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.

 

Utah legalizes gay marriage, December 20, 2013

page: 8
7
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Bhadhidar
 


Wow, that was the thinnest most unthought response on this thread.
Tell you what, why don't you go play baseball with a bat and a bat. Or play tennis with a racket and a racket,,, just play with what God gave you. Write on your paper with a sheet of paper.

The constitution does not guarantee equal protection for the choice of homosexuality. You guys are trampling on the laws that protect black people in this country. If I were black I'd be pissed.
edit on 20-1-2014 by Christian Voice because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   
Please everyone, play nice and no name calling. This is a very good discussion, and is hitting all the major points of each "side". But if you look at it, again, legally, gays = straight = love = in-laws. In America the trend is like a very big wave coming to shore after being built up far out in the ocean, and gay marriage is the winning side. It's all over but the final buzzer. Remember when the ruling came down last year in the Supreme Court case, Justice Scalia actually stood up by his chair and glared and belittled the justices who voted to overturn portions of DOMA, saying (paraphrasing) that the ruling would likely bring gay marriage to all the United States within a year. Why did he say that? He knows the law, he knows what they had just voted on, and now federal justices are affirming Scalia's knowledge. I said earlier in this thread (or on another) that I would not be surprised in Scalia voted in favor of gay marriage when the case comes back to them. Because he knows what the law now reads - he was in the room!

Now as to Australia, that's another story, but it may go "gay marriage" very quickly one day, maybe in the not very distant future.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


Let's pretend your argument that we get to select if we are homosexual or not is true, that being said it doesn't matter because we are still Human, it doesn't matter what we select to be because we should all get equal rights as HUMANS Sexuality, gender, race, religion we are all human who deserve the same rights. and at the topic at hand Marriage. if a Human wants to marry another Human what does it matter if it's same or different sex?

if the religion that you Select to believe in forbids you from believing in same sex marriage fine, your right your belief, but those Religious laws can not dictate the lives of others, you talk about the constitution that states the separation between state and religion, so a state can not use religions dogma to decide who can and cannot get married.

the argument becomes moot



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


Okay, I'm calling you out. I've heard quite enough; this has gone beyond pathetic.

You constantly roam around these forums itching for gay threads so that you can puke out the same old arguments that get proven invalid time after time.

It's so unbelievably childish that I can't express any patience for it anymore

If you want to be taken seriously, get a real argument, these ones you've been using are so f&%^ing dead that I can't find the words to describe the idiocy it would take to keep parrotting them ad ridiculum for YEARS on this website:

1. "Gay is unnatural"

You're typing on a computer. Is your computer natural? Are you a sinner for using it?

Here's the real kicker, though; MARRIAGE ISN'T NATURAL EITHER. Humans created it and they did so long before Christianity ever existed.

Sorry about your luck.

2. "Gay doesn't reproduce"

Neither do infertile people. Are infertile married heterosexuals immoral? Are they full of sin and woe? Will Hell be as hot for them?

Is the only good thing you could possibly do is reproduce?

What's more magnamous:

-Producing your own child
-Adopting a child that already exists and doesn't have a home

...?

3. "Gay doesn't has the sex orgunz"

Yes it does. "God" (I hate that this is at the beginning of a sentence so that I have to capitalize it) sure has a sense of humour if he put that prostate glad conveniently right there. Must be there to test our faith like fossils and stars and oxygen, right?


4. "The Bible Says..."

Your ridiculous book has been on the losing end of peer review for more than a century. Nobody cares what it says. It's nonsense, get over it. It has zero power in a secular society, and shouldn't have power over your independent mind.

This book was written for and by a bunch of nervous, ignorant, stupid bronze-aged mesopotamians and nobody with a head on their shoulders would even entertain the thought of pretending that it has any bearing whatsoever on their own lives, much less an endorsement to control someone else's

5. "It will change the definition!"

First of all, human rights trump the definition of words.

Secondly, the definition of marriage has been changed hundreds of times over the course of history, and if it hadn't then women would still be property of the men. Is that what we want? No changes on the efinition of marriage?

6. "It ruins the sanctity of marriage!"

This is the stupidest one by far. It actually makes absolutely no sense at all and nobody has been able to explain it. Ever.

I mean honestly, what are you saying? Gay people getting married will make straight peoples' marriages crumble? A sporatic amount of divorce?

Ridiculous. You would actually ahve to have a serious intellectual disability to be convinced of this ultimate stupidity.

7. It will harm the children"

Pathetic.

Multiple studies across the social sciences have repeatedly demonstrated that there is no difference in psychosocial outcomes between children raised by opposite-sex couples and those raised by same-sex couples. There is no evidence that children are psychologically harmed by having two dads or two moms. The American Psychological Association (APA), the American Sociological Association (ASA), and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has each endorsed the legalization of same-sex marriage and its capacity to provide a stable familial framework for children.

8. "It will lead to pedophelia, bestiality, and polygamy!"

Easy, dumbass, hold on a second. None of these have anything to do with two consenting human adults in a legally recognized relationship.

Go ahead and name one country that has legalized these after legalizing same-sex marriage. It must be easy, because these slippery-slope arguments that you rely on are so "consistent throughout history", right?



....


I look forward to seeing you vomit up one of these idiotic arguments in the next gay thread.

You're making me wonder if consistent intellectual slaughter is fun to be on the losing end of.

Please, for the love of god (no capital; nailed it), get fresher material. Your arguments have gotten staler than a communion wafer.
edit on 20-1-2014 by TheRegal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 


Please, no name calling or overtly attacking other posters (I sound like a mod, but just trying to keep this thread on the straight and narrow about the unstraight and wide), it's against the terms. And besides, it's just mean. Although I see your points and agree with you, someone's beliefs are in their own mind, which they own. Just as gays own their own bodies, as the legal situation in the U.S. is now affirming.


edit on 20-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Darth, please don't get me wrong, YES I do not agree with homosexuality, but we are on a forum for debate. That's where I am on this. You are one of the few that hasn't come across as hateful so I will explain myself to you on this. If you read back, I haven't condemned homosexuals to hell, I have not wished harm upon anyone. I have just expressed my views.
I would imagine that most on here find it hard to believe but I do have friends that are gay. Well, I have one close friend and a few that are more people I speak to in passing. When I first learned that he was gay he asked me what I thought and I told him exactly what I have expressed here. Bear in mind that we were friends before I found out as he hid it well. He asked me if I still considered him to be a friend and I told him of course. We discussed things and we agreed that I would not push my opinions or my faith onto him and he would not flaunt his sexuality in front of me. He happens to be a man that firmly believes that there is a time and place for such things. As I informed you yesterday, I am a big Geology nut. Well he is too. We still have wonderful trips looking for fossils. I cannot express enough that this is just a forum for debate. That is what I do. I hate no one. I have posted this saying before and it bears repeating. You can love someone deeply and sincerely that you do not like. You can like someone passionately that you do not love. Yes I can Love you, hang with you, be great friends with you and disagree with your lifestyle choices.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 


You have been a member for a few months and hardly have an adequate scope for who I am. I post on several different threads here and have posted my own threads on several other topics. You are rather new so I will leave this one alone.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


I suggest you pull your head out of whatever holy book you've got glued to your nose long enough to look up the phrase Equal Protection Under the Law!

That, along with the freedom you enjoy to practice whatever religion/superstition tickles your fancy have gone a long way toward keeping you and your fellow "believers" not only out of jail, but perhaps even, alive.

Show a little respect to the land, and the laws, that have succored you by learning what it stands for,

And why!



For those readers who might be tempted to nod in agreement with CV's assertion that the Constitution does not guarantee US citizens the right the choose to be gay, consider this:

The Constitution doesn't guarantee You the right to "choose" to be Christian, either. Or Jewish, or Muslim, or Democrat, or Republican, or Atheist, or for that matter, Married.

It DOES grant that whatever you choose, you have the right to the same protection under the law that someone making an entirely Different choice would enjoy.

Now, as I said in my previous post, I do not believe that being gay is a choice an individual can make, just as being born with brown eyes is not a choice an individual can make. I can, I think, understand why CV, and others, might want to believe that homosexuality is a matter of individual choice: They have invested their lives in a belief system which, in return for faithful adherence to certain rules of behavior, rules which require heavy sacrifices, assure a wondrous reward. The very foundations of such a belief system would be threatened with collapse if it could be shown that the same reward, if it exists, could be achieved without such sacrifices.

It some respect, homosexuals are a form of proof that the reward is accessible without the sacrifice. And if there is one proof, then there may be others. Indeed, there may be a whole plethora of proofs. And that would mean that CV and all those others had spent their lives in unnecessary sacrifice. What a cheat!


But that was Their choice, and the Law can neither punish nor reward them for making that choice.

And if they are to argue that they have the right to make that choice, then they must in turn grant the same basic right, the right to choose, to others as well. Regardless of whether they agree with the choice.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


If and when your friend gets married would you attend his wedding? Would you be best man if he asked? If so, you are a loving person, an accepting person. If not, why not?

And I'll draw the line at asking if you'd dance with him at his wedding. (lol)

edit on 20-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


Having an opinion holds absolutely no validity when your opinions are proven wrong.

When your opinions are proven wrong then they cease to be opinions and continue on to be nothing other than fallacies.

They deserve no respect; especially if you refuse to change your mind despite being constantly incorrect in your arguments and convictions.

Change your mind like a rational person. This garabge that you subscribe to is ABSOLLUTE NONSENSE. It's mazing to me how religious indoctrination causes people to believe that they have a warrant for utter stupidity.

If I were, for example, to say that Ethiopians aren't human, and don't deserve to be treated as anything other than cattle. You could come in here, show me the evidence that Ethiopians are human, and I would have no choice but to change my mind. However, if I said that a bearded guy in the sky told me this, and that I wasn't changing my mind because this is "the truth" that I know and "my beliefs", would it suddenly give my opinion merit? Seems like some people would argue that it does.

They're wrong, though. It doesn't. Reality will win over any inevident belief system every single time. It's time to change your "opinions".

Also, your little "I have gay friends" story... I'm sad that I didn't include that in my list. Anecdotal evidence holds zero value in practical argument, and, when online, it's often made up on the spot.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Bhadhidar
 


Homosexuality is not mentioned anywhere in the constitution including amendments which go right up to recent times-and are the law of the land as regards legality. It is like some subjects which are not mentioned in the Bible- one has to look for an analogous subject- for example Gambling versus the ninth article of the decalogue ( Thy shall not covet they neighbor"s Goods) which can be drawn broad enough to cover gambling. but the subject of Homosexuality is not directly mentioned in the Constitution, not are any amendments directly applicable except possibly the angle of separation of church and state

This opens up a gigantic can of worms. If the constitution did in fact guarantee marital rights for people (which it does not), then would it also protect mentally retarded people to wed, or cousins, or people and animals ?



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 


Dude, please U2U me on this so we do not derail this any further. I have a few things I could say to you. Show me where anything I have said has been proven wrong! You can't because as much as you hate to admit it, your side of this argument has no more proof of anything at all than my side does. Sure you can present biased studies and false statements but in the end it is opinion and emotion vs opinion and emotion. You also assume entirely too much. I never brought my faith into the mix until someone else forced it into the equation. I have shown that I don't need to quote scripture to get over on someone like you but I certainly can if it makes you feel better. You obviously have a lot of hatred toward God and his children and that is between you and him.
edit on 20-1-2014 by Christian Voice because: (no reason given)


Also, my story of my friend was for Darth Prime who is a much calmer, less hateful individual than yourself.
edit on 20-1-2014 by Christian Voice because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


Mentally retarded people can get married, as far as I know. There was that really good movie with Juliette Lewis, "The Other Sister", who never came close to a Best Actress Oscar but should have at least two (for that one and "Natural Born Killers").
edit on 20-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 

They can get married because it happened in a movie ?

By the way, I agree, it was a good movie. Diane Keaton does a wonderful job at being a protective overbearing mother. She actually had me a bit flustered before the end LOL



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


So much arrogance that I have to return it.

No.

This is not my opinion.

This is my state of being.

Do not try to tell me what my state of being is. You will not win the argument against the person living it. Do not be so ridiculously asinine to think that you can tell someone what they are and what choices they've made in life. It's retarded, and I won't have it.

A U2U won't change you being incorrect, and all of this has been spot-on topic so I don't know why you're saying this is derailing except for the likelihood that you want me to shut up because any opposition to your ridiculous ideals is going to win pretty much every time.

Go ahead and counter-quote my list and let me know where the logic lies in your "opinions" (fallacies). They're stupid arguments, and you can't even justify them yourself. Admit it, analyze the evidence, erase any predetermined conclusions, and you will absolutely change your mind, and move on. This is how adults use their brains. The methodology for reason is not to start from the conclusion and scamper to find evidence to support it. Look at the evidence, draw a conclusion from it; never the other way around.
edit on 20-1-2014 by TheRegal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Christian Voice
 


I don't know for sure, (EDIT: I now know for sure, yes they can) but I assume they can get married. I'll research (EDIT: Did, and they can. Remember the storyline in Arrested Development? Won't go into spoilers, but that was hilarious). I forgot Diane Keaton was in the film, maybe needs a rewatch. And don't worry about derailing the thread, the Utah case is on hold now until at least Feburary 25th, so lots of time to talk all of this out, hopefully civilly. And if you would, please answer what I asked earlier, would you be best man if and when you friend gets married and wanted you to be? And if so, please let someone else organize the bachelor party (lol again).
edit on 20-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by TheRegal
 


Don't be a coward, we can discuss this in private so we do not derail this thread.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Post remove by poster for making a bad joke. Points deducted and slap on the wrist self-administered.
edit on 20-1-2014 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Wow, the loaded question Piers Morgan hit Osteen with.
No I would not be the best man nor would I attend the wedding. The subject has come up briefly, he is actually one that does not agree with gay marriage or at least he says he doesn't. He says his sexuality is no one's business and he believes most homosexuals are all for it because they want to flaunt it and rub it in people's faces. Perhaps I am lucky he isn't as hateful as a lot on here are. Honest to God, I don't think we've ever had a fight over it at all.



posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


Nope, the last three threads I have debated in on this topic were closed down due to people staying off topic. It will either be in private or not at all. And how in the heck am I going to "convert" someone as you put it. You claim he is born gay so how can I change how he was born ? Ridiculous.
edit on 20-1-2014 by Christian Voice because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join