However court rules, gay marriage deb...

However court rules, gay marriage debate won't end

There are 2348 comments on the NewsCenter 25 story from Mar 28, 2013, titled However court rules, gay marriage debate won't end. In it, NewsCenter 25 reports that:

However the Supreme Court rules after its landmark hearings on same-sex marriage, the issue seems certain to divide Americans and states for many years to come.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NewsCenter 25.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#2050 Apr 30, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Another one trying to elevate themselves to African American suffrage...doesn't apply...just makes you less credible...
ROTFLMOA!!! Stop it! Stop it!! You're killing me with this craziness!! LOL!!

Poor you. It sucks to have to pretend you don't understand things in order to prop up your side of the discussion, doesn't it??

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2051 Apr 30, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!!!! Too funny. You really believe that nonsense, don't you??
Why wouldn't I believe the truth???....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2052 Apr 30, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
ROTFLMOA!!! Stop it! Stop it!! You're killing me with this craziness!! LOL!!
Poor you. It sucks to have to pretend you don't understand things in order to prop up your side of the discussion, doesn't it??
Is this a rebuttal??? I fail to see any relevant content.....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2053 Apr 30, 2013
Poly 4 the People wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would it bother u if polygamy was legalized? Its seems hypocritical for gay marriage advocates not to at least tacitly support it. Polygamous families do exist in this country.
..because it's not about marriage 'equality' at all...they are all liars....

Since: Apr 08

Chagrin Falls, OH

#2054 Apr 30, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
..because it's not about marriage 'equality' at all...they are all liars....
That's really rich, coming from you! You are desperately trying to stop same-sex couples from getting legal recognition of their relationships. You trot out all the old discredited arguments. And then you turn around and try and smear those working for marriage equality by saying they aren't "really" for marriage equality at all!

It's like a KKK member thinking they can discredit their opponents by calling them anti-Semitic or anti-African-American.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2055 Apr 30, 2013
Gay And Proud wrote:
<quoted text>
That's really rich, coming from you! You are desperately trying to stop same-sex couples from getting legal recognition of their relationships. You trot out all the old discredited arguments. And then you turn around and try and smear those working for marriage equality by saying they aren't "really" for marriage equality at all!
That's really rich, coming from you! You are desperately trying to stop polygamists participants from getting legal recognition of their relationships.

You trot out all the old unsubstaniated arguments. And then you turn around and try and smear those working for the preservation of traditional marriage because we exposed your hypocracy and your misrepresentation the word 'equality'...because you aren't "really" for marriage equality at all!

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#2056 Apr 30, 2013
Poly 4 the People wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would it bother u if polygamy was legalized? Its seems hypocritical for gay marriage advocates not to at least tacitly support it. Polygamous families do exist in this country.
Who says we don't?? I have *zero* problem with legally recognized polygamy. Bring me a petition for a law that makes sense and I'll sign it! It's not something I aspire for myself, but I see not problem with other people doing it. The couple of polygamous families I've known were lovely people with very strong family values and relatively happy children.

Where the anti-equality folks make their mistakes is when they decide that a) advocates of same-sex marriage are anti-polygamy (not necessarily true), and b) that, in order for us to have legitimacy, we are somehow obligated to fight for the equal marriage rights of absolutely anyone and everyone else, regardless of how far removed their situations are from our own.

The truth is that polygamy is far more complex from a legal point of view than same-sex marriage equality, which can be effortlessly adopted into law by simply removing the opposite gender requirement from the laws. Everything else stays the same.

For polygamy, EVERY law regarding marriage, family, property, inheritance, wills, divorce, adoption, child protection, welfare, ALL OF THEM would have to be examined and re-written to accommodate multiple concurrent spouses with multiple children sharing joint (or not) custody. Those advocating for polygamy have a far steeper road ahead of them as they have to get by BOTH religious hypocrisy and bigotry AND hundreds of legal hurdles in order to be recognized legally.

But even so, if someone were to give me a petition to sign in support of recognizing polygamous families, and their proposal was fair and equitable and reasonably adopted, I'd sign it. Why not? I'm not willing to stand in the way of someone else pursuing happiness.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#2057 Apr 30, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
NOPE! That's not true...there is no gay gene, therefore this is not an 'innate' characteristic...it is 'caused' by something...a malfunction somewhere....pay attention to your own scientists...
<quoted text>....
LOL!! You should learn something about science before you try to quote it. Just because they haven't found "the gay gene" yet, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. They also haven't found "the straight gene" yet. Using you're "logic", that would mean that straight aren't straight by nature, but somehow choose it, like you pretend gay folks do.

And even if everyone were proven to have "chosen" their sexual orientation, wouldn't that suggest that everyone's personal choice must be right for them and, therefore, cannot be wrong?

Also, if you knew the first thing about logic and/or science, you'd know that you can't prove a negative (like there not being a "gay gene"). So you should stop insisting you can because it only proves how little you know about what you're talking about.

“Marriage Equality”

Since: Dec 07

Lakeland, MI

#2058 Apr 30, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry...another lie..ssm has opened the door for polygamists to challenge marriage statutes in the name of marriage equality....liar! Soon it will be incest marriages as well, fighting under the same umbrella...hope you all are proud...history will reflect that homosexuality was the downfall of marriage in this country...congrats!
OMG!!! And you know what's gonna happen NEXT???? The little pixies will all come out of the forest and demand that they have the right to marry the Leprechauns!! And then the Leprechauns will demand that they can marry zombies!! And everyone will be SO confused!!!

No one will EVER be able to figure out who to marry!!! HOW will all the poor, suffering straight people ever figure out what they're supposed to do with all that insanity going on??? Poor, POOR straight people. They're so easily confused. I suspect thousands of them are turning gay as we speak because they can't remember who they're supposed to be attracted to.

How sad that everyone is ruining the world for straight people. They don't seem to adapt very well, do they?

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2059 Apr 30, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL!! You should learn something about science before you try to quote it. Just because they haven't found "the gay gene" yet, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. They also haven't found "the straight gene" yet.
You all keep throwing up the 'straight' gene like we are the ones claiming it exists...just like the gay gene...it doesn't...we are born male/female not straight/gay....get it right...
Using you're "logic", that would mean that straight aren't straight by nature, but somehow choose it, like you pretend gay folks do.
We are 'all' straight by nature...your 'abnormality' is the result of some something else...not your genes...
And even if everyone were proven to have "chosen" their sexual orientation, wouldn't that suggest that everyone's personal choice must be right for them and, therefore, cannot be wrong?
No, id-jit. Do you 'choose' to walk on your feet??? You can however 'choose' to walk on your hands if you want to....walking on your feet is just normal anatomy...no 'gene' tells us to walk on our feet...
Also, if you knew the first thing about logic and/or science, you'd know that you can't prove a negative (like there not being a "gay gene"). So you should stop insisting you can because it only proves how little you know about what you're talking about.
It is 'your' scientists that confirmed this information, so you have a problem with them...not me...the explicitly determined....wait for it.....THERE IS NO GAY GENE!!!

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2060 Apr 30, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG!!! And you know what's gonna happen NEXT???? The little pixies will all come out of the forest and demand that they have the right to marry the Leprechauns!! And then the Leprechauns will demand that they can marry zombies!! And everyone will be SO confused!!!
You can't argue with facts...polygamy is now in the courts...make way for incestuous folks to demand marriage and the recognition of before long...
No one will EVER be able to figure out who to marry!!! HOW will all the poor, suffering straight people ever figure out what they're supposed to do with all that insanity going on???
Marriage will mean nothing...to anybody...
Poor, POOR straight people. They're so easily confused. I suspect thousands of them are turning gay as we speak because they can't remember who they're supposed to be attracted to.
How sad that everyone is ruining the world for straight people. They don't seem to adapt very well, do they?
Traditional marriage is not about 'straight' people, as there is no hetersexual requirement to marry the opposite sex....now please tell us more about marriage 'equality' again....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2061 Apr 30, 2013
eJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
Who says we don't?? I have *zero* problem with legally recognized polygamy.
Of course you don't...cause you really don't care about marriage at all, do you????
Where the anti-equality folks make their mistakes is when they decide that a) advocates of same-sex marriage are anti-polygamy (not necessarily true), and b) that, in order for us to have legitimacy, we are somehow obligated to fight for the equal marriage rights of absolutely anyone and everyone else, regardless of how far removed their situations are from our own.
You all made everyone else's fight 'your' fight by throwing the word 'equality' into your argument...if you didn't mean it, you shouldn't have said it....
The truth is that polygamy is far more complex from a legal point of view than same-sex marriage equality, which can be effortlessly adopted into law by simply removing the opposite gender requirement from the laws. Everything else stays the same.
I don't think it's 'effortless' at all...and who decides how much 'effort' goes into equality anyways????
For polygamy, EVERY law regarding marriage, family, property, inheritance, wills, divorce, adoption, child protection, welfare, ALL OF THEM would have to be examined and re-written to accommodate multiple concurrent spouses with multiple children sharing joint (or not) custody.
So???? Equality shouldn't take all that into account now should it???
Those advocating for polygamy have a far steeper road ahead of them as they have to get by BOTH religious hypocrisy and bigotry AND hundreds of legal hurdles in order to be recognized legally.
Not as steep a road as you think....ssm has opened the door for them in ways they never expected...
But even so, if someone were to give me a petition to sign in support of recognizing polygamous families, and their proposal was fair and equitable and reasonably adopted, I'd sign it. Why not? I'm not willing to stand in the way of someone else pursuing happiness.
Reasonable and fair according to whom?? Them or you???
To the heart

Shreveport, LA

#2062 Apr 30, 2013

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2063 Apr 30, 2013
To the heart wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =LRXP5Bf8KFsXX
What's this about??

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2064 Apr 30, 2013
We Hate to Say We Told You So
Same-Sex Marriage & Polygamy
By: John Stonestreet|Published: April 25, 2013 7:20 AM

Claims that legalizing same-sex “marriage” is a slippery slope to polygamy have been met with scoffs. We really hate to say “we told you so...”
In a scene from Jurassic Park, Ian Malcolm, the mathematician skeptical about whether the park is a good idea, watches the T-Rex burst out of its enclosure and says,“I hate being right all the time.”

Princeton Professor Robert George and other defenders of traditional marriage understand these sentiments. For years, they’ve warned that redefining marriage beyond the union of one man and one woman wouldn’t—indeed couldn’t—stop with same-sex unions. The same reasoning that extends marriage to same-sex couples would easily be applied to polygamy and polyamory also.

The standard response to these concerns was scoffing and accusations of fear mongering.

Well, the fences are down and the beast is loose.

Cont'd....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2065 Apr 30, 2013
On Valentines’s Day, the Scientific American published an article claiming that polyamorists could “teach us a thing or two about love,” and the only reason to oppose it was bigotry because of outdated views about love and sexuality. As I said on my Point commentary about the article, the flow of the argument sounded far too familiar.

And now, as if on cue, Slate magazine published an article on April 15 by Jillian Keenan arguing that polygamy should be legalized. As Keenan notes, the arguments about gay marriage being a “slippery slope” that will lead to legalized polygamy is something “we’ve been hearing about for years.” To which she adds,“We can only hope.”

......

What’s most significant here isn’t the quality of Keenan’s arguments. The quality is poor. The treatment of women in countries where polygamy is legal makes her optimism about the impact of legalizing it seem dangerously naive. And her appeal to religious freedom is—shall we say—selective. There are plenty of law-abiding Americans whose religious freedom is under genuine threat who could benefit from this kind of solicitude.

No, the most significant thing about Keenan’s argument is not, to paraphrase Samuel Johnson, that it’s made well, but that it’s made openly.

cont'd.....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2066 Apr 30, 2013
As Dr. George pointed out in “First Things,” when Christians pointed out the logical link between same-sex marriage and polygamy, proponents of same-sex marriage rejected the connection. They insisted that “no one is arguing for the legal recognition of polygamous or polyamorous relationships as marriages!”

George writes in response,“That was then; this is now.” The “then” he referred to was last week; the now is today.

George predicts that Keenan’s article “will not produce a single serious critique by a major scholar or activist from the same-sex marriage movement.”

Now he would love to be wrong. But defenders of traditional marriage know that the enclosures that kept marriage a “monogamous and exclusive union” are being dismantled. And no one should be surprised by what emerges, least of all those doing the dismantling.

...it's funny though....how they don't even acknowledge their role in the dismantling.....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#2068 Apr 30, 2013
April 17, 2013 at 4:07 pm

We recently reported Slate author Jillian Keenan's opinion that "the fight doesn’t end with same-sex marriage. We need to legalize polygamy too!

Well, just in case anyone should think this is idle speculation and thought experiment, consider news coming out of Canada today:

A Canadian court is assembling an unprecedented set of testimonies and legal briefs about the pros and cons of polygamy. The goal is to answer the question of whether Canada’s anti-polygamy law is constitutional.

But, as the story reveals, there is still cause for hope. The case to legalize polygamous unions faces an uphill battle, against some formidable forces -- for example, the scholarship of Professor Joseph Henrich from the University of British Columbia.

Henrich has written of monogamy that it is "one of the foundations of Western civilization, and may explain why democratic ideals and notions of human rights first emerged as a Western phenomenon."

We'll be watching....
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2069 Apr 30, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry...another lie..ssm has opened the door for polygamists to challenge marriage statutes in the name of marriage equality....liar! Soon it will be incest marriages as well, fighting under the same umbrella...hope you all are proud...history will reflect that homosexuality was the downfall of marriage in this country...congrats!
What a hot, steaming pile of horseshit. Hilarious that you are THAT stupid. Homosexuals want to get married, so they are responsible for the downfall of marriage. Yeah... that makes PERFECT sense.

We don't have much longer to wait for SCOTUS' decision.... not that YOU have ANY respect for the American System of government. Whatever will you do after SCOTUS tells you to grow up? I know.... you can start a protest movement... ban education.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#2070 Apr 30, 2013
Get That Fool wrote:
April 17, 2013 at 4:07 pm
We recently reported Slate author Jillian Keenan's opinion that "the fight doesn’t end with same-sex marriage. We need to legalize polygamy too!
Well, just in case anyone should think this is idle speculation and thought experiment, consider news coming out of Canada today:
A Canadian court is assembling an unprecedented set of testimonies and legal briefs about the pros and cons of polygamy. The goal is to answer the question of whether Canada’s anti-polygamy law is constitutional.
But, as the story reveals, there is still cause for hope. The case to legalize polygamous unions faces an uphill battle, against some formidable forces -- for example, the scholarship of Professor Joseph Henrich from the University of British Columbia.
Henrich has written of monogamy that it is "one of the foundations of Western civilization, and may explain why democratic ideals and notions of human rights first emerged as a Western phenomenon."
We'll be watching....
Really? Since WHEN did you pay attention to Canada?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Autos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News San Francisco police chief releases more racist... 14 hr Julie Jane 1
Key cutting Automatic V8/X6 or Miracle A7 22 hr Ambrosio 1
News Chevy Volt leapfrogs Toyota's Prius (Nov '10) Thu Baby makers 11,767
GM Tech2 “Access to Security Access was denied” Thu Ambrosio 1
News FCA to recall 1.1 million vehicles for confusin... Apr 27 who 1
New BMW INPA K+CAN With FT232RQ Chip Apr 27 uobd2 1
How to program Citroen key fob with Lexia 3 Dia... Apr 26 car-diagnostic-tool 1
More from around the web