Obama-Marriage Debate - Alpharetta, GA

Discuss the national Obama-Marriage debate in Alpharetta, GA.

Are you with President Obama in supporting gay marriage?

Alpharetta is with Obama on gay marriage.
Yes, all the way
 
18
Not at all
 
1
I'm on the fence
 
0

Vote now in Alpharetta:

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
datruth

Canton, GA

#1 May 12, 2012
In 2004, he said he did not believe in gay righta or marriages, but now, as a campaign booster, he is saying he is for gay rights and marriage. I'm with him now, but I'm not really sure what he really wants. I am for gay rights, gay marriage, and the right to have an abortion.
Robin Hood

Alpharetta, GA

#2 May 12, 2012
If the religious want to enjoy freedom from the secular;
.
The secular must enjoy freedom from the religious
Alex

Alpharetta, GA

#3 May 26, 2012
It is about being morally correct not religiously correct
Emily

Alpharetta, GA

#4 May 26, 2012
Who one loves and chooses to mary is a personal choice. And one the government should be able to control. Much less the bigoted, religious leaders who are fighting it. Equality!
Chase

Alpharetta, GA

#5 May 26, 2012
Separation of Church and State.
America

Alpharetta, GA

#6 May 26, 2012
he rocks!

Since: Oct 09

Harv wishes he were me

#7 May 26, 2012
Emily wrote:
Who one loves and chooses to mary is a personal choice. And one the government should be able to control. Much less the bigoted, religious leaders who are fighting it. Equality!
Yes, but when you get the gov't involved and want the taxpayers to pay benefits then it is no longer a personal issue.

If you truly believe in equality, I assume you support marriage between siblings as well as polygamy?
Sean

Alpharetta, GA

#8 May 26, 2012
The government is not meant to control, nor should it ever control, the way a person lives their life. Religion or similar preconception cannot be used as law for a governing body, because no religious law is an axiom.

Since: Oct 09

Harv wishes he were me

#9 May 26, 2012
Sean wrote:
The government is not meant to control, nor should it ever control, the way a person lives their life. Religion or similar preconception cannot be used as law for a governing body, because no religious law is an axiom.
So according to you, siblings should be allowed to marry.
Sean

Alpharetta, GA

#10 May 26, 2012
Sawber wrote:
<quoted text>
So according to you, siblings should be allowed to marry.
When did I ever say anything like this? For one, you're using both an appeal to fear and the infamous 'slippery slope', which are both logical fallacies. For two, legalizing gay marriage - aka, giving the LGBT community the equality that they deserve - will not directly or inevitably lead to recognition of other types of untraditional marriages, as you so claim. And quite frankly, if true equality was practiced, then yes, siblings would be allowed to marry, whatever my thoughts upon it. It's none of my business what others do, and I can't tell someone else how to live their life based on how I live mine. If I'm preaching fairness, then this is obviously an illogical thing to do. While I can certainly try and elevate my interests, such as the promotion of science and intellectualism, I can't make a law that says everyone should read a textbook three days a week. And you can't make a law that says our perfectly normal LGBT citizens can't do what pleases them, and deny them the benefits of the institution of marriage.
Robin Hood

Alpharetta, GA

#11 May 26, 2012
Sawber wrote:
Yes, but when you get the gov't involved and want the taxpayers to pay benefits then it is no longer a personal issue.
The IRS already taxes gay couples for the $467,562.00 marriage benefit package; but gay couples get nothing in return
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/03/your-money/...
Sawber wrote:
If you truly believe in equality, I assume you support marriage between siblings as well as polygamy?
Marriage establishes legal kinship. Siblings are already kin; so sibling marriage is redundant
.
Polygamy dates back 3000 years. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. 1000 women all married to each other is the biggest gay marriage in the Bible. Solomon would need 25 Greyhound buses just to take his 1000 wives shopping at Victoria's secret
.
If you want polygamy; first you throw a riot; and then pitch a Polygamy Pride Parade.....Mitt Romney can help you with it after Obama's reelection ;o))

Since: Oct 09

Harv wishes he were me

#12 May 27, 2012
Sean wrote:
<quoted text>
When did I ever say anything like this? For one, you're using both an appeal to fear and the infamous 'slippery slope', which are both logical fallacies. For two, legalizing gay marriage - aka, giving the LGBT community the equality that they deserve - will not directly or inevitably lead to recognition of other types of untraditional marriages, as you so claim. And quite frankly, if true equality was practiced, then yes, siblings would be allowed to marry, whatever my thoughts upon it. It's none of my business what others do, and I can't tell someone else how to live their life based on how I live mine. If I'm preaching fairness, then this is obviously an illogical thing to do. While I can certainly try and elevate my interests, such as the promotion of science and intellectualism, I can't make a law that says everyone should read a textbook three days a week. And you can't make a law that says our perfectly normal LGBT citizens can't do what pleases them, and deny them the benefits of the institution of marriage.
You said "nor should it ever control, the way a person lives their life." So you didn't really mean that?

And what makes you think marriage is a right? The FACT that siblings can't marry shows that it isn't. You can't deny a "right" based on lineage/genetics.

But at least you are consistent enough to see equality would have to include them.

And you would have to include polygamists as well. The only basis for the number two is in procreation-it takes two and only two to procreate.

So, pretending incestuous marriage was legal, can you imagine what that would do to the economy? A daughter could marry her ailing dad so that when he died, she could collect Widows Social Security.

A military member could marry his/her sister so she would get healthcare and other services while he/she could move out of the barracks, get a higher housing allowance, get perdiem for the sibling when he/she moved, etc.

Since: Oct 09

Harv wishes he were me

#13 May 27, 2012
Robin Hood wrote:
<quoted text>

Marriage establishes legal kinship. Siblings are already kin; so sibling marriage is redundant
Are you claiming the biological kinship of siblings gets them the same benefits/protections as the affinity of marriage?

Heck, it that if all gay couples want, all they need it a will, a HIPAA release, and a medical Power of Attorney. One trip to a notary and likely no cost.

No, you claim you want equality but now you seem to think "separate but not close to equal" is just fine. Pure bigotry.
Robin Hood wrote:
<quoted text>

If you want polygamy; first you throw a riot; and then pitch a Polygamy Pride Parade..
Oh, I see, you don't really want equality, just equality for you group? Screw the other groups because they are icky?
Sean

Alpharetta, GA

#14 May 27, 2012
Sawber wrote:
<quoted text>
You said "nor should it ever control, the way a person lives their life." So you didn't really mean that?
...What? What did I say that refuted this? I didn't even mention government in my response.
Sawber wrote:
<quoted text>
And what makes you think marriage is a right? The FACT that siblings can't marry shows that it isn't. You can't deny a "right" based on lineage/genetics.
How is marriage not a right? And how is the fact that it can be denied to certain groups make it not a right? When "colored people" were forced to use the "colored facilities", was it not a right being withheld from them to use the same facilities as everyone else? The right of equality?
Why the fuck are you this adamant about prohibiting gay marriage in the first place? They didn't vote on your marriage. You shouldn't vote on theirs.

Since: Oct 09

Harv wishes he were me

#15 May 27, 2012
Sean wrote:
<quoted text>
...What? What did I say that refuted this? I didn't even mention government in my response.

Are you on drugs?
[QUOTE who="Sean"]The government is not meant to control, nor should it ever control, the way a person lives their life.
"Ever" includes polygamists and siblings, right?
Sean wrote:
How is marriage not a right? And how is the fact that it can be denied to certain groups make it not a right? When "colored people" were forced to use the "colored facilities", was it not a right being withheld from them to use the same facilities as everyone else? The right of equality?
Yep. If it really is a right that is being withheld, then it does indeed apply to siblings who want to marry as well as polygamists, right?

I contend it is not a right. How do you determine what is a right?
Sean wrote:
Why the fuck are you this adamant about prohibiting gay marriage in the first place? They didn't vote on your marriage. You shouldn't vote on theirs.
I'm the taxpayer who will be paying the benefits they are asking me for.

If they want to be a couple, fine. However, as soon as they are asking for recognition by the gov't and benefits from the gov't, they are inviting the taxpayer (me) into their relationship.
Robin Hood

Alpharetta, GA

#16 May 29, 2012
Sawber wrote:
<quoted text>
"Ever" includes polygamists and siblings, right?
<quoted text>
Yep. If it really is a right that is being withheld, then it does indeed apply to siblings who want to marry as well as polygamists, right?
I contend it is not a right. How do you determine what is a right?
<quoted text>
I'm the taxpayer who will be paying the benefits they are asking me for.
If they want to be a couple, fine. However, as soon as they are asking for recognition by the gov't and benefits from the gov't, they are inviting the taxpayer (me) into their relationship.
Gay couples are already taxed double for the $467,562 marriage benefit package (as two single individuals); but they get nothing in return
.
Apparently all that money is used to subsidize *your* marriage
.
So potentially you 'could' take a financial hit; but not for the reason you think
.
Here is a (one page) discussion of relevance to the matter:
http://afewdollarsmore.com/2012/03/08/the-eco...
Sean

Alpharetta, GA

#17 May 29, 2012
Sawber wrote:
"Ever" includes polygamists and siblings, right?
...
Yep. If it really is a right that is being withheld, then it does indeed apply to siblings who want to marry as well as polygamists, right?
I said nothing against the equality I described in my SECOND comment (the keyword being "second", as I said "response"), so I have no idea what you're talking about in contradicting myself. And just pasting a sentence I said and going "THIS IS A CONTRADICTION LOL ARE YOU ON DRUGS" doesn't make it a contradiction. It has to - surprisingly - contradict something.
You are literally just spitting back the same "polygamists and siblings" argument over and over, which only shows me that you've very poorly thought out what you're saying if you can't even think of other things to support your position. And, by the sound of it, the conclusion you're stating says that you ARE willing to continue infringing upon the equality of others, as long as it means you can pay fewer taxes.
What a true, virtuous Republican.
Shall we close all the colleges as well, so you don't have to waste your state tax dollars on people trying to become smarter than you ever will be?

Since: Oct 09

Harv wishes he were me

#18 May 31, 2012
Robin Hood wrote:
<quoted text>
Gay couples are already taxed double for the $467,562 marriage benefit package (as two single individuals); but they get nothing in return
And? Why should they. Note that siblings who want to marry also pay and (potential polygamists) may have 4 or five people who pay but get no benefits.

Do they deserve to have their marriages recognized and financially encouraged by the gov't?

.
Robin Hood wrote:
<quoted text>
.
Here is a (one page) discussion of relevance to the matter:
http://afewdollarsmore.com/2012/03/08/the-eco...
" we are talking as much as $2.5 billion to $277 billion in expenses. "

Yep, you clearly are an Obama fan if you like increasing the deficit by amounts like that.

And let's not forget the impact of family members marrying to game the system as well as polygamists.

Or do you not believe in marriage equality?

Since: Oct 09

Harv wishes he were me

#19 May 31, 2012
Sean wrote:
<quoted text>
I said nothing against the equality I described in my SECOND comment (the keyword being "second", as I said "response"), so I have no idea what you're talking about in contradicting myself. And just pasting a sentence I said and going "THIS IS A CONTRADICTION LOL ARE YOU ON DRUGS" doesn't make it a contradiction. It has to - surprisingly - contradict something.
You are literally just spitting back the same "polygamists and siblings" argument over and over, which only shows me that you've very poorly thought out what you're saying if you can't even think of other things to support your position. And, by the sound of it, the conclusion you're stating says that you ARE willing to continue infringing upon the equality of others, as long as it means you can pay fewer taxes.
What a true, virtuous Republican.
Shall we close all the colleges as well, so you don't have to waste your state tax dollars on people trying to become smarter than you ever will be?
Instead of continuing to whine about the argument, why not try to actually address it?

Is marriage a right? If so, how can it be denied to siblings based simply on genetics/lineage?

Likewise, how can it be denied to polygamists? After all, the only real significance the number two has is in procreation: it takes two and only two to procreate.
Sean

Alpharetta, GA

#20 May 31, 2012
Sawber wrote:
Is marriage a right?
Yes. The ability for homosexuals to marry should not be denied to them based on their sexuality, if the government is to be giving benefits with marriage. If the government had no involvement whatsoever, then it would be no problem. Let it be a religious institution, but then it cannot receive federal benefits. However, if it is considered a "man-woman", religiously-maintained institution which ALSO receives federal benefits, then this is obviously discrimination against perfectly normal "man-man" or "woman-woman" couples who want to receive the same thing. In this way, it is their right to equality.
Sawber wrote:
If so, how can it be denied to siblings based simply on genetics/lineage?
If I am to be consistent with my previous response concerning equality, no, it would "not be able to be denied to siblings based on genetics/lineage", as you love spouting constantly. Nor did I ever say anything which said it WOULD be denied, so again, your attacking position is a bit out of context.
.
And I'm sorry, we're not voting on polygamy or incestual marriages, are we? Stop presenting a "slippery slope" deformation of the actual issue that's being discussed, which is the right of homosexual partners to marry, and stop acting like my "disregarding" of your slipshod argument is a sign of me not addressing your argument. It's fine and dandy to present the issue however you want, but assuming a false premise - your 'slippery slope'- and then using it as basis for an argument is patently fallacious. I can't stand on it, to be metaphorical.
.
I'm tired of your argument. You're refusing to address the actual reason why you stand against homosexual marriage by presenting an argument that's completely based on extrapolation, and the only other reason you've provided is because you don't want to pay taxes to promote equality. Again, very virtuous.
.
And judging by your comment record, you also seem to live in a huge amount of cities across the United States! Fascinating! You must have to move a lot to spread your bigotry on such a great level.
.
Stay out of my town and its poll. Your views aren't wanted here.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

Alpharetta Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News City of Cumming honors essay winner Wed Hope Springs 1
News Roswell To Celebrate Recycling Center's 15th An... May 26 CTJRoswell 1
News Law Student Charged With Murder (Mar '08) May 20 ambi10 133
Review: Financial Care For Seniors May 12 indict ROGER AILES 3
News S. Hall Man Indicted on Murder, Robbery Charges (Oct '07) May 11 Frady 16
Review: Water Removal Services LLC May 9 marty f 2
Say "NO" to Boosterthon Fun Runs in our schools (Oct '08) May 7 Ncg2000 550
Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]