If you are agaianst gay marriage, you're a BIGOT!

[SniperFire]

If a person believes that a group of American citizens should not be afforded the same rights and privileges as all other citizens, then that person is a bigot. Plain and simple.

Every person in America has exactly the same right to marriage as anybody else.

Should everyone be permitted to marry their mother and 4 sisters and breed with them?

Should a man be permitted to marry hundreds of women and stick them in poverty to raise the kids as he moves on to the next?

Can you name a society or culture on earth which has survived with your desired definition of marriage, and where people were permitted to breed like dogs?

(please don't say Detroit)

 

[Artevelde]

Now you're just repeating the same trolling insults. Boring. I'm going to bed.

Wake me if you actually get a defensible position.

That your position is totally indefensible has indeed been proven adequately. Everybody here has noticed.

My position is the 14th amendment. As you have offered no rebuttal other than insults, you have no reasonable argument for your stated position.

Please review the following for future reference:

Rules of Debate | eHow.com

The "burden of proof" is on you.

Where exactly does the 14th Amendment define marriage in the way you have? You really are totally ignorant.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The 14TH Amendment is not a blanket amendment is does not give the abnormal that are considered illegal acts special rights.

 

[Steelplate]

I have no dog in this hunt, but it seems to me that gays aren't being represented as full fledged members of our country. This is, in effect a case of taxation without representation.....the basis of the American Revolution. They are law abiding citizens who work, pay taxes and live normal lives other than the fact that they have sex and romantically love people of the same sex.

IMO, that's not enough reason to discriminate. If the issue is a religiously based one, let the churches decide whether they will perform the ceremony.

 

[Roudy]

But you are okay with government paying welfare payments to support those kids, right? Just saying, in the end, abortion cuts down on unwanted children that become a burden to the system and taxpayers. I'm not using it as an argument supporting abortion but just pointing out the fact of the situation.

As for allowing gays to marry, your other examples really are not the same thing. Polygamy involves multiple people marrying or one person marrying more than one person. Gays are not asking for this. Gays are also not wanting or asking for the right to marry their pets. What they want, is the right to marry the one person they love, which happens to be someone of the same sex, and the reason they are of the same sex is because that is how they were made. The Church may not like it, but here is the fact; with some people, God fucked up. God made these people gay, so we ought to let them marry.

Now I know everyone of the religious nutjobs is going to tell me I'm full of shit, that gays choose their lifestyle. Bottom line is if you know many gay people, then you will know that they did not choose that lifestyle; it was chosen for them.

Bottom line about gay marriage is that I do not support gay marriage. I support the right of gay people to marry. The difference being that not everyone should be forced to marry a gay person.

Polygamists want to marry the ones they love too, so do those who want to marry their pets, and those gays that love more than one person, etc. You see how your argument is filled with indefensible holes any good lawyer can exploit? Besides, the science in being gay is far from being conclusive. Some gays are born that way, while for some it is learned behavior, yet others suddenly realize they are gay after 30 years of being straight, and some even turn straight after being gay. Even more confusing, some are bisexuals who enjoy both sexes equally. Should we let a trio of bisexuals marry? There has not been a "gay gene" identified yet. Where does this insanity end after the genie is let out of the bottle? It's endless in my opinion.

The "gene" is irrelevant. It's who you love and want to marry that matters. Dragging pets and barnyard animals into the conversation is nonsense.

How about polygamy, and groups of bisexuals? It's not as simple. Marriage is a religious based right. Gays do indeed have all the equal rights as straights do in marriage in what is called legal unions. You cannot redefine a religious institution and call it something else, no matter how hard you try. Just like you cannot relable Christianity and call it Islam. You may be able to do by force, which is what is being attempted now, but it will not be the same, and the people will eventually rise up to defend their rights and beliefs by passing constitutional amendments.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Roudy,

You have really raised the bar on this forum over the past few days. I want to make sure that you are adequately recognized for your contribution. You have a unique flair for making these very complex issues appear so simple minded. Your straight forward style is refreshing....like a good ol' Cleveland Steamer.

 

[Papageorgio]

I wont play the ridiculous what if game. We are discussing a specific topic. If you can't stay on topic, then you're obviously not capable of having this conversation.

You really are a pathetic hypocrite. And a coward to boot.

You keep using the word hypocrite. As my stated beliefs ALWAYS fall on the side of freedom and liberty, I don't think you know what that word means.

Then answer the question that was asked, and quit playing games. It is not a ridiculous game, it is moving to the next logical step.

 

[Papageorgio]

Hyperbole to justify bigotry is still bigotry.

What bigotry? If gays want to marry, then fine by me, it is a state issue.

I am asking why two people in love, a mother and a son or a brother and a sister in love, cannot marry? The criteria set forth is two people in love, they are in love, what is wrong with it?

Because that produces retarded offspring. Surely you know about that...

So if two sisters want to marry, or two brothers, or a son marries his father, it's okay because they don't reproduce? Sounds bigoted to me.

 

[Roudy]

Roudy,

You have really raised the bar on this forum over the past few days. I want to make sure that you are adequately recognized for your contribution. You have a unique flair for making these very complex issues appear so simple minded. Your straight forward style is refreshing....like a good ol' Cleveland Steamer.

Thanks lone. I'm don't care too much for biases or party line talk. What ever is good for the country. As far as presidents go, I think Reagan was a giant of a man, equivalent to a Churchill, and Clinton was a wizard, who united this country and ushered in the greatest decade of prosperity, progress and stabilty I have seen. This president reminds me the most of the disaster that the Carter presidency was. In many ways the world is still trying to recover from his presidency. One man, especially if he's the president of the US, can make a huge difference.

 

[BillyV]

Roudy,

You have really raised the bar on this forum over the past few days. I want to make sure that you are adequately recognized for your contribution. You have a unique flair for making these very complex issues appear so simple minded. Your straight forward style is refreshing....like a good ol' Cleveland Steamer.

Thanks lone. I'm don't care too much for biases or party line talk. What ever is good for the country. As far as presidents go, I think Reagan was a giant of a man, equivalent to a Churchill, and Clinton was a wizard, who united this country and ushered in the greatest decade of prosperity, progress and stabilty I have seen. This president reminds me the most of the disaster that the Carter presidency was. In many ways the world is still trying to recover from his presidency. One man, especially if he's the president of the US, can make a huge difference.

I think before you thank "good ole lone" you might want to check the Urban Dictionary for the definition of a "Cleveland Steamer".

 

[Roudy]

Roudy,

You have really raised the bar on this forum over the past few days. I want to make sure that you are adequately recognized for your contribution. You have a unique flair for making these very complex issues appear so simple minded. Your straight forward style is refreshing....like a good ol' Cleveland Steamer.

Thanks lone. I'm don't care too much for biases or party line talk. What ever is good for the country. As far as presidents go, I think Reagan was a giant of a man, equivalent to a Churchill, and Clinton was a wizard, who united this country and ushered in the greatest decade of prosperity, progress and stabilty I have seen. This president reminds me the most of the disaster that the Carter presidency was. In many ways the world is still trying to recover from his presidency. One man, especially if he's the president of the US, can make a huge difference.

I think before you thank "good ole lone" you might want to check the Urban Dictionary for the definition of a "Cleveland Steamer".

Ha! I just looked it up, thanks. Amazing I'm assuming it's lone's way of complementing people. But who knows.

 

[mudwhistle]

If a person believes that a group of American citizens should not be afforded the same rights and privileges as all other citizens, then that person is a bigot. Plain and simple.

There are laws that do that.

Problem is they not only want equality, but they want to be exactly the same, and being domestic-partners isn't the same to them. They want everyone to ignore two guys kissing in public, adopting children, etc.

They want everyone to immerse themselves in the same fantasy.

I say let them get married, but don't scream "BIGOT" every time somebody starts giggling at them.

 

[The T]

If a person believes that a group of American citizens should not be afforded the same rights and privileges as all other citizens, then that person is a bigot. Plain and simple.

There are laws that do that.

Problem is they not only want equality, but they want to be exactly the same, and being domestic-partners isn't the same to them. They want everyone to ignore two guys kissing in public, adopting children, etc.

They want everyone to immerse themselves in the same fantasy.

I say let them get married, but don't scream "BIGOT" every time somebody starts giggling at them.

Indeed. And the problem. All people may be created equal BUT they are individuals. All people are NOT the same. How many times do we have to learn the lesson?

 

[Vidi]

That your position is totally indefensible has indeed been proven adequately. Everybody here has noticed.

My position is the 14th amendment. As you have offered no rebuttal other than insults, you have no reasonable argument for your stated position.

Please review the following for future reference:

Rules of Debate | eHow.com

The "burden of proof" is on you.

When the 14TH amendment was written homosexual acts were illegal, and did not give gays any special rights nor were they even thought of. The 14TH is not a one size fits all rights.

Perhaps you'd like to read it again

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

It says ALL persons. Not some. Not a few. Not the straight or the white or the rich. It says ALL.

So yes it IS a one size fits all.

 

[amrchaos]

The op states that
"If you are agaianst gay marriage, you're a BIGOT!"
Does this mean that if you are not a bigot, then you are not against gay marriage?

But I am a homophobe, but not against marriage.

Logically curious, is it not?

 

[Staidhup]

Simply tired of this issue, tired of being told because I don't agree with granting special rights to the gay community that I am a bigot. I will side with nature on this one, nature simply does not afford gay couples the ability of procreation for a reason. Maybe those that advocate for the destruction of the US have a valid point in that we have become a decadent immoral society based on sin. Are we now Rome?

 

[bodecea]

I have a disabled neighbor who is losing his home because he was out of work for a while. Even though he is disabled, he still has two part time jobs, but it's not enough to save his house.

Meanwhile, down the street is a Hispanic couple here illegally. This couple, like many others were arrested during a raid of a packing plant a few years ago, but then they were let go and not deported. Now, they live in a house and receive welfare benefits for their 7 children. They also get a big fat refund every year at tax time. There is a huge scam where illegal aliens get refunds, not just for their kids, but for as many kids as they list on the tax return. It was reported recently that illegal aliens are putting names on returns of kids who live in Mexico and may or may not exist. They average something like $12,000 each. Billions each year are going to these scammers.

But, don't expect Obama to even acknowledge that there is a problem, let alone do anything about it.

He is stirring up social issues, but doesn't want to talk about the economy, unemployment, inflation, record numbers of foreclosures, border security, Fast and Furious scandal, Solyndra scandal and a lot of other mysteries.

You know these people to be illegal and committing tax fraud, why have you not reported them?


BTW...you do know that illegal alien figures are DOWN this administration, right?

Arrests of illegal migrants on U.S.-Mexico border plummet - The Washington Post

 

[bodecea]

Simply tired of this issue, tired of being told because I don't agree with granting special rights to the gay community that I am a bigot. I will side with nature on this one, nature simply does not afford gay couples the ability of procreation for a reason. Maybe those that advocate for the destruction of the US have a valid point in that we have become a decadent immoral society based on sin. Are we now Rome?

What special rights would those be, Darling?

 

[Ravi]

If a person believes that a group of American citizens should not be afforded the same rights and privileges as all other citizens, then that person is a bigot. Plain and simple.

Thank you for putting it so concisely.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Roudy,

You have really raised the bar on this forum over the past few days. I want to make sure that you are adequately recognized for your contribution. You have a unique flair for making these very complex issues appear so simple minded. Your straight forward style is refreshing....like a good ol' Cleveland Steamer.

Thanks lone. I'm don't care too much for biases or party line talk. What ever is good for the country. As far as presidents go, I think Reagan was a giant of a man, equivalent to a Churchill, and Clinton was a wizard, who united this country and ushered in the greatest decade of prosperity, progress and stabilty I have seen. This president reminds me the most of the disaster that the Carter presidency was. In many ways the world is still trying to recover from his presidency. One man, especially if he's the president of the US, can make a huge difference.

Oh. You are very welcome.