone else who disagrees must have a problem with diversity which is also a part of us as a species.

blah blah blah they got divorced good for them, its like the first gay people to get divorced WE'RE MAKIN HISTORY WOOHOO



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Polls say # of homosexual people in the USA in somewhere between 1 in 10 and 1 in 20 people

Let's use 1 in 15 as the average

15 x 6.6 = 99.0

close enough

So, 6.6 people out of 99 is homosexual

6.6% of 313 031 000 = 20, 660, 046

rounding up 21 million gay people in the USA

add another 3 million to compensate for the missing 1%

we get 24 million gay people in the USA

add another 6 million for margin of error ( or people in the closet )

30 million gay people in the USA ( fair enough? )

So according to the 11 million people margin of error

That's about 1/3 the # of gay people in the USA

You're OK with that margin of error????




30 million gay people in the USA


It is estimated that around 10% of the population is gay. There are 300 million people in the U.S., so there would be 30 million gay people.
edit on 17-2-2012 by MathiasAndrew because: add link



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by milkyway12
 


your awnser is invalid considering SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE. not all americans are christian so why is the laws still written under "god"

this government think just has way to many problems within it. We are all equal and if i want to go get married, and call it being married, i should be able to.



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by MathiasAndrew
 

I correct myself 1/3 of people are gay.
good work



posted on Feb, 17 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jakupairs
 





People are sexual, statistically 1 out of every 2 people are bisexual or gay.




Not true, show me something to support your claim.


BTW: young straight & young gay people should learn how to spell better

aloud is spelled allowed





new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 27  28  29    31  32 >>

log in

join