Magic Under Fire For Donation Which Opposes Gay Marriage

lakerz12 · Post #81 » by **lakerz12** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:05 am

TylerTheDebater wrote:
MannyRam99 wrote:
TylerTheDebater wrote:
People are born gay.

People are born black.

One statement is not as clear cut as the other.

Both statements are truth. Both is one not as clear cut as the other?

Evidence is not conclusive on whether people are born gay. Some evidence suggests so, others suggest not. American culture likes to assume it is true

Post #82 » by **Yuri Vaultin** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:05 am

TylerTheDebater wrote:
MannyRam99 wrote:
TylerTheDebater wrote:
Anyone defending the hatred against homosexuals when it comes to marriage is a homophobe. There's no way around it. There's no reason to be against same sex marriage. AT ALL. If you say "that's how marriage always was"... you were against inter-racial marriage too? Inter-religion marriage? You wouldn't admit to that, but it's okay to admit to being against same sex marriage? GTFO.

No, no, no, no.

Interracial marriage does not have the same implications as same sex marriage, don't even go there. Interracial marriage doesn't involve anything that goes against or defies holy matrimony, same-sex marriage does.

People are born gay.

People are born black.

The bible has nothing to do with marriage. Marriage was not invented by Christians.

This.

Woodsanity · Post #83 » by **Woodsanity** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:06 am

bertrob wrote:
TylerTheDebater wrote:
It's not okay to oppose gay marriage. Don't let idiots just get away with it.

I think people who oppose gay marriage are idiotic but they probably look at me the same way for supporting it
Who is right? Theres no "true" right answer
People are entitled to have their own opinions

Not if it infringes on other people's rights.

Chalk1 · Post #84 » by **Chalk1** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:06 am

Technically children are asexual, and develop their sexuality during prepubescence.

Whether hetero or homo there's no choice in the matter in how one's sexuality will develop.

Kyrama · Post #85 » by **Kyrama** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:06 am

Muggsy Bogues wrote:
lakerz12 wrote:Some people completely misunderstand many of those people who do not support gay marriage. It has nothing to do with their feelings towards homosexuals as individuals or as a group. It simply has to do with their belief in what marriage is.

No, we understand this perfectly. However, we also think that allowing your beliefs to dictate what your fellow citizens may or may not do is a horrible idea.

Basically, this. If you want to claim your church shouldn't be able to wed two people of the same gender, fine. The problem comes when two people who love each other try to get the same rights as heterosexual couples and are refused. For example, prior to the recent changes in hospitalization laws I've seen men and women come to visit their partner in the hospital only to be turned away because they are technically not a spouse. Were they trying to destroy the "sanctity of marriage" or ruin <insert your religion here>? Nope. They just wanted to see the person they loved who very well may be dying.

MannyRam99 · Post #86 » by **MannyRam99** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:07 am

TylerTheDebater wrote:
MannyRam99 wrote:
TylerTheDebater wrote:
People are born gay.

People are born black.

One statement is not as clear cut as the other.

Both statements are truth. Both is one not as clear cut as the other?

FYI : A truth has to be a fact, a fact has to be proven a certainty.

therefore both statements are not "truths".

Post #87 » by **Yuri Vaultin** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:07 am

MannyRam99 wrote:
TylerTheDebater wrote:
People are born gay.

People are born black.

One statement is not as clear cut as the other.

Michael Jackson begged to differ.

bullsnewdynasty · Post #88 » by **bullsnewdynasty** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:07 am

Muggsy Bogues wrote:Oh? Okay then, what's it say?

Maybe you do understand, but let me make it clear.

It means that the government can't establish a national religion like the Church of England.

It also means that the government cannot prefer one religion over another, religion over no religion, or no religion over religion.

So it really depends on whether you feel marriage is religious or not. If marriage is religious, then the government cannot intrude on it.

MannyRam99 · Post #89 » by **MannyRam99** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:07 am

Yuri Vaultin wrote:
MannyRam99 wrote:
TylerTheDebater wrote:
People are born gay.

People are born black.

One statement is not as clear cut as the other.

Michael Jackson begged to differ.

Rallyks · Post #90 » by **Rallyks** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:07 am

There are some pretty gross people in this thread

Post #91 » by **Manhattan Project** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:07 am

Look if two men or two women want to be miserable together why stand in their way? Simple as that.

Gus McCrae · Post #92 » by **Gus McCrae** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:08 am

We must protect the sanctity of marriage! lame.

There are so many benefits of being married that just make life easier if you are a life partner with someone. My wife for example, say she gets in a near fatal car crash, I can go to the hospital, say I"m her husband, and they'll bring me in the room to see her. If I"m her "boyfriend" I likely would not be granted that right, let alone power of attorney should medical decisions be required.

If she dies I'm the default beneficiary, but not if I was her bf. People being gay doesn't affect any of us and nothing changes when they're married to affect us. I genuinely believe that in 50 years people will be as embarrassed to say they opposed gay marriage as people who 50 years ago did not want women voting or non-segregated schools.

LikeABosh · Post #93 » by **LikeABosh** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:09 am

MannyRam99 wrote:FYI : A truth has to be a fact, a fact has to be proven a certainty.

therefore both statements are not "truths".

Then we're not born straight either

Mobat · Post #94 » by **Mobat** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:09 am

MannyRam99 wrote:
Mobat wrote:
MannyRam99 wrote:I dunno man, you're gonna have to ask about 40 odd US senates, plus a couple hundred million US citizens.

I'm from Canada. You guys are ass backwards on many issues I find.
I am sure a hefty percent of your populations has strong feels against gay marriage as well. There must be some Canadian census with the statistics documented, I'll try to find it.

It's legal here because we tend to not make moral decisions for other people.

Bertrob · Post #95 » by **Bertrob** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:09 am

Woodsanity wrote:
bertrob wrote:
TylerTheDebater wrote:
It's not okay to oppose gay marriage. Don't let idiots just get away with it.

I think people who oppose gay marriage are idiotic but they probably look at me the same way for supporting it
Who is right? Theres no "true" right answer
People are entitled to have their own opinions

Not if it infringes on other people's rights.

Very true
but theres a fine line most gay marriage opponents don't cross, and I think we should respect their opinions
But I 100% agree, if a homophobe is actively putting down gays they should be stopped

RIPskaterdude · Post #96 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:10 am

Why can't they simply just give the exact rights and tax benefits under an union as people receive in a marriage? Same benefits, same rights, different name. I figure that would be fine with the religious people.

Post #97 » by **og15** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:10 am

Kyrama wrote:
Muggsy Bogues wrote:
lakerz12 wrote:Some people completely misunderstand many of those people who do not support gay marriage. It has nothing to do with their feelings towards homosexuals as individuals or as a group. It simply has to do with their belief in what marriage is.

No, we understand this perfectly. However, we also think that allowing your beliefs to dictate what your fellow citizens may or may not do is a horrible idea.

Basically, this. If you want to claim your church shouldn't be able to wed two people of the same gender, fine. The problem comes when two people who love each other try to get the same rights as heterosexual couples and are refused. For example, prior to the recent changes in hospitalization laws I've seen men and women come to visit their partner in the hospital only to be turned away because they are technically not a spouse. Were they trying to destroy the "sanctity of marriage" or ruin <insert your religion here>? Nope. They just wanted to see the person they loved who very well may be dying.

This is also just idiocy though. Rules / laws aren't made to encompass every single scenario, and no one has time to go write down every possible exception. One is to use wisdom and discretion in a situation like this, but I guess that's how amendments come about, and that's why countries have courts.

MannyRam99 · Post #98 » by **MannyRam99** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:10 am

LikeABosh wrote:
MannyRam99 wrote:FYI : A truth has to be a fact, a fact has to be proven a certainty.

therefore both statements are not "truths".

Then we're not born straight either

Duh ?

Post #99 » by **og15** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:11 am

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:Why can't they simply just give the exact rights and tax benefits under an union as people receive in a marriage? Same benefits, same rights, different name. I figure that would be fine with the religious people.

Why make things easier when you can make it harder though? :wink:

Kyrama · Post #100 » by **Kyrama** » Tue Aug 7, 2012 3:11 am

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:Why can't they simply just give the exact rights and tax benefits under an union as people receive in a marriage? Same benefits, same rights, different name. I figure that would be fine with the religious people.

Ideally this is how is would be. You get the government out of the marriage business altogether and have the government provide civil unions to couples. Then, if you choose to marry through the church of your choice, you're free to.