- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Gay Marriage
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:12 am to burger bearcat
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:12 am to burger bearcat
quote:
In a vacuum, all things being equal.
Which arrangement is better for a child to be raised in.
One with a mother and father. Or one with two fathers or two mothers?
Should one arrangement be prioritized over the other? Should these arrangements be deemed equal?
When it comes to adoption, should we place more emphasis on the well being of the child or the emotional feelings of the adults wanting to adopt?
While I agree with you that the ideal familial unit is Mother and Father due to the unique perspectives each role brings to raising a child. I would also argue that providing a child with a loving, stable, and supportive environment is a good thing whether it's provided by hetero or gay couples. It still offers a far better alternative than leaving children in foster care or orphanages, where they may not receive the same level of support.
0
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:14 am to bluestem75
quote:
No, I don’t have to provide proof
I didn't say that.
I said you'll have to provide a link for me BEFORE I WILL BELIVE IT.
quote:
Courts invalidate wills all of the time.
I said wills that were otherwise solid. And I won't believe otherwise without a link that VALID wills are invalidated "all the time."
Instead of wading through the rest of your strawman post, here are some actual numbers for you:
According to a quick Google search, only .5%-3% of wills are contested and of those, less than 1% are overturned.
That's not "all the time" by anyone's reasonable definition. And, that's what i thought.
You could perhaps find a link that shows that some disproportionate percentage of successfully contested wills are for homosexual people, but even then it's still not widespread, and further, in order for it to really go to your point as a defense of gay marriage, you'd have to show some kind of evidence that being married would keep the will from being successfully contested.
If the courts are just out there willy-nilly turning over all of these wills for homosexual people, what would stop them from continuing to do so if the couple was married? Married people's relatives contest wills too.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:15 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Your bias will take you to where you want it to take you.
You're so close to figuring this out.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:17 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
The irony of saying this while knighting for McCarthy
Already have.
Good luck losing elections with your bias..
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:23 am to burger bearcat
quote:
We do believe they can get married. It's not about violating rights of anyone individually. They can marry the opposite sex.
What you are asking is for us to change what marriage is to something that it is not.
And I'm saying that you are free to believe this way in your church and I would be against the government forcing your church to perform gay marriages. But the US Government represents all people, including the minority. They cannot discriminate in the services they provide.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:42 am to SidewalkDawg
quote:
Can you provide a justification
I addressed this with my first post. It never fails.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:45 am to allin2010
quote:
Now the Methodist church has split because of this issue. They are not alone, even some Baptist Churches (Alliance of Baptist) recognize and perform Gay Marriage Ceremonies. Episcopal Churches, Church of Christ, Judaism, Presbyterian, allow this.
those are not real churches anymore.
quote:
I feel churches are not following scripture, etc.
correct
Posted on 11/26/24 at 9:47 am to Flats
quote:
I addressed this with my first post. It never fails.
I get that you believe laws are rooted in morality, but that’s a pretty dangerous way to view the government’s role. You’re trying to turn the government into a vehicle for your personal moral beliefs rather than seeing it as a tool for protecting equal rights.
You still haven't justified why two consenting adults should be denied a government service. The government isn't in the business of policing personal morality, and the Constitution ensures that people are treated equally under the law, regardless of sexual orientation.
And for the record, screwing on a park bench has nothing to do with this conversation. There’s a big difference between private consensual behavior and actions that are public, harmful, or violate other people's rights.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:11 am to SidewalkDawg
quote:
I get that you believe laws are rooted in morality, but that’s a pretty dangerous way to view the government’s role.
It has nothing to do with how I view it, it’s reality. If anything it’s dangerous to pretend that it’s only about morality for others but not yourself.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 10:52 am to Flats
quote:
It has nothing to do with how I view it, it’s reality.
Reality doesn't justify limiting a person's freedom based on your moral views. A large theme of our Constitution is about denying a tyranny by majority.
quote:
If anything it’s dangerous to pretend that it’s only about morality for others but not yourself.
I actually agree with you that everyone’s moral beliefs play a role in how they view certain issues. But that’s exactly why the government should not base laws on any one group’s morality. If that were 'Reality' we would be at the mercy of the morality of those in charge. Hence the 14th Amendment.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 11:48 am to OBReb6
quote:
Upwards of 30% of gen Z is identifying as one of the letters. You honestly thing 30% is a normal number that would always be present if there is no stigma?
True. It's just part of the culture currently to be non-binary, gay, trans, etc.
I think it's like a pendulum though.
We hard hardline christian fundamentalists who were of the opinion that everything was satanic/evil -- weird shite like the witch scare in the 90s, Harry Potter being satanic, Magic The Gathering being satanic. This in their eyes is counter culture against their parents. Even though it is mainstream now, it is not to their parents and their older culture.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 12:14 pm to Flats
quote:
Attacking a straw man is simple.
The strawman was implying I wanted 5 men ruling over the country.
I explained my stance on that decision.
What strawman are you saying I've attacked?
Posted on 11/26/24 at 12:43 pm to SidewalkDawg
quote:
A large theme of our Constitution is about denying a tyranny by majority.
You should read Scalia's thoughts on this topic made during his confirmation hearings.
quote:
But that’s exactly why the government should not base laws on any one group’s morality.
Some people think gay marriage is a moral good, some think it's morally harmful. We either include it in our laws or we don't and you cannot divide that baby. In any democratic system saws are going to be based on the values of a group, typically the largest group, and that, again, is reality. It doesn't matter what's justified, it just matters what is. Some values will win, some will lose. It's not a perfect system but there isn't a better one.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 12:58 pm to SidewalkDawg
quote:
Let's not pretend all hetero relationships are a net positive to society.
Lets not pretend homosexualy relatioships are a positive to society. Just on the basic scientific level without interjecting personal feelings into the subject, it's unnatural and counterproductive to the survival of the human species.
Posted on 11/26/24 at 3:57 pm to Flats
quote:
You should read Scalia's thoughts on this topic made during his confirmation hearings.
I'm aware of Scalia's strict interpretation, but that's the beauty of our system, it doesn't rely on one person's interpretation.
quote:
Some people think gay marriage is a moral good, some think it's morally harmful. We either include it in our laws or we don't and you cannot divide that baby. In any democratic system saws are going to be based on the values of a group, typically the largest group, and that, again, is reality. It doesn't matter what's justified, it just matters what is. Some values will win, some will lose. It's not a perfect system but there isn't a better one.
Look, I will grant you that ultimately a majority rule will create systems and laws, I will also grant you that "Might makes Right" as well, but we don't allow the strong to rule over the weak. Our systems have evolved past these notions. The majority created a Constitutional system with safeguards to prevent things like what you are speaking of. As it stands there are two ways with which our system of government works to shape law. One is through legislation, and the other is through judicial interpretation and that is reality.
I get that you feel Obergefell was an incorrect interpretation, however, it doesn't change the fact that there is a strong case to be made for interpreting the 14th amendment to stop the government from treating individuals differently based on sexual preference.
quote:
It's not a perfect system but there isn't a better one.
On this we surely agree.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News