Obama-Marriage Debate - Somerset, KY

Discuss the national Obama-Marriage debate in Somerset, KY.

Are you with President Obama in supporting gay marriage?

Somerset is not with Obama on gay marriage
Not at all
 
92
Yes, all the way
 
65
I'm on the fence
 
1

Vote now in Somerset:

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Level 6

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1265 Feb 2, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
<quoted text>same sex marriage won't just harm homosexuals. Gays are already allowed to marry under current laws; they always have and they still can today. There is no orientation test for a marriage license.
Same sex marriage supporters can't be honest about their policy because calling it gender apartheid marriage just won't win.
All the silly apartheid language aside (dude, that is the DUMBEST argument I've heard from a relatively intelligent person on this topic..you're seriously worried about prison rape being made worse by same sex marriage...are you shitting me???)...

Here is where you really lost me very early on in this debate. You keep saying that gays are allowed to get married under current laws. If by that statement you mean that they are allowed to get married to people of the opposite sex then sure, they can. If by that statement you mean they can marry people of their own, preferred gender then NO THEY CANNOT. I think this, along with the ridiculous patented Prison Rape™ argument are monumentally insane. The part about gays being allowed to marry under current law is just a lie. The part about prison rape is a red herring.

What I find most offensive about your posts is that you occasionally claim to be ok with gays. I find that very hard to accept, given your stance on this issue. It smacks of "Heck, some of my best friends are black...I just don't want them mixing with whites." It's the same damn thing when you break it down.

So you are not a troll. You honestly believe your argument is a good one? Ok, dude, whatever floats your boat.

But we're well over 50% in favor at this point. And no sign of that trend changing. So you better just get used to the idea. These desperate state mandates "defining" marriage as being man/woman are basically the last gasps of the anti-gay marriage movement. They will eventually be found not in keeping with the Constitution.

Good night, and peace. I said what I wanted to say and I'll do my very best not to continue this argument. The horse is done dead.

For anyone who is on the fence just think about whether or not you would want someone else to decide if YOU could get married to the one you love.

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#1266 Feb 2, 2013
Homosexual behavior has been observed in thousands of species, so you're ignorant.
Ollie wrote:
Same sex marriage and sex is the same as having sex with animals. Its not natural and goes againt the scheme of life.
rick santorum

Tucson, AZ

#1267 Feb 2, 2013
mitt romney is directly responsible for the deaths og gays and gay activist in uganda..its his money that is spreading hate with the ugandan gov and its people..mormons need to leave uganda or be killed...you have 90 days.
zipyourlip

London, KY

#1268 Feb 2, 2013
Ollie wrote:
Same sex marriage and sex is the same as having sex with animals. Its not natural and goes againt the scheme of life.
Republican Jesus™ hates The Gay. They’re sinners, after all. It says so right there in the Bible next to the part about shellfish being an abomination. Nothing demonstrates the compassionate conservatives’ dedication to the teachings of Republican Jesus™ like blocking legislation for same sex marriage and calling homosexuals pedophiles while enjoying a nice shrimp cocktail before a delicious lobster dinner.
Also, Republican Jesus™ gave us AIDS, and STDs in general, as punishment for homosexuality. Of course, this ignores the fact that lesbians have the lowest rate of STDs, including AIDS, among all adult population groups. So as far as punishment goes, half of the “sinners” are better off than the rest of us, statistically speaking. Maybe Republican Jesus™ likes him some girl on girl action?
KELLERMAN

Huntsville, OH

#1270 Feb 2, 2013
Ollie wrote:
<quoted text>Animals don't engage in homosexual acts. In the animal world its the survial of the fitest and the weak are weeded out to keep the heard strong. Humans are becoming weak due to homosex acts being condoned. Gays brought down the Roman empire.
Your post reminds me of Nazi propaganda that led to millions of others being executed. How can you blame the gays for the change in society morals. I doubt the Roman empire was destroyed due to gays. Gays have been here since the dawn of time and it hasn't been destroyed yet. When you post these kind of posts, one can assume that you are not a Christian or you wouldn't post such rubbish. During cocktail hour we were discussing gays and these kind of posts. It appears that the Gay's should change their format and introduce themselves as a religion. They can get tax exemptions an being a religious group than they would have protection and rights that you have to spill your nonsense.

“Welcome to the Winds of Change”

Level 5

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#1272 Feb 4, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>
The state has an interest in not promoting an unhealthy sexual behavior by legally legitimizing it.
Especially now that we have Obamacare.
Actually they don't....and I find it very interesting that conservatives want government just small enough to fit into people's bedrooms. Why is that?

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1274 Feb 4, 2013
Same sex marriage would change all gender segregated institutions, like prisons. If you hate prison rape, keep marriage male/female, to avoid forced prison weddings.

“Welcome to the Winds of Change”

Level 5

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#1275 Feb 4, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Same sex marriage would change all gender segregated institutions, like prisons. If you hate prison rape, keep marriage male/female, to avoid forced prison weddings.
If you believe this then I have a unicorn to show you and some beach front property to sell.

Brian the troll like to make things up when there is no facts based in reality to prove them. Troll on Brian troll on!

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1276 Feb 4, 2013
Gender segregation can't provide the benefits traditional marriage provides, so we shouldn't subsidize gender segregated relationships.

Civil unions and domestic partnerships are perfect compromise, as those are civil contracts.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1277 Feb 4, 2013
They call me a troll because they can't face the arguments; name calling is easier than reason. They barely understand, ad hominem argument is fallacy.

I'll note the insults but I don't take it personally. Just document the insults and injuries, for court.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Level 6

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1279 Feb 4, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
They call me a troll because they can't face the arguments; name calling is easier than reason. They barely understand, ad hominem argument is fallacy.
I'll note the insults but I don't take it personally. Just document the insults and injuries, for court.
You want me to reject the inclusion of homosexuals in marriage (which is a symbol of normal society) because you are afraid convicts will get raped and forced into marriages they don't want.

Surely you can see how that kind of argumentation would lead me to think you are not being entirely serious or genuine in this conversation. We typically refer to that kind of thing as "trolling". If you are serious about your Argument From Prison Rape™ then I apologize for calling you a troll and I wish you a speedy recovery from whatever is ailing you.

Nobody makes an argument like that with a straight face.
Yeah

Butler, KY

#1280 Feb 4, 2013
Allanon80 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually they don't....
Well, O.K. I guess that settles it. LOL!

1 in 5 gay males infected with HIV.

67% of ALL syphilis cases in the U.S. are gay males.

LBGTQ suicides are at epidemic levels.

I do not hate gay people.

We need to be educating people about the mental and physical health risks rather than trying to sweep the facts under the rug so we can promote a political agenda for the sake of winning votes.

The republicans lie to and manipulate the religious for votes.

The democrats are manipulating the LBGTQ community for votes.

Neither party really cares for either group.

The real enemy of the LBGTQ community is disease and depression. These issues are being ignored and the gay marriage political football isn't going to fix it.

Let me guess your answer, "It has nothing to do with the marriage issue".
Yeah, that's only been said about 500 times on this thread.
You democrat sycophants could care less about gay people because you'll lie about the hazards that face them so you can promote your politics. It's all about winning votes for you people.

“Welcome to the Winds of Change”

Level 5

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#1281 Feb 4, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, O.K. I guess that settles it. LOL!
1 in 5 gay males infected with HIV.
67% of ALL syphilis cases in the U.S. are gay males.
LBGTQ suicides are at epidemic levels.
I do not hate gay people.
We need to be educating people about the mental and physical health risks rather than trying to sweep the facts under the rug so we can promote a political agenda for the sake of winning votes.
The republicans lie to and manipulate the religious for votes.
The democrats are manipulating the LBGTQ community for votes.
Neither party really cares for either group.
The real enemy of the LBGTQ community is disease and depression. These issues are being ignored and the gay marriage political football isn't going to fix it.
Let me guess your answer, "It has nothing to do with the marriage issue".
Yeah, that's only been said about 500 times on this thread.
You democrat sycophants could care less about gay people because you'll lie about the hazards that face them so you can promote your politics. It's all about winning votes for you people.
Actually I am very aware of the GLBT plight since I happen to be gay. You are right though, through education comes knowledge. The reason for STD rates being as high as they are is easily seen through the lack or real sex education. The reason for suicide rates being so high is because GLBT teens are made to feel like the are less than human because of who they love. This all coming from people who say who and how they love someone is wrong and that their relationship is somehow less than that of their counterparts i.e. marriage.

Now back to the real debate, the government/teachers/parents should educate our youth how to protect themselves from STD's. The nation should teach their children not to hate someone because of who they are. This would take care of some suicide issues. Finally the government should make sure that GLBT couples can get married if they want, just like their straight counterparts. Once all this is done I think you will see things change for the better.
Yeah

Butler, KY

#1283 Feb 4, 2013
Allanon80 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I am very aware of the GLBT plight since I happen to be gay.
Sorry, then the last sentence of my previous post wasn't directed at you.

I just see this entire issue as nothing more than another way that our government is keeping us divided. I swear I think Obama would do a 180 on this for enough money. Not just him either, any of them.

I know that you and others believe that marriage will help these issues, but I also see very little public discourse or knowledge of these problems. It seems that these issues are being suppressed in order not to sully the politics of the marriage debate.
The marriage issue is a real money maker for the dems right now. Can you imagine how much money the LGBTQ community has given the dems on this one thing. Politicians love to exploit the issues that we're passionate on.

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Level 6

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#1284 Feb 4, 2013
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, O.K. I guess that settles it. LOL!
1 in 5 gay males infected with HIV.
67% of ALL syphilis cases in the U.S. are gay males.
LBGTQ suicides are at epidemic levels.
I do not hate gay people.
We need to be educating people about the mental and physical health risks rather than trying to sweep the facts under the rug so we can promote a political agenda for the sake of winning votes.
The republicans lie to and manipulate the religious for votes.
The democrats are manipulating the LBGTQ community for votes.
Neither party really cares for either group.
The real enemy of the LBGTQ community is disease and depression. These issues are being ignored and the gay marriage political football isn't going to fix it.
Let me guess your answer, "It has nothing to do with the marriage issue".
Yeah, that's only been said about 500 times on this thread.
You democrat sycophants could care less about gay people because you'll lie about the hazards that face them so you can promote your politics. It's all about winning votes for you people.
You are conflating the risks of dangerous sex practices with the state of being gay. And no, this is not relevant to gay marriage. If a straight couple were ate up with every known STD they could still get married. Why would you insist on a double standard?

You need to understand what it means to have a sexual orientation. You have one, I have one, everybody has one. Sometimes they can drift, sometimes they cannot. Most people fall pretty firmly to one side or the other while some folks are comfortable going both ways.

This is because sexuality is complex and beautiful. It is not the robotic cartoon that social conservatives want it to be, or need it to be.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1285 Feb 4, 2013
Homosexuals have always been included in marriage, I cite Oscar Wilde and Meredith Baxter as examples. The issue isn't inclusion since there is no law preventing homosexuals from marrying under the same laws as everyone else.

The issue is changing marriage law so two men or two women would be considered 'married'; introducing gender segregation to marriage where only gender diversity existed before. The issue is bringing marriage into prisons and other gender segregated institutions.

Level 5

Since: Mar 12

Hopkinsville, KY

#1286 Feb 5, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Homosexuals have always been included in marriage, I cite Oscar Wilde and Meredith Baxter as examples. The issue isn't inclusion since there is no law preventing homosexuals from marrying under the same laws as everyone else.
The issue is changing marriage law so two men or two women would be considered 'married'; introducing gender segregation to marriage where only gender diversity existed before. The issue is bringing marriage into prisons and other gender segregated institutions.
There's a lot packed in there, for sure. I would reiterate that it is not, in fact, legal for homosexuals to marry partners of the same gender which is a fact you are trying to skate around, rhetorically. By "marry", I am referring to the state recognized contract of marriage, not jumping the broom, so to speak.

Let's get to this little nugget of gender segregation. The assumption in your argument is that gender segregated institutions, such as prisons, are designed that way to specifically prevent married couples from being together. This is, in fact, not the case. Gender segregation in prison exists to protect female prisoners from sexual activity, whether by force or volition, with men, and the consequences of such activity. There are a number of biological and sociological reasons why this is necessary but we all know why this is true, intuitively. The female body is obviously more susceptible to rape and the effects of being raped, by men, are obviously very traumatic in the long term. Even if the relationships were consensual and prisoners of opposite gender were allowed to reproduce, that is obviously no place for a child to grow up. As a result, female prisons were created to separate them from male prisoners, for that purpose. The result is that heterosexual relationships do not exist in these types of prisons among prisoners but that is the result, not the reason for their existence.

With that in mind, the argument against homosexual marriage from the perspective of prison populations is as absurd as it appears on face value. It is completely unrelated to the reason prison populations are segregated by sex. Beyond that, prisoners are deprived of quite a few rights while in prison and depriving them of one more, this particular one that is, is not going to make me lose any sleep.

The argument that heterosexual marriage is diverse is yet another shot from the hip. If you have 100 married couples, all 100 couples are identical in gender composition, if you live in a state like ours. If you take 100 married couples somewhere that permits gay marriage, the gender arrangement of married couples is more diverse. In the first case, all 100 couples are of one combination of a set of 3 possible binary combinations. In the latter, they are distributed among all 3 combinations.

Beyond any of that, the overall argument is simply insincere. None of us really believe you are an advocate of prisoners or marriage diversity. This is akin to the creationist argument that creationism is more scientific. The argument requires such rhetorical gymnastics that it undermines its own rationality because you cannot be an advocate for a community with whom you differ on defining principles.
Pollster

Bristolville, OH

#1288 Feb 7, 2013
Why should we pass sweeping SSM laws, for what purpose?

If you say civil rights, does that mean that polygamist, and incestuous relations have a civil right to be married as well?

And what purpose would polygamist, and incestuous marriage play in the role of benefiting our nation as a whole?

If you say that SSM should be allowed for the same financial gain that heterosexual couples enjoy.

Then what is the point of the institution of marriage to begin with, financial gain?

I thought the institution of marriage was to provide a benefit to societal norms and family.

Are we now changing the qualifier to financial gain rather then a benefit to society and the children of a society?

You may say we should have SSM because it is a civil right.

Does that mean that now we are changing the qualifier from a benefit to societal norms and children, to financial gain and civil rights?

Well then, What is the real purpose of the institution of marriage?

Should we pass laws based upon expediency and political correctness?

Has expediency and political correctness become the new qualifier for the institution of marriage?

You may say we need SSM so gay partners can visit one another in the hospital?

Has hospital visitation now become the new qualifier to rearrange the institution of marriage?

Would it not make more sense to change visitation laws?

You may say we need SSM because we have children on orphanages?

Is this now become the new qualifier for the institution of marriage?

Would it not make more sense to relax the adoption laws and allow all children to enjoy both a father and mother in the home?

You may say we should allow SSM because gay couples have been in long term relationships. But wouldn't that discriminate against the short term gay relationships?

Has long term gay relationships now become the new qualifier to rearrange the institution of marriage?

You may say we need SSM because some have served in the military?

But that would discriminant against those that haven't?

And has military service now become the new qualifier to rearrange the institution of marriage?

And what would be the new qualifier for the polygamist and incestuous couple?

And still we have not answered the most basic question, what is the purpose of SSM and what benefit does it provide to society and society's children?

Surly one cannot expect to turn the world upside down based upon something that is totally self-serving, can we?

Should not all laws be based upon those things that cause the mores and norms of a nation and family to flourish?

Should not laws be based upon those things that cause civilizations to propagate the family, rather then the individual?

Should we give full status to the concept of SSM. A concept that has no ability to fully propagate the society in which the concept is being advocated?

Civil unions? For what purpose?

Equality? Based on what?

Look, I am trying to help SSM out here.

But you have got to make you case?

Facts, not emotion.

Logic, not illogic!

Benefit, not nonsense.

Laws based upon moral underpinnings that have stood from antiquity. Not laws created to squeeze moral underpinnings out as new unproven qualifiers are created.

Laws that protect our nations most valuable asset, children. Not laws created for social experimentation with children.

Laws that strengthen heterosexual marriage. Not laws that cheapen and toy with heterosexual marriage.

I have not written to be critical!

But these questions must be answered in the pursuit of whats really best for our nation, not the individual.

&li st=PLQUH50YNQ6GQ-ZNLEZLA5RDEGN RW7D4PS

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#1290 Feb 7, 2013
There is no gender equality right in the Constitution. Putting women in front line combat units is a terrible idea, that would result in death and injury in combat and training.

If you care about women, keep marriage male/female.

“Welcome to the Winds of Change”

Level 5

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#1291 Feb 7, 2013
The trolls are back. To give a short answer to Pollster marriage and the reasons for marriage have changed throughout history. Yes not to long ago people married for station/money and power and not for love. That is history you can even look it up if you want.

There are a number of reasons GLBT couples want to get married, one of them being the societal benefits of being married. That is just one reason, love would be another.

I seen you put in your slippery slope arguments as well.

Still waiting for you and Brian to give the valid legal argument that the state can use to prevent 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.

Somerset Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 22 min Athenesword 142,357
Hey Hatti. (Jan '12) 12 hr Hatti_Hollerand 27,441
News Kentucky taking bids on development at state park (Dec '14) 14 hr blankforGov 19
*keep a word- drop a word* Game (Jul '11) 15 hr Red_Forman 11,412
4 word game (Jan '09) 23 hr Honest Babe 2,195
3 word comment - (Oct '09) Wed Dickens1 6,245
Debate: Gay Marriage - Somerset, KY (Jul '10) Tue simple pleasures 850
Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]