Supreme Court Will Review DOMA, Prop ...

Supreme Court Will Review DOMA, Prop 8 Challenges

There are 1477 comments on the EDGE story from Dec 20, 2012, titled Supreme Court Will Review DOMA, Prop 8 Challenges. In it, EDGE reports that:

On December 7, marriage equality proponents heard the news they'd been waiting to hear: that the Supreme Court will review whether the Defense of Marriage Act and California's Proposition 8 violate the Equal Protection clause of the Constitution.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1081 Jan 23, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
And the fact that you think that matters is hysterical.
p.s. if you put 10 men who shoot blanks on one island with 10 women, and 10 fertile straight couples on another island, you will have the same result as in your example. Does that make one group of straight people more equal than the other?
Stupid.
So many 'what ifs' that is what's hysterical.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1082 Jan 23, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, there will be more gay kids born on "heterosexual island."
Stupid.
Not one to a gay couple, stupid.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1083 Jan 23, 2013
Wondering wrote:
I have no problem with putting it to a vote.

Wondering, the US Supreme Court has held that marriage is a fundamental right on 14 separate occasions.

It has also held that " One's right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections."
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943)

Thank you for once again putting your ignorance on display. What makes your assertion regarding voting on marriage equality even dumber,, is that you seem to have forgotten that although you do not support equality for all, the majority of Americans do.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#1084 Jan 23, 2013
Wonderig wrote:
Find two deserted islands that can support life.
On one, put 10 gay couples.
On the other, put 10 straight couples.
Go back to each island to see what you find after 100 years.
Then tell us they're equal. I have a feeling you'll find one deserted island.
But to keep everything equal, there would still be ten women on the 'gay' island (5 lesbian couples) and ten men (5 gay couples). The 'straight' island would have ten men and ten women, too (10 male/female couples). The problem with your little scenario is you ignore the possibility that those lesbians would use those gay men's sperm (no in and out then repeat business) to inseminate themselves. And some of those lesbians will be surrogates for the gay couples. It happens all the time. Lots of gaybies in the gayborhood.

And some of those kids born on the 'straight' island will be gay having never met another gay person. Never having been 'recruited'. Never having been 'indoctrinated'. Despite what their parents have 'taught' them. Despite what their religious upbringing has 'taught' them. Yup, some of those kids will still be gay even after the best environment (non-gay) you could imagine to raise them in.

And most of the kids born on the 'gay' island will be straight and have none of the ideologically-driven hangups you seem to exhibit.

So in reality, your little rhetorical argument would actually undermine your position.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#1085 Jan 23, 2013
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
But to keep everything equal, there would still be ten women on the 'gay' island (5 lesbian couples) and ten men (5 gay couples). The 'straight' island would have ten men and ten women, too (10 male/female couples). The problem with your little scenario is you ignore the possibility that those lesbians would use those gay men's sperm (no in and out then repeat business) to inseminate themselves. And some of those lesbians will be surrogates for the gay couples. It happens all the time. Lots of gaybies in the gayborhood.
And some of those kids born on the 'straight' island will be gay having never met another gay person. Never having been 'recruited'. Never having been 'indoctrinated'. Despite what their parents have 'taught' them. Despite what their religious upbringing has 'taught' them. Yup, some of those kids will still be gay even after the best environment (non-gay) you could imagine to raise them in.
And most of the kids born on the 'gay' island will be straight and have none of the ideologically-driven hangups you seem to exhibit.
So in reality, your little rhetorical argument would actually undermine your position.
This was the best response to the idiocy. Better than my own.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#1086 Jan 23, 2013
Tony C wrote:
This was the best response to the idiocy. Better than my own.
Thanks. I almost sent it before the true nature of the environment those gay kids would come out of occurred to me. Gays couldn't be blamed for 'creating' gay kids if we're excluded from the island Wondering created for himself. He'll still try to come up something to say otherwise which we'll shoot full of holes again and again.

Wondering (and others) never let facts, logic, or the law get in the way of their ideology.

I hope it's warm where you are. It's currently 6 degrees and dropping.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#1087 Jan 23, 2013
DaveinMass wrote:
So in reality, your little rhetorical argument would actually undermine your position.
Of course, Wondering lacks the logical skills to understand that.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1088 Jan 23, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
There you go making things unequal again. Are you getting it?
Okay, we'll make them all the same age, all the same fertility and all the same mixture of genders.

All the same.

Guess what, the gays & lesbians will figure out how to create the next generation just as their hetero counterparts will.

It won't make any of them straight, and there will likely be the same number of gays & straights in that next generation as well.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#1089 Jan 23, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem with putting it to a vote.
That's not what I asked.

Would you be as cavalier about it if you thought the majority would vote to deny you the right to marry?

So answer the question I asked- would you accept the results if the majority in your state voted to ban you from marrying someone of the opposite sex and only allowed you to marry someone of the same sex?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1090 Jan 24, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not what I asked.
Would you be as cavalier about it if you thought the majority would vote to deny you the right to marry?
So answer the question I asked- would you accept the results if the majority in your state voted to ban you from marrying someone of the opposite sex and only allowed you to marry someone of the same sex?
I have no problem with putting it to a vote.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1091 Jan 24, 2013
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
But to keep everything equal, there would still be ten women on the 'gay' island (5 lesbian couples) and ten men (5 gay couples). The 'straight' island would have ten men and ten women, too (10 male/female couples).
The problem with your little scenario is you ignore the possibility that those lesbians would use those gay men's sperm (no in and out then repeat business) to inseminate themselves. And some of those lesbians will be surrogates for the gay couples. It happens all the time. Lots of gaybies in the gayborhood.
And some of those kids born on the 'straight' island will be gay having never met another gay person. Never having been 'recruited'. Never having been 'indoctrinated'. Despite what their parents have 'taught' them. Despite what their religious upbringing has 'taught' them. Yup, some of those kids will still be gay even after the best environment (non-gay) you could imagine to raise them in.
And most of the kids born on the 'gay' island will be straight and have none of the ideologically-driven hangups you seem to exhibit.
So in reality, your little rhetorical argument would actually undermine your position.
More what ifs. If we use your scenario we once again stray from equal. Straight couples will produce their children normally, if any children happen on gay island it will be through other means.

If you want to involve lesbians, we'll need a third island. Still 10 couples on each. After 100 years we'll have 2 deserted islands.

The only "hangup" I have is that gays should not be allowed to force their values on others who reject them. A simple solution would be an opt out. Gay advocates don't want to allow an opt out beause they would lose their captive audience of 5 year olds.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#1092 Jan 24, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
More what ifs. If we use your scenario we once again stray from equal. Straight couples will produce their children normally, if any children happen on gay island it will be through other means.
If you want to involve lesbians, we'll need a third island. Still 10 couples on each. After 100 years we'll have 2 deserted islands.
The only "hangup" I have is that gays should not be allowed to force their values on others who reject them. A simple solution would be an opt out. Gay advocates don't want to allow an opt out beause they would lose their captive audience of 5 year olds.
1. THE WHOLE THING IS A "WHAT-IF," STUPID! You're talking about people stranded on islands!!

2. "Through other means" does not mean unequal, stupid! p.s. If we wanted to do it through regular means, we can force it for the sake of the species not dying out. But guess what? We can just have a big old party on that island 'til we die, because we don't have to procreate, because the straight people on the other island will do that for us. We're all the human race. If they go on, we go on. The human race can't die out if 20 gay people on an island die, while there are 20 reproducing straight people on the other island!

3. You already have an opt-out. You opt out of public schooling.

“Equality for ALL”

Since: Jul 10

Massachusetts

#1093 Jan 24, 2013
Wondering wrote:
More what ifs. If we use your scenario we once again stray from equal. Straight couples will produce their children normally, if any children happen on gay island it will be through other means.
If you want to involve lesbians, we'll need a third island. Still 10 couples on each. After 100 years we'll have 2 deserted islands.
The only "hangup" I have is that gays should not be allowed to force their values on others who reject them. A simple solution would be an opt out. Gay advocates don't want to allow an opt out beause they would lose their captive audience of 5 year olds.
But YOU were the one to introduce the 'what ifs' with your two island argument.

And don't you include lesbians as part of the 'gay' community? So to be 'equal' there would need to be 5 lesbian couples on our island. And guess what. Lesbians birth children. Your two island proposal didn't stipulate how any of the women could become pregnant. But to be fair, the women on the 'straight' island can use the 'other' means to become pregnant too.

And in your scenario, the 10 straight couples have opted out in the ultimate way. On their island they control all of the environment their children will be exposed to. They would control what and how their children are taught. No gay or lesbian could 'recruit' any of those children into the 'gay lifestyle'. No 'indoctrination' by a 'gay agenda'. But guess what. SOME OF THE CHILDREN BORN ON YOUR ISLAND WILL BE GAY!! Do you deny that possibility? Yup, some of those kids will still be gay even after the best non-gay environment you could imagine to raise them in.

So the question then becomes what do you do with those gay children on your 'straight' island. Are you going to exile them? Some families do that to their gay child here in the real world. What do you tell these gay children about themselves?

So even on your 'straight' island, you will recreate all of the issues you moan and whine about in the real world.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1094 Jan 24, 2013
Tony C wrote:
"Through other means" does not mean unequal, stupid! p.s.
Equal = the same.
Through other means = not the same.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1095 Jan 24, 2013
DaveinMass wrote:
<quoted text>
But YOU were the one to introduce the 'what ifs' with your two island argument.
"Jim and I are married," said Koski. "We are a family, but we are not treated like every other family in the U.S."

No need to mix gay men with gay women. Jim says he and his husband are just like any other family. So, let's put 10 couples, just like his since his family is the same, on one island. Then put 10 straight couples on another. See what happens after 100 years. I think we'll see proof that they are not the same.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#1096 Jan 24, 2013
Tony C wrote:
The human race can't die out if 20 gay people on an island die,
But it could if everyone were gay.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#1097 Jan 24, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Equal = the same.
Through other means = not the same.
Wrong. Equal means having the same value, stupid.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#1098 Jan 24, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
"Jim and I are married," said Koski. "We are a family, but we are not treated like every other family in the U.S."
No need to mix gay men with gay women. Jim says he and his husband are just like any other family. So, let's put 10 couples, just like his since his family is the same, on one island. Then put 10 straight couples on another. See what happens after 100 years. I think we'll see proof that they are not the same.
What happens after 100 years is all those people will be dead, but some on the straight island will have living children, and statistically some will be gay.

YOU HAVE NO POINT.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#1099 Jan 24, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
But it could if everyone were gay.
So now that your example has been decimated, you are going back for more what-ifs.

When and how would everyone in the world become gay?

You are so idiotic. Are you not capable of making serious arguments?
Jane Dodo

West New York, NJ

#1100 Jan 24, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
So now that your example has been decimated, you are going back for more what-ifs.
When and how would everyone in the world become gay?
You are so idiotic. Are you not capable of making serious arguments?
No, he isn't. You can give him all the facts you like. Wondering will just call them lies and dismiss them. Pretty convenient little denial mechanism, ain't it?

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Washington court rules against florist in gay w... 8 min Amused 65
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 47 min Respect71 45,158
News Doritos makes rainbow chips in support of gay r... (Sep '15) 49 min guest 1,092
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 1 hr carter county res... 24,777
Looking for a girlfriend for a married bi-sexual (Aug '08) 7 hr Pleasures feminin... 55
News Singer Greg Gould: 'I was told not to be too gay' 8 hr Marco R s Secret ... 1
News Gay Pride just 'not black enough' 8 hr Marco R s Secret ... 1
More from around the web