Page 109 of 190 FirstFirst ... 95999105106107108109110111112113119159 ... LastLast
Results 2,701 to 2,725 of 4740

Thread: Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century

  1. #2701
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    unfunny location
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    I made a joke and put it on my facebook:

    What do you guys think?
    That's pretty accurate
    Pokemon isn't real, I'm sorry

  2. #2702
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    How is that surprising? Romney and Obama had the same view on Gay Marriage: Let the states handle it.
    Weren't the republicans planning on making an amendment defining marriage as only one man and one woman?
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  3. #2703
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    Weren't the republicans planning on making an amendment defining marriage as only one man and one woman?
    And Romney remained support of giving equal rights to Gays, if not through marriage than atleast all the rights marriage grants through the states. Something pretty much along with what Obama was proposing.
    Last edited by BigLutz; 11th February 2013 at 5:33 AM.

  4. #2704
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,922

    Default

    The economy has been suffering for how long now? Gay rights is just one issue; unless the governments of the western world have been doing nothing but passing laws on gay rights 24/7, it's ridiculous to put the burden of paying more attention to the economy on gay rights activists. You can't both call it a minor issue and at the same time claim it's big enough and there are so many people invested in it that it's taking undue attention from the economy.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    And Romney remained support of giving equal rights to Gays, if not through marriage than atleast all the rights marriage grants through the states. Something pretty much along with what Obama was proposing.
    It's the 'marriage' part that matters, though, to the people campaigning for those rights, even if you're going to frame it in your own terms. Even if the effect of leaving it to the states would be the same, Obama campaigned against the state bans, eventually came out in favor of gay rights and repealed DADT. And he mentioned Stonewall in his inaugeration speech. Obama doesn't have the same view on gay marriage as Romney does, he just has the same idea of what government should do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  5. #2705
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    And Romney remained support of giving equal rights to Gays, if not through marriage than atleast all the rights marriage grants through the states. Something pretty much along with what Obama was proposing.
    I had no idea that Romney supported marriage equality. Perhaps you meant another type of "equality" that is completely irrelevant.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  6. #2706
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    @fart
    Posts
    1,198

    Default

    Romney said he personally opposes gay marriage (to a man he didn't know was gay lmao)
    life is
    a game

  7. #2707
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marioguy View Post
    I had no idea that Romney supported marriage equality. Perhaps you meant another type of "equality" that is completely irrelevant.
    What kind of equality are Gays looking for? Are they looking for being able to go into a church and get married? If so they can do that already. Are they looking for full rights and privileges under the law? If so both Obama and Romney support the same thing: Let the States decide.

    Quote Originally Posted by CSolarstorm View Post
    Obama doesn't have the same view on gay marriage as Romney does, he just has the same idea of what government should do.
    At the end of the day I would say that is all that matters, it does not matter if a President is 100% for or against Gay Marriage if they see it as something that should be left up for the states. If they are not willing to use Executive Authority to institute or ban Gay Marriage then at the end of the day what they personally feel is meaningless.
    Last edited by BigLutz; 11th February 2013 at 5:31 PM.

  8. #2708
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Why are we talking about Romney? The guys is gone, we'll never hear from him again. It doesn't matter what he thinks, he is now irrelevant.

  9. #2709
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Following that star
    Posts
    1,423

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CSolarstorm View Post
    The economy has been suffering for how long now? Gay rights is just one issue; unless the governments of the western world have been doing nothing but passing laws on gay rights 24/7, it's ridiculous to put the burden of paying more attention to the economy on gay rights activists. You can't both call it a minor issue and at the same time claim it's big enough and there are so many people invested in it that it's taking undue attention from the economy.
    I disagree, and I think you would too if you were sticking to your principles. I seem to recall you at one time saying that both political parties (Democrat and Republican) were both the same, using what you called "wedge issues" to divide people. I then brought up how important these issues, like abortion and homosexuality, are to people on both sides of the aisle. You seemed to admit the genuineness of these issues and how they truly divide people yet still claimed they were wedge issues. Maybe I just didn't get say enough times, "You can't both call them wedge issues and call them genuine issues expressing heartfelt differences of opinion among the masses.

    Please do not think that I brought that up to distract you or change the subject (since I recall you saying something like that once before). It is important to the point I make. BigLutz's statement by no means implied that it is a big issue that is, on its own, taking undue attention from the economy. Unless we take wildly inflated figures on the number of homosexuals in America, they are not large. It is, in fact, laughable that anyone would think that legalizing gay marriage would help our national economy. So especially in light of the fact that a few gays do not want gay marriage legalized, I hope you do not take offense when I tell you that, as far as numbers and significance are concerned, this is not a major issue. I don't think I can put it better than Snorunt conservationist did, so his words will sum up:

    Quote Originally Posted by Snorunt conservationist View Post
    In the past fifty years, homosexuality has gone from being derided and a criminal offence to gaining relative mainstream acceptance. Gays can now have their relationships acknowledged by the state (without the need for marriage), they occupy significant positions in politics, television and the media. The steps made have been so gargantuan that marriage seems almost irrelevant. I'm all for it, just don't see why time and money should be spent on pushing this through when there are so many more important issues in the country. This isn't a massive win for civil rights, it's an insignificant footmark, not to mention (in this instance, and, unsurprisingly, in the Obama instance) little more than a political plaything.
    This thread has not been made up of posts like the above, so he deserves to be applauded for that. But here is the basic point I wish to make, and the point it appears BigLutz and Snorunt Conservationist wish to make. Some people, including those supporting gay rights (along with other groups like pro-choice), have been very interested in these issued and not very interested in our country's very large economic problems. Consider this example, from the pre-election Obama thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Profesco View Post
    If I vote, it will be for Obama. It will also be an unhappy vote; there's little I can endorse of him or the democratic party in general as successful leadership.

    On economic issues, I know and understand just a little. What I have learned is that the tax and legal policies put forward by the current republican party will do more harm to my family and friends and people across the US in economic positions similar to us than they will to help us - the democrats' policies will not put us in quite so much danger. On values issues and social policies relating to them, I've seen a lot of well-intentioned harm and injustice sought after by the large extreme-conservative base of the republican party. On this side of the coin I am far more involved and concerned, and it would be enough for me to fight against a republican leadership headed by Romney even if the economic matters swayed me to his side.

    But basically this election sucks.
    Note especially the prominent mention of social issues. This post was deftly countered by Snorunt conservationist:
    Quote Originally Posted by Snorunt conservationist View Post
    How much danger will America be in if it continues to add to a sixteen trillion dollar debt?
    I spent a while looking in that thread for a post by someone who was pro-gay, but debated the importance of that issue. In support of treating the economy as the most important issue, he said, basically, "Do you want there to still be a country?" That's the point. It really is not an issue of putting any kind of burden on pro-gay activists. It's that many of them are putting pro-gay activism ahead of the needs of the country.

    And given the severity of our economic situation, I think you can agree that such a thing is unacceptable.

    Sprites ripped by Yoshi Clone of spritersresource.com. Banner by my brother ShinySandshrew.

  10. #2710
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Evil Scumbags, Inc.
    Posts
    1,128

    Default

    It takes a hell of a lot more time, money, and resources to fix a sixteen-trillion-dollar debt than it does to give people equal rights.

  11. #2711
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    What kind of equality are Gays looking for? Are they looking for being able to go into a church and get married? If so they can do that already. Are they looking for full rights and privileges under the law? If so both Obama and Romney support the same thing: Let the States decide.
    It's a meta concept. 'Marriage' is more than the sum of a ceremony and all the observed rights of a couple.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  12. #2712
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    8,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CSolarstorm View Post
    Well, don't sell short the kind of influence a president has, even if it's not directly because of their power.
    I agree the President has the power of the bullypulpet and the power of his voting bloc, but at the end of the day it is usually up to the people of a state to decide, and as we saw in California in 2008, such a thing does not always work out.

  13. #2713
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Shiver Star
    Posts
    2,155

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pesky Persian View Post
    It takes a hell of a lot more time, money, and resources to fix a sixteen-trillion-dollar debt than it does to give people equal rights.
    Just as SC and TFP said: If it take even one second away from "fixing" the economy, it's not worth the time.
    Jackpot!

    I have a theory that the Pokémon world and the Mother world are one in the same. I won't go into spoilers for Mother 3, but think of Black and White's story of the dragon and the twins. Also, chimeras are kind of like Pokémon.

    Werster is without a doubt the Pokémon Master.

  14. #2714
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    2,922

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFightingPikachu View Post
    I disagree, and I think you would too if you were sticking to your principles. I seem to recall you at one time saying that both political parties (Democrat and Republican) were both the same, using what you called "wedge issues" to divide people. I then brought up how important these issues, like abortion and homosexuality, are to people on both sides of the aisle. You seemed to admit the genuineness of these issues and how they truly divide people yet still claimed they were wedge issues. Maybe I just didn't get say enough times, "You can't both call them wedge issues and call them genuine issues expressing heartfelt differences of opinion among the masses.
    Yes I can. What else is going to be a wedge issue besides something we're genuinely invested in?

    I don't want gay rights to be the wedge that prevents people from working together on the economy. It would be one thing if Snorunt Conservationist actually demonstrated that relenting on the gay rights issue will directly lead to economic recovery. Communicating that relationship would probably bring us all around to his side - but it would make the issue moot because there's only so many ways you can repeat that one idea before moving on to talk about the economic crisis.

    What I read, however, is that gay rights is such /worthless/ and /irrelevant/ cause that it should take a backseat to even a hypothetical possibility that the entire capacity of the government and all its funds can get together and necessarily find a solution to the economic crisis. Which pretty much comes off as scapegoating the central issue of this conversation, gay rights, in order to blow off steam from an entirely different topic, the economy, and throwing an entire cause under a bus just to spite a poltical figure he doesn't want to benefit from it.

    I suspect however, that's just the way Snorunt Conservationalist talks about everything.

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLutz View Post
    I agree the President has the power of the bullypulpet and the power of his voting bloc, but at the end of the day it is usually up to the people of a state to decide, and as we saw in California in 2008, such a thing does not always work out.
    Touche'. Obama wasn't actually president yet though.
    Last edited by CSolarstorm; 12th February 2013 at 6:51 AM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Albus Dumbledore
    Words are, in my not-so-humble opinion, our most inexhaustible source of magic. Capable of both inflicting injury, and remedying it.

    My deviantART
    | Suggested Alternative News: The Juice Rap News and The Corbett Report

  15. #2715
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Cool Cool River
    Posts
    2,760

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pesky Persian View Post
    It takes a hell of a lot more time, money, and resources to fix a sixteen-trillion-dollar debt than it does to give people equal rights.
    False premise.

    Quote Originally Posted by CSolarstorm View Post
    It's a meta concept. 'Marriage' is more than the sum of a ceremony and all the observed rights of a couple.
    Which makes me wonder why so many people give a **** about the rights of people to "marry". If marriage is such a meta concept, why is a piece of paper which constitutes barely any new rights so important? Note, it isn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by CSolarstorm View Post
    I don't want gay rights to be the wedge that prevents people from working together on the economy. It would be one thing if Snorunt Conservationist actually demonstrated that relenting on the gay rights issue will directly lead to economic recovery.
    Well it's as much a perception thing as much as anything else, especially in the U.K. As I said earlier in the thread, the gay marriage issue is as much about a man picking a fight and trying to wrestle internal control back to his side of a political party than it is about gay marriage. When a man campaigns for a minor change more passionately than he does for the need to save and restore our economy, it baffles me. Freedom of speech, drug legislation, the NHS. These things matter. Gay people no longer being civil partners but being married couples doesn't.

    The gay marriage thing is also worth mentioning in another way, more tied to America, but applicable here too. It stems from the way in which gay marriage is used as a stick with which to beat others and further an agenda which moves much beyond gay marriage.

    When we hear advocates of gay marriage talking, the buzzword is "fairness", or something similar to that. This same shtick (not a typo) is then used to justify other policies which have little to nothing to do with gay rights. Tax rises? It's about "fairness". More government? We must insure "fairness". Attempts to shut down freedom of speech? It's "unfair" to demonise certain groups for having vile opinions. It's part of an "us and them" mentality which is used by the modern left to prevent any kind of worthwhile debate. Hence why an irrelevant issue like gay marriage is presented as some kind of major step forward for civil rights. Those who oppose it are painted as bigots. Fast forward to a debate on the economy. Said "bigot" discusses sensible economic proposals, but their "bigoted" views on something like gay marriage are held against them and used as a stick in order to ignore their economic points. Gay marriage is a perfect embodiment of how minor issues are used to divert from other failures.

    I'm pro gay-marriage, but I don't kid myself it's a big issue. Meanwhile, I resent the way that my opinion is used as a template for further "progressiveness".

    I suspect however, that's just the way Snorunt Conservationalist talks about everything.
    For such a pseud you really are pretty sucky at spelling usernames.

    BTW, just so we're clear. What I'm replying to here is a man who criticises my opinions regularly when he has condoned mass murder on this very forum. Look at my sig for further details. A strange kind of moralist.
    Last edited by Snorunt conservationist; 12th February 2013 at 4:49 PM.

  16. #2716
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snorunt conservationist View Post

    The gay marriage thing is also worth mentioning in another way, more tied to America, but applicable here too. It stems from the way in which gay marriage is used as a stick with which to beat others and further an agenda which moves much beyond gay marriage.
    What Agenda? Care to demonstrate it in action? Show us how LGBT community is using Gay marriage as a means for special treatment instead of just running your mouth.

    When we hear advocates of gay marriage talking, the buzzword is "fairness", or something similar to that.
    The Buzzword is equality, and they have every right to it.

    Hence why an irrelevant issue like gay marriage is presented as some kind of major step forward for civil rights.
    It's only irrelevant to you, many people find it important. It's about perspective. It is also the last hurdle, besides Gay adoption, that must be crossed for the LGBT community to be full equals.

    Those who oppose it are painted as bigots. Fast forward to a debate on the economy. Said "bigot" discusses sensible economic proposals, but their "bigoted" views on something like gay marriage are held against them and used as a stick in order to ignore their economic points. Gay marriage is a perfect embodiment of how minor issues are used to divert from other failures.
    Do you have evidence? I've never heard of an economic proposal being voted down because the person who presented it is against gay marriage.

    I'm pro gay-marriage, but I don't kid myself it's a big issue. Meanwhile, I resent the way that my opinion is used as a template for further "progressiveness".
    And because it's worth repeating, it's not a big issue for you!. But as evidence would dictate, it is a big issue for others, which is why it's being adressed. I think you just need to deal with it.

  17. #2717
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Cool Cool River
    Posts
    2,760

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eterna View Post
    What Agenda? Care to demonstrate it in action? Show us how LGBT community is using Gay marriage as a means for special treatment instead of just running your mouth.
    I didn't mention the gay community. I was referring to politicians. It's a part of a wider campaign.


    The Buzzword is equality, and they have every right to it.
    They have it for all intents and purposes. Any additions are merely superfluous (slightly different in America I'll grant you).

    It's only irrelevant to you, many people find it important.
    Don't care.

    It's about perspective.
    Yeah, and anyone with it can realise what a non-entity gay marriage is.

    It is also the last hurdle, besides Gay adoption, that must be crossed for the LGBT community to be full equals.
    Yawn. It's a trifling matter in the grand scheme of things. It's a minor minor change in status.

    Do you have evidence? I've never heard of an economic proposal being voted down because the person who presented it is against gay marriage.
    Did you not follow the election? An election which should have been about the absolute catastrophic failure of the Obama administration to improve the economy was manipulated into a (mainly fictitious) campaign which painted Romney as some kind of women hating, poor despising gay basher (none of which he is, for all his faults), simply because it was easy to manipulate people by doing so. As I say, it ties into a wider collective about the notion of "fairness" that is used to demonise those who (in many cases) have perfectly fair(ish) objections to gay marriage, abortion etc.

    Note I said "something like gay marriage", not "gay marriage". You've proved my point perfectly. A distortion in order to manipulate my point and make me seem bigoted. It's effective but incredibly duplicitous.

    And because it's worth repeating, it's not a big issue for you!.
    Not a big issue full stop. As long as millions suffer from immoral drug legislation, as long as the economy remains in the toilet, as long as many a civil liberty is being stripped in the name of security, gay marriage is not a big issue. Anyone who would prioritise gay marriage above almost any other issue needs to take a long, hard look at themselves. Believe in it, support it, but please don't pretend it holds a significant place in the grand scheme.

    Oh, the Western World is tied up in trillions of debt, we're running massive deficits, unemployment is ridiculously high throughout much of the world, our civil liberties are being eroded, thousands of people are locked and billions spent in a futile war on drugs, but I don't care! I just want an almost pointless piece of paper and to be able to say I'm married! (NB; This is purposefully exaggerated).

    But as evidence would dictate, it is a big issue for others, which is why it's being adressed. I think you just need to deal with it.
    Deal with it? I couldn't care less about it, just the hysteria and BS that's spread around it. I just want everyone (on both sides) to stfu, live their lives and stop manipulating and using gay marriage as some worthwhile issue when it really isn't.
    Last edited by Snorunt conservationist; 13th February 2013 at 1:55 AM.

  18. #2718
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    294

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Snorunt conservationist View Post

    They have it for all intents and purposes. Any additions are merely superfluous (slightly different in America I'll grant you).
    Doesn't matter how small, they still aren't equal.



    Don't care.
    Well in that case I don't care how much your struggling financially. Economically I'm fine and your problem isn't important too me.


    Yeah, and anyone with it can realise what a non-entity gay marriage is.
    Clearly people seeking to be treated as equals lack perspective in what matters.


    Yawn. It's a trifling matter in the grand scheme of things. It's a minor minor change in status.
    Not to them.


    Did you not follow the election? An election which should have been about the absolute catastrophic failure of the Obama administration to improve the economy was manipulated into a (mainly fictitious) campaign which painted Romney as some kind of women hating, poor despising gay basher (none of which he is, for all his faults), simply because it was easy to manipulate people by doing so. As I say, it ties into a wider collective about the notion of "fairness" that is used to demonise those who (in many cases) have perfectly fair(ish) objections to gay marriage, abortion etc.
    Romney lost because his line of thinking simply isn't suitable for an increasingly liberal America. The Republican party needs to realize that this is no longer the 1950's and social conservatism no longer jives with the public as strongly. Him being painted those things is no different than how Obama was painted as an evil socialist. Also It was really Romney supporters that ultimately undermined his entire campaign.

    Note I said "something like gay marriage", not "gay marriage". You've proved my point perfectly. A distortion in order to manipulate my point and make me seem bigoted. It's effective but incredibly duplicitous.
    Since we're talking about Gay issues in a thread about Gay issues yes, I did think you were talking about Gay marriage which is what we're talking about. I take it that since you simply dodged the question without providing an example to mean that you have none.


    Not a big issue full stop. As long as millions suffer from immoral drug legislation, as long as the economy remains in the toilet, as long as many a civil liberty is being stripped in the name of security, gay marriage is not a big issue. Anyone who would prioritise gay marriage above almost any other issue needs to take a long, hard look at themselves. Believe in it, support it, but please don't pretend it holds a significant place in the grand scheme.
    It doesn't have to affect everyone for it to still be important and worthy of our time.

    Deal with it? I couldn't care less about it, just the hysteria and BS that's spread around it. I just want everyone (on both sides) to stfu, live their lives and stop manipulating and using gay marriage as some worthwhile issue when it really isn't.
    Until Gay marriage passes the LGBT community cannot live their lives the way they wish too.
    Last edited by Eterna; 13th February 2013 at 2:11 AM.

  19. #2719
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Cool Cool River
    Posts
    2,760

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eterna View Post
    Doesn't matter how small, they still aren't equal.
    Which is why I'm pro gay marriage. I just have the perspective to realise what a minor issue it is currently.

    Well in that case I don't care how much your struggling financially. Economically I'm fine and your problem isn't important too me.
    Then you clearly lack the perspective you harp on about so much. Your selfishness compounds your duplicity, even if you are being facetious.

    Also, it's "you're" and "to".

    Clearly people seeking to be treated as equals lack perspective in what matters.
    Gay kids being bullied in school- A problem

    Gay people still being beaten up and ostracised because of their sexuality- A problem

    Gay people still not being able to adopt in some cases- A problem

    Gay people not being able to get a trifling bit of paper in some Western countries- Not really a problem.

    Your posts clearly show you lack perspective.

    Not to them.
    Maybe, doesn't make them any less wrong (or those who use gay marriage as a political tool any less disgusting).

    Romney lost because his line of thinking simply isn't suitable for an increasingly liberal America.
    Chuckle. Obama voters aren't liberals.

    What line of thinking is that? I'm still waiting to find out what a horrible person Romney was. I've been told he hates women, gays and poor people, but I'm yet to see any evidence.

    The Republican party needs to realize that this is no longer the 1950's and social conservatism no longer jives with the public as strongly.
    Perhaps. Not the point though really.

    Him being painted those things is no different than how Obama was painted as an evil socialist.
    Arguing that two wrongs essentially make a right.

    The main difference being of course that the vast majority of the media painted Romney as such, whereas a tiny proportion did the same for Obama.

    Since we're talking about Gay issues in a thread about Gay issues yes, I did think you were talking about Gay marriage which is what we're talking about.
    Well actually, it's "Homosexuality and Politics in the 21st Century", not a Gay issues thread. Key word of course being politics. I'm talking about the use of homosexuality and similar issues within politics because they're tied to the same point. Please don't use your attempted duplicity as an attempt to make it seem like I'm spamming.

    I take it that since you simply dodged the question without providing an example to mean that you have none.
    Well, I did. The 2012 campaign. I mean, I'll come back with more if you want, but any chump can remember as far back as the months before November can't they?

    It doesn't have to affect everyone for it to still be important and worthy of our time.
    No ****, just has to be worthy of our time.

    Until Gay marriage passes the LGBT community cannot live their lives the way they wish too.
    Very few people do.
    Last edited by moot; 13th February 2013 at 2:50 AM.

  20. #2720
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    961

    Default

    okay, gonna just post in here already

    Gay people not being able to get a trifling bit of paper in some Western countries
    a "trifling bit of paper" that grants them what were, at last count, several hundreds of legal benefits not afforded under legal institutions separate from civil marriage

    the absolute catastrophic failure of the Obama administration to improve the economy
    please, tell me more about how being blocked at literally every possible turn bar two from injecting any substantial government spending whatsoever into the economy was his fault again, i forgot what mental gymnastics you ran through last time

    As long as millions suffer from immoral drug legislation, as long as the economy remains in the toilet, as long as many a civil liberty is being stripped in the name of security, gay marriage is not a big issue.
    i guess we should never address any issue that doesn't affect absolutely everyone (or enough of everyone to get classed as a Snorunt Conservationist-Approved Big Issue) then, since apparently the federal government is completely incapable of addressing ALL OF THESE SIMULTANEOUSLY.

    Obama voters aren't liberals
    that's actually correct. they were about half self-identified moderates and about half self-identified liberals, with a very small proportion of self-identified conservatives. you're improving!

    actually, it's "Homosexuality and Politics in the 21st Century", not a Gay issues thread
    and sort of repeating that second to last note, i wasn't aware that "gay issues" and "homosexuality and politics" were mutually exclusive terms from one another, given that gay issues are only issues because of the interactions between the latter. you'll have to show me your mental gymnastics routine again.

    Very few people do.
    drugs lol
    civil liberty issues that actively affect a tiny minority of americans ps notice i am not saying they aren't issues lol
    economic issues that aren't really issues ps this is specifically referencing things like the debt and tax rates on top brackets lol
    Last edited by John Madden; 13th February 2013 at 2:52 AM.
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  21. #2721
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Cool Cool River
    Posts
    2,760

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eBay Huckster View Post
    a "trifling bit of paper" that grants them what were, at last count, several hundreds of legal benefits not afforded under legal institutions separate from civil marriage
    My parents and many other couples I know have done fine without these critically important legal benefits. If that's such a concern why not change legislation in order for this to extend to cohabiting couples both gay and straight?

    As far as I see, this is as much a discrimination against non-married couples than it is against gay couples in general, if not more so. Why should married gay couples and married straight couples have more legal rights than their non-married counterparts? Maybe I should start a campaign in parliament to change these draconian laws, seeing as I don't really care for marriage, but believe in long-term relationships. My parents are a perfect example to me. I won't of course because I don't really care about granting a woman who isn't my mother or sister the right to make medical decisions for me (theoretically as I like in the U.K. Is that one of the legal benefits?), because I have the perspective to recognise its relative lack of importance currently.

  22. #2722
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    961

    Default

    My parents and many other couples I know have done fine without these critically important legal benefits
    that's nice, now tell me why what i'm quoting isn't logically fallacious.

    not even addressing the rest of the point since you seem to be willfully leaving out the fact that the non-married couples at least have the CHOICE of getting married
    Last edited by John Madden; 13th February 2013 at 2:57 AM.
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  23. #2723
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Cool Cool River
    Posts
    2,760

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eBay Huckster View Post
    that's nice, now tell me why what i'm quoting isn't logically fallacious.
    Because it's anecdotal evidence, yes yes. Very good.

    Point still stands that I see no reason to consider these benefits anything more than trivial.

  24. #2724
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    961

    Default

    of course you do. that doesn't make it a valid and/or good argument.
    last.fm
    facebook


    OFFICIAL ATTACK HUCKSTER OF SPP
    If you see this sig in the debate forum, you're definitely doing something wrong.

  25. #2725
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Cool Cool River
    Posts
    2,760

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eBay Huckster View Post
    of course you do. that doesn't make it a valid and/or good argument.
    Yet the legal rights one isn't a good one in the first place, so what can you do?

Page 109 of 190 FirstFirst ... 95999105106107108109110111112113119159 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •