Members rscornutt Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 No doubt the answers will be: "Because the institution of marriage is between a man and a woman." "Because this undermines the institution of marriage." "Because it's always been this way." There are two people at my work who are really upset about this. Because of course, they are debating this. It's a big deal to them. No one else cares. It doesn't affect anyone else. But for some reason, "angry white men" seem to get really upset about this ( I'm joking about this, btw, based on our other thread - this ain't a swipe at angry people, white people, people who are men, or all three rolled in together). I asked the two upset people at my work this question: "Do any of you know any gay people?" They stared blankly. They said "No". "Then how does this affect you and your family?" "It undermines the institution of marriage." "How does this affect you and your family? Does this change anything in your family?" "No." And there you have it. And in a world where logic has been tossed to the rubbish bin, I'm sure you are well pleased with yourself. Now, you may fold your arms, lean back, and know that if the most imporatnt decisions were to be made based upon putting words into people's mouths, or justified by the personal relations and knowledge of people (whether or not the know people), you would be made king. And there you have it. Thank you fire and amp. I find it amazing that the cry "because it was unconstitutional" carries so much weight among people who obviously have no idea how our government is supposed to work, or what our founding documents actually say. It has become a legislative "abracadabra" to settle the nerves of those who decided it was better to sleep through their ninth grade civics class rather than pay attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members FireWithin Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Despite your mirth, FireWithin, you missed the crucial word in my post: minority. I'm not here to preach to you about morals... you have yours, I have mine, it's fine. But the reason your version of morality seems valid to you is that most people are not gay. So in a place where most people were gay and you weren't, the local morality would be that being gay is right, and your heterosexuality would be condemned. So, I ask again: would that stop you from being heterosexual? If the church told you it was wrong, if the government said it was wrong: would you be romantically involved with a man? If the answer is "no", you have some thinking to do and some perspective to gain. Here's another hypothetical question: if Craig Anderton was gay, would it be morally okay for you to participate on this forum and take advice from him about audio matters? I'm not going to get into this with you because you have demonstrated that you lack the ability to comprehend morals or even understand the true meaning. But, to answer your oddly worded or perhaps it's an attempt and making a trick question - If the majority was to tell me I was wrong, would I still believe the same? Well, if you'll notice, everyone on this thread supports the gay union other than me and one other person. I have and will continue to make my stand but, in ways that will make a difference. I cannot and will not argue over the internet. In fact, I've gotten sucked(oops, should not use that word in this thread, might get someone excited!) into this topic long enough. (come on, you knew gay jokes were coming sooner or later!) btw, Jeff, I am not attacking your personal views. Have them, that is what makes this country a great place to live(at least for a little while longer ) I was wrong to even respond to any of these replies but I wanted to let russant(?) know he was not alone because I know how these thread escalate into putting a persons opinions on trail by peer with no right to be judging anyone(and by the very people claiming to want to let everyone be happy and live the way they want). Peace out, hope I have not hurt feelings...I know how tender some of you are :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 And in a world where logic has been tossed to the rubbish bin, I'm sure you are well pleased with yourself. Now, you may fold your arms, lean back, and know that if the most imporatnt decisions were to be made based upon putting words into people's mouths, or justified by the personal relations and knowledge of people (whether or not the know people), you would be made king. I don't understand how it affects anyone. Please explain this to me since my pissed-off co-workers could not. Please explain your logic to me. I seriously want to know. I'm heterosexual. If this undermines my heterosexuality or aims at marriage, I want to know. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rscornutt Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 OMG - I have just lost all faith in the educational system of this country: Or as Jeff points out, because the law is unconstitutional. These ballot initiatives are just a way special interest groups try to circumvent the legislative process, and that goes for both sides of the political spectrum. At which point in time did people actually voting for or against something become a way to circumvent the legislative process? People can show up and either vote it down, or pass it. There is no legislature to blame - the people did it. After this, I think I am going to retire to a cave and eat bark... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Guitzilla Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Sarcasm aside, it is naive to think the acceptance of homosexuality has no effect on families.Did you ever have to answer the question posed from your 5 year old child when your child asks, "Daddy, why does that man's pants have a big hole in the butt"? I have never walked around in public with a hole in them on purpose, but I have had a seam give way and unfortunately I did not have an extra pair of pants. My sincerest apology to you and your daughter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 OMG - I have just lost all faith in the educational system of this country: At which point in time did people actually voting for or against something become a way to circumvent the legislative process? People can show up and either vote it down, or pass it. There is no legislature to blame - the people did it. After this, I think I am going to retire to a cave and eat bark... There's a system of government called representative democracy, which is what is used in the United States. Elected representatives conduct the peoples business, and if they don't do what is expected by the people they can be voted out. The proper channel to enact a new law is to have it debated in the legislature. The job of legislators is to write laws which pass muster with the existing Constitution. When laws conflict with each other, the Courts decide where the lines are drawn. You could run up a ballot initiative that totally decriminalizes marijuana and probably easily pass it on a popular vote. But such a law would still be in conflict with any number of other laws and keep the Courts busy for years. OTOH, a well written law that respects existing law could decriminalize most current marijuana offenses and would not waste time being challenged in Court for trampling on existing law, and would not be overturned by the Courts. Oops, wrong forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dreabfly Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 At which point in time did people actually voting for or against something become a way to circumvent the legislative process? People can show up and either vote it down, or pass it. There is no legislature to blame - the people did it. I think the point being made here is that all our other socio arguments have been decided by the Supreme Court - Roe V. Wade, Brown v Board of Education, Dred Scott v Sanford. Except now - gay marriage. A court makes a ruling (as they always have with these issues) and everyone goes nuts that the court is deciding for us. Hardly true, since most popular polls show that 60-70% of the American population is FOR civil unions, and if we follow our democratic majority rule arrangement, a popular vote would likely support what the courts are ruling anyway. But, in any case, they are following the determined pattern for deciding these issues - local court, appellate court, state court, supreme court. Decision. Racial integration, abortion, freedom from slavery - if all these things we entrusted to the hands of the judiciary - why is it we simply can't trust them to determine the issue of gay marriage? If you want a civics argument to support your logic, you'll have to look for something else. Maybe that would be a good use of your "cave" time. :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 I find it amazing that the cry "because it was unconstitutional" carries so much weight among people who obviously have no idea how our government is supposed to work, or what our founding documents actually say. I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit. -- Thomas Paine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Bravo! You said exactly what I wanted to say, but you said it much better. I still can't see how the people can think that the courts MAKING laws is a good thing regardless of whether they agree with this particular decision. Laws are supposed to be made by Legislators in our system of government. Considering that laws are now being routinely made by the Judicial branch at State and Federal levels, it occurs to me that voting in the executive branch of your particular choice is all that matters since the courts have rendered the Legislative branch impotent. The legislative branch made itself impotent by its members not doing anything except trying to get re-elected. They typically wash their hands of anything remotely controversial and do nothing, so you get these ballot initiatives which end up in Court. And as you probably know, Massachusetts is a standard bearer for this concept. Oops, wrong forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 I have never walked around in public with a hole in them on purpose, but I have had a seam give way and unfortunately I did not have an extra pair of pants. My sincerest apology to you and your daughter. :lol: :lol: :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dreabfly Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Oops, wrong forum Ditto. Somebody please move it, so we can converse without guilt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Lakers vs. Celtics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Overrated or underrated? Quiznos or Subway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members antematter Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Chuck Norris on bass Gary Coleman on keys David Hasselahoff on burgers uh.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members antematter Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Let me just state for the record I have no problems with homosexuals getting married. I just think they're gay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Thanks for clearing that up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members antematter Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 should i have written 'their gay' or was i right with 'they're gay'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 should i have written 'their gay' or was i right with 'they're gay'? Take this to the Grammar forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 This debate would sound better at 96/192 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 Myth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dreabfly Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 This debate would sound better at 96/192 More resolution or more musicianship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7403547.stm If the bible is true you Californians can expect that BIG earthquake you've been talking about for so long any time now. Great! Now I gotta sit through another round of these at every stoplight... I swear I'm going to start ramming people on purpose. I strongly suspect you are misreading your Bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wwwjd Posted May 16, 2008 Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 "If it doesn't affect me or my family, then who cares" proving the breakdown in worth and value I mentioned pages back is already happening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Super 8 Posted May 16, 2008 Author Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 you have demonstrated that you lack the ability to comprehend morals or even understand the true meaning. Fire, please explain to me what morality has to do with this?Is this morality really about the words of the Apostle Paul, and the old testament, or are you getting this from somewhere else? Thanks. Oh, and I'm really more of a Right leaning centrist than a Liberal, so I oughta be able to understand. :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Super 8 Posted May 16, 2008 Author Members Share Posted May 16, 2008 "If it doesn't affect me or my family, then who cares"proving the breakdown in worth and value I mentioned pages back is already happening You lost me on this one too. Can you please explain how this is a "breakdown in worth and value"? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.