GOP mute on Supreme Court cases regarding DOMA

[Retro Rob]

Even if we buy that marriage is for society and not individuals, we need some compelling reason to deny it to those that society does not get benefit from. You also need a compelling argument that society does not benefit from gay marriage, I personally think it does. In the absence of such a compelling argument, society needs to treat them equal to all other relationships.




Truthfully, I don't really get it either. I know it is there, and it produces some startling reactions, but I'm not sure why.
Want to see it at work, go into your average bar and buy a guy a drink and wink at him. See if you don't get your ass kicked. Why? Why would he react violently to that? It is a compliment, no?

My personal guess is that it stems from many guys not being really all that comfortable in their sexuality, and maybe a little afraid of being treated like a woman (because, if they know it or not, they think of women as inferior.)

Lol yeah sitting next to a gay guy will make you gay. That flew back in elementary school, but not now!!

 

[sigurros81]

You see the problem with that argument is that them asking for you to recognize their relationship is them asking for you to care.

No they don't and you're an idiot.

 

[soulcougher73]

I was just at lunch today with a Christian Conservative and gay marriage came up. He supports it and would even vote for it if able to. Why? Because even though his church and his views via religion are against it, he doesnt believe in telling others how to live. His christanity tells him not to judge others and that in the end its between them and god to decide.

Just because gay marriage is legal doesnt mean he has to take part in it..which is a no duh answer to most rational people.

 

[Retro Rob]

I was just at lunch today with a Christian Conservative and gay marriage came up. He supports it and would even vote for it if able to. Why? Because even though his church and his views via religion are against it, he doesnt believe in telling others how to live. His christanity tells him not to judge others and that in the end its between them and god to decide.

Just because gay marriage is legal doesnt mean he has to take part in it..which is a no duh answer to most rational people.

LOL, he doesn't want to tell people how to live, yet he would vote for it.

I agree with you second statement. That's why I don't see why so many religious folk are fighting against something they shouldn't be a part of, using a means (political) that they shouldn't be using.

 

[zsdersw]

LOL, he doesn't want to tell people how to live, yet he would vote for it.

That isn't contradictory.

 

[sigurros81]

I was just at lunch today with a Christian Conservative and gay marriage came up. He supports it and would even vote for it if able to. Why? Because even though his church and his views via religion are against it, he doesnt believe in telling others how to live. His christanity tells him not to judge others and that in the end its between them and god to decide.

Just because gay marriage is legal doesnt mean he has to take part in it..which is a no duh answer to most rational people.

:thumbsup:

 

[finglobes]

GOP doesn't fight for DOMA because the leadership doesn't fight for much of anything the media will defame them for. The GOP base is conservative. The GOP leaderships is not. Many people fail to recognize that. In New York homosexual marriage passed because 4 Republicans voted for it. After last election 3 of the 4 are gone and the 4th is due.

Homosexual marriage will never go far for long. Its a mutation of an institution in a society that is in state of decay. Families have broken down over the years and people have more identity issues - which creep into politics. But like in Wiemar Germany where the Nazi Party and Brown Shirts were started by homosexuals, chaos and upheaval eventually accompany social decay.

First liberalism (basically immorality disguised as hyper morality) told people marriage was "just a piece of paper". Now its the most special thing there is - but just between homosexuals. See its actually just another step down the ladder. Libs go from one zany extreme to the other in a constant cycle of demise. Everything they touch gets broken and thats why most lib states are collapsing.

 

[Retro Rob]

That isn't contradictory.

Why, because the vote would be in favor? Permitting or denying someone something is telling them what they can/cant do, or on this case, how to live/how not to live.

 

[nehalem256]

I was just at lunch today with a Christian Conservative and gay marriage came up. He supports it and would even vote for it if able to. Why? Because even though his church and his views via religion are against it, he doesnt believe in telling others how to live. His christanity tells him not to judge others and that in the end its between them and god to decide.

Just because gay marriage is legal doesnt mean he has to take part in it..which is a no duh answer to most rational people.

BS. Somehow I bet he would change his tune if a guy wanted to marry a 12 year old, or his sister.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

LOL, he doesn't want to tell people how to live, yet he would vote for it.

I'm confused. How is voting to allow others to live their own lives how they choose contradictory to not telling them how to live them?

 

[nehalem256]

Everyone is responsible for their own choices.

You mean until those choices have consequences. See for example the liberal view on abortion.

The liberation and sexual revolution that I presume you're referring to when you talk about liberals making stuff acceptable has had far more of a benefit to society overall than it has been a detriment.

Yes AIDS, STDs, fatherless children! Will the benefits never end! :'(

 

[zsdersw]

Why, because the vote would be in favor?

Yes.

Permitting or denying someone something is telling them what they can/cant do, or on this case, how to live/how not to live.

No, it is not saying they must live a certain way.. or even that they should live a certain way. It's telling them that it is OK to live that way if they choose to.

 

[soulcougher73]

LOL, he doesn't want to tell people how to live, yet he would vote for it.

I agree with you second statement. That's why I don't see why so many religious folk are fighting against something they shouldn't be a part of, using a means (political) that they shouldn't be using.

He would vote to legalize gay marriage so everyone is treated equally in the eyes of the law. His personal religious belief on wether it is right or wrong is not up to him. Its up to his God to judge them.

How is legalizing gay marriage telling someone how to live? Either you read what i wrote wrong or i didnt explain his positino well enough the first time.

 

[zsdersw]

You mean until those choices have consequences. See for example the liberal view on abortion.

No, I don't mean until.. I mean in spite of the consequences.

Yes AIDS, STDs, fatherless children! Will the benefits never end! :'(

You have an incredibly myopic view of history. STDs were ridiculously common long before the sexual revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_condoms). AIDS has led to an effective treatment for cancer (http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2288825). Fatherless children is a problem, but it isn't something we have to throw everything about sexuality back into the closet in order to solve.

 

[soulcougher73]

BS. Somehow I bet he would change his tune if a guy wanted to marry a 12 year old, or his sister.

Im not religious. But JESUS FUCKING CHRIST you are the stupidest fucker on this board. In what way at all does your comment have to do with 2 consenting adults regardless of sexuality marrying each other?

Do you have some kind of jump to conclusion mat or something?

 

[Moonbeam]

Im not religious. But JESUS FUCKING CHRIST you are the stupidest fucker on this board.

Do you have some kind of jump to conclusion mat or something?

What does that say about the people who respond to him?

 

[soulcougher73]

What does that say about the people who respond to him?

That they want to attempt to teach people the error of their ways?

 

[nehalem256]

Im not religious. But JESUS FUCKING CHRIST you are the stupidest fucker on this board. In what way at all does your comment have to do with 2 consenting adults regardless of sexuality marrying each other?

It has to do with whether you think you have a right to tell people how to live their life.

 

[zsdersw]

It has to do with whether you think you have a right to tell people how to live their life.

12-year-olds are not considered adults able to give consent objectively. I don't see anything wrong with letting siblings marry each other.

 

[soulcougher73]

It has to do with whether you think you have a right to tell people how to live their life.

Allowing gays to marry is not telling anyone how to live their life. Got anymore bright ideas their Einstein?

Way to shot your own arguements down lol

 

[Retro Rob]

Yes.



No, it is not saying they must live a certain way.. or even that they should live a certain way. It's telling them that it is OK to live that way if they choose to.

Ok, fair enough. You know, I find it mighty hypocritical how someone just dismisses someone's personal beliefs because said beliefs dont line up with what's "in" or what people want to do.

You guys want gays and lesbians to be respected and accepted in society, well, learn to give it back to those who don't necessarily agree with you all. I guess part of the reason why we can't co-exist, for now anyway, is because one side says "it's an abomination" and the others say "you don't accept me because of inherited ignorance, bigotry, and fear".

It takes two to tango. If both sides of the SSM issue look past their own pride, bigotry, and forced-acceptance, we would have at least a relatively peaceful social society. Until then, nothing positive will happen. Not accepting SSM isn't tantamount to hatred, accepting it isn't sending you to "hell".

 

[zsdersw]

You know, I find it mighty hypocritical how someone just dismisses someone's personal beliefs because said beliefs dont line up with what's "in" or what people want to do.

You guys want gays and lesbians to be respected and accepted in society, well, learn to give it back to those who don't necessarily agree with you all. I guess part of the reason why we can't co-exist, for now anyway, is because one side says "it's an abomination" and the others say "you don't accept me because of inherited ignorance, bigotry, and fear".

It takes two to tango. If both sides of the SSM issue look past their own pride, bigotry, and forced-acceptance, we would have at least a relatively peaceful social society. Until then, nothing positive will happen. Not accepting SSM isn't tantamount to hatred, accepting it isn't sending you to "hell".

Who in this thread is this aimed at?

 

[soulcougher73]

Ok, fair enough. You know, I find it mighty hypocritical how someone just dismisses someone's personal beliefs because said beliefs dont line up with what's "in" or what people want to do.

You guys want gays and lesbians to be respected and accepted in society, well, learn to give it back to those who don't necessarily agree with you all. I guess part of the reason why we can't co-exist, for now anyway, is because one side says "it's an abomination" and the others say "you don't accept me because of inherited ignorance, bigotry, and fear".

It takes two to tango. If both sides of the SSM issue look past their own pride, bigotry, and forced-acceptance, we would have at least a relatively peaceful social society. Until then, nothing positive will happen. Not accepting SSM isn't tantamount to hatred, accepting it isn't sending you to "hell".

Why should we give into bigorty and hatred? Also noone said you have to respect them or accept them. But you do need to treat them equally in the eyes of the law and give them the same courtisy you give every other non gay person.

Maybe we should go on a mission to make religious people 2nd class citizens since we dont agree with every little thing they do. Give them less rights than the rest of us. Sound fair? Didnt think so.

 

[nehalem256]

Allowing gays to marry is not telling anyone how to live their life. Got anymore bright ideas their Einstein?

Way to shot your own arguements down lol

You obviously completely missed my point.

It is hypocritical to say you you against "telling people how to live their life"

And then say

You shouldn't be able to marry your sister, or a 12 year old, or multiple people.

Everyone is fine with telling others how to live their life.

 

[Retro Rob]

Why should we give into bigorty and hatred? Also noone said you have to respect them or accept them. But you do need to treat them equally in the eyes of the law and give them the same courtisy you give every other non gay person.

Maybe we should go on a mission to make religious people 2nd class citizens since we dont agree with every little thing they do. Give them less rights than the rest of us. Sound fair?

Well, keep that up and we will have a divided society. You sound mighty silly talking about not respecting someone while at the same time, treating them right. Respect and proper treatment go hand in hand. The reason why I treat others right it because I have a level of respect for them.