• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What exactly is the argument against Gay Marriage?

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I need only quote Amplifier once to send him down in flames:

Let's cut out all housing programs, all federal aid, and send them links to this post instead.

We all know what "this post" was - it was a post saying that poor people should go to college.

He wanted no free money for anyone. Just have them get an education somehow. And, yet, he inserted crap about FREE housing and other FREE stuff, so people would have the time to get an education, into my post, when he clearly was arguing against all that FREE stuff.

Amp - usually when people find themselves in a hole, they stop digging.
 
Originally posted by: Tab
I think some countries in Europe have had gay marriage for quite a while, correct me if I am wrong though.
Holland recently legalized it, they are the first.
 
Gay Marriage in:

Belgium (2003)
Canada (2005)
Netherlands (2001)
Spain (2005)

Debated in:

Australia
France
Ireland
Romania
South Africa
China
United States: CA NY OR
 
Originally posted by: totalcommand
I need only quote Amplifier once to send him down in flames:

Let's cut out all housing programs, all federal aid, and send them links to this post instead.

We all know what "this post" was - it was a post saying that poor people should go to college.

He wanted no free money for anyone. Just have them get an education somehow. And, yet, he inserted crap about FREE housing and other FREE stuff, so people would have the time to get an education, into my post, when he clearly was arguing against all that FREE stuff.

Amp - usually when people find themselves in a hole, they stop digging.

Who do you think you're arguing against. I know my facts and you're not going to refute them. Go on, click on any of the links in my origianl post and prove they don't exist.

It's true I don't like/respect/care about the poor. In my ideal world, there would be no government help. Earn your own way. Or go 10k in debt like that loser Tab.

But the fact remains the government aid exists. And as long as they exists I'm not going to tolerate any excuses about how hard it is to be successful.

I'm glad you think I'm the bad guy, because you're a pvssy who hides behind excuses and rhetoric. The programs exist, go use them.

-Amp (never makes an excuse) lifier
 
I am loser because I decided to goto into some debt so I could goto college?

The vast majority of college students, around 75% go into debt because they don't have enough money to pay for college.

No reply on having a moderated debate with TC?

Alright, since you think TotalCommand is such a big kid and his points sucks how about you have a "moderated" debate with him?

If you would take a look here...

Basically, the discussions are heavily moderated, word limit, "reliable sources" and must be properly cited.

So, how about it? If we could get the moderators to agree... 😉
 
Originally posted by: Amplifier
Originally posted by: totalcommand
I need only quote Amplifier once to send him down in flames:

Let's cut out all housing programs, all federal aid, and send them links to this post instead.

We all know what "this post" was - it was a post saying that poor people should go to college.

He wanted no free money for anyone. Just have them get an education somehow. And, yet, he inserted crap about FREE housing and other FREE stuff, so people would have the time to get an education, into my post, when he clearly was arguing against all that FREE stuff.

Amp - usually when people find themselves in a hole, they stop digging.

Who do you think you're arguing against. I know my facts and you're not going to refute them. Go on, click on any of the links in my origianl post and prove they don't exist.

Well, who am I arguing against? If you're so sure of yourself, reveal yourself to us.

It's not the facts that a wrong, it's your logic.

It's simply not sound to say that the poor are making excuses because they have all the resources available (welfare, etc.) to them, and then turn around and say we should take those resources away:

"Let's cut out all housing programs, all federal aid, and send them links to this post instead."

Your premises completely contradict each other.

I was simply pointing that out in my PM's and in this thread.

It's true I don't like/respect/care about the poor. In my ideal world, there would be no government help. Earn your own way. Or go 10k in debt like that loser Tab.

You've already agreed in your previous post that education is a necessary but not sufficient part of the solution.

But the fact remains the government aid exists. And as long as they exists I'm not going to tolerate any excuses about how hard it is to be successful.

I don't think poor people are going to be asking for your judgement anyways.

I'm glad you think I'm the bad guy, because you're a pvssy who hides behind excuses and rhetoric. The programs exist, go use them.

-Amp (never makes an excuse) lifier

It's really you who's been trolling this whole time. Youre logically inconsistent, and yet you like to debate. It's really a pretty horrible combination.

Tab - that's a good idea, but I'm pretty busy these next couple weeks. Maybe after 2 weeks I would have time for the research, etc.
 
I've done nothing but give links to government programs and throw in a few pot shots at people too lazy to learn about them. Find an inconsistancy. Or made up lines like "75% of college students go in debt" and "Government programs for students were cut".

But none of that matters, because I have no bad debt in my balance sheet. Jokes on you.

-Amp "Find out when you're broke excuses won't feed you" lifier
 
Originally posted by: Amplifier
And as long as they exists I'm not going to tolerate any excuses about how hard it is to be successful.

So, according to your post, there is nothing holding back people from escaping poverty. Then what is the cause of a higher ratio of minorities being in poverty?

Census 2000
Percentages below the Poverty line
Whites: 9%
Blacks: 25%
Native Americans: 26%
Asians: 13%
Latino: 23%

So if hardwork is the primary cause of one's economic level, why do all minorites have a higher ratio of poverty than whites? Are minorities inherently more "lazy" than whites?
 
Originally posted by: abj13
Originally posted by: Amplifier
And as long as they exists I'm not going to tolerate any excuses about how hard it is to be successful.

So, according to your post, there is nothing holding back people from escaping poverty. Then what is the cause of a higher ratio of minorities being in poverty?

Census 2000
Percentages below the Poverty line
Whites: 9%
Blacks: 25%
Native Americans: 26%
Asians: 13%
Latino: 23%

So if hardwork is the primary cause of one's economic level, why do all minorites have a higher ratio of poverty than whites? Are minorities inherently more "lazy" than whites?

http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/incperdet.html

For extra fun take note that a minority with a bachlors or associate degree does not fall under the poverty line in any table.

Now if you really want your head to spin, go to my original post an check out the government programs that pay for a minorities education!

Think that one guy still wants to get in a 'fact' argument with me?
 
I happen to work in the field of education reform. Education in this country was not designed for everybody to succeed. It was desigined with the intentions of having 20% of public school students succeed and go on to higher education, while the remaining 80% would become agrarian workers or manual laborers. This system was desigined in the late 19th century to keep the existing social order and was not designed for and does not work in todays society/economy, where it is nearly essential to continue on to higher education, not only for an individuals success but also for the economic success of the US. There is currently a lot of work going into reforming the education system in the US, which is failing, but this is a long term project. In the meantime, we will continue to see 50% - 80% dropout rates in urban areas and poorer communities, and a slow change towards small learning communities (SLC's) and curriculums which are designed to prepare students for college instead of weeding them out for manual labor.
 
Main Entry: mar·riage
Pronunciation: 'mer-ij, 'ma-rij
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage
 
The USA constitution gives the right to be treated equally before the law with respect to other citizens. Denying same-sex couples access to marriage is a violation of equal treatment before the law.

The USA constitution also gives citizens the right to conduct their business and lives free from unnecessary or arbitrary interference by the state; denying same-sex couples access to marriage is a clear violation of due process.

When laws banning same-sex marriage are turned over in the USA supreme court sometime in the next 10 years or so, the decision will be based on either due process or equal treatment before the law.

Well I guess we should allow murderers to keep killing people. Marriage is defined as two people joined of opposite sex. I guess homosexuals need a new name.

 
Originally posted by: Lifted
I happen to work in the field of education reform. Education in this country was not designed for everybody to succeed. It was desigined with the intentions of having 20% of public school students succeed and go on to higher education, while the remaining 80% would become agrarian workers or manual laborers. This system was desigined in the late 19th century to keep the existing social order and was not designed for and does not work in todays society/economy, where it is nearly essential to continue on to higher education, not only for an individuals success but also for the economic success of the US. There is currently a lot of work going into reforming the education system in the US, which is failing, but this is a long term project. In the meantime, we will continue to see 50% - 80% dropout rates in urban areas and poorer communities, and a slow change towards small learning communities (SLC's) and curriculums which are designed to prepare students for college instead of weeding them out for manual labor.

This is a large part of the drive behind non-traditional post secondary educatrion becoming so popular (community colleges, trade schools, IT trainig centers, etc); society still wouldn't benefit from much more than 25% of the population being 'intellectual' (I use that word rather loosely) workers, but a high school education is no longer enough to have a successful career, in general.
 
Originally posted by: Amplifier

http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/incperdet.html

For extra fun take note that a minority with a bachlors or associate degree does not fall under the poverty line in any table.

DNE. No such table exists on your link examining education level and either poverty line data or median income of the various minority groups.

The fact is that minorities also fail at gaining education:

2000 Census- Percent with Bachelor's Degree or more:
White 27.6%
Black 17.3%
Asian 49.8%
Hispanic 11.4%
(No stats for Native Americans)

Now, wait. Are children choosing to make the mistake of not getting a proper education? Nope, all children have equal desires for higher education.

Kao, G. Race and Ethnic Differences in Parental College Aspirations for Youth. Research in Sociology of Education: Schooling and Social Capital in Diverse Cultures 13: 85-104.

So the question remains, if hardwork is the primary cause of one's economic level, why do all minorites have a higher ratio of poverty than whites? Why do minorities (blacks and hispanics) also have lower levels of education? Are minorities inherently more "lazy" than whites?
 

"The vast majority of college students, around 75% go into debt because they don't have enough money to pay for college.
"

Yes. You do make up your facts. Financial aid does not = debt.

Btw thanks for adding to my argument. 70% of people are already using the programs I listed. No clue why financial aid is such a difficult concept to grasp.
 
Originally posted by: Tab
Yes, it is you barrow money and you pay it back... This is debt...

I think he's seperating financial aid and student loans, while in fact student loans are a form of financial aid becuase they are subsidized by Uncle Sam.
 
"Marriage" is defined as a union between a man and women before God.

Let two people get together and have all the same legal rights, but don't call it marriage.
 
Originally posted by: Amplifier
Originally posted by: abj13
Originally posted by: Amplifier
And as long as they exists I'm not going to tolerate any excuses about how hard it is to be successful.

So, according to your post, there is nothing holding back people from escaping poverty. Then what is the cause of a higher ratio of minorities being in poverty?

Census 2000
Percentages below the Poverty line
Whites: 9%
Blacks: 25%
Native Americans: 26%
Asians: 13%
Latino: 23%

So if hardwork is the primary cause of one's economic level, why do all minorites have a higher ratio of poverty than whites? Are minorities inherently more "lazy" than whites?

http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/incperdet.html

For extra fun take note that a minority with a bachlors or associate degree does not fall under the poverty line in any table.

Now if you really want your head to spin, go to my original post an check out the government programs that pay for a minorities education!

Think that one guy still wants to get in a 'fact' argument with me?


This is the only fact I need to argue:

"Let's cut out all housing programs, all federal aid, and send them links to this post instead."

And it's a fact that you wrote it.
 
Originally posted by: Rayden
"Marriage" is defined as a union between a man and women before God.

Let two people get together and have all the same legal rights, but don't call it marriage.

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=marriage

I don't see god anywhere in there. I suppose people that don't believe in god, or your god, can't get married? In fact, the state doesn't care one way or the other when they issue you a marriage certificate. So where exactly are you getting this definition from? Surely not your bible.
 
Originally posted by: Rayden
"Marriage" is defined as a union between a man and women before God.

Let two people get together and have all the same legal rights, but don't call it marriage.

Nah, just pull the tax exempt status of any church that won't marry Gays.
 
Back
Top