Poll: Most Americans Oppose Gay Marriage

[OCA]

Originally posted by mattskramer
"Please, spare me! I don't need a doctor to tell me that 2 men plugging each others holes is wrong! There is no reasonable explanation other than a disease. Anyone that engages in this foul behavior obviously has mental issues. We have good psychiatrists in the USA and there is help available."

Okay. I have presented you with sound and logical rebuttal against common arguments opposing homosexual marriage. I have also presented you with information and opinion by organizations within the medical community that conclude that homosexuality, in and of itself, is not a disease and not a mental illness. Yet, you continue to hold on to your own opinion. Good night.

I'm guessing that mattskramer is queer? Would make sense since the only people that think its ok for two people of the same sex who plug each others dirt road or vaccum each others carpet should be involved in a relationship that marriage denotes. It simply is wrong no matter how you slice it, it goes against every common sensical thing known to man. Why are we still arguing this?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by OCA
It simply is wrong no matter how you slice it, it goes against every common sensical thing known to man. Why are we still arguing this?

Because we haven't given an argument that he agrees with yet.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Because we haven't given an argument that he agrees with yet.

What do you expect from someone who debates about how people could debate a topic, but doesn't fully debate one himself?

You will be sitting here all day long. He keeps playing referee and then stirs the pot, backing out to watch the result. In his "God complex" his mind is waxing the dolphin to the fact he can do this to what he percieves to be lower-level beings.

The guy is just smoke. If he were real, he might actually say or do something.

 

[OCA]

Who are the 5 who voted for federal protection of gay marriages.
I voted for constitutional ban on gay marriage and civil union, surprise surprise!

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by OCA
Who are the 5 who voted for federal protection of gay marriages.
I voted for constitutional ban on gay marriage and civil union, surprise surprise!

Well, I voted state.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by NewGuy
Well, I voted state.

Unfortunately, now that SCOTUS has overturned the Texas sodomy law, any state laws dealing with gay marriage can be easily struck down, using that decision as precedence. The states rights argument for gay marriage is very weak.

 

[NewGuy]

Originally posted by gop_jeff
Unfortunately, now that SCOTUS has overturned the Texas sodomy law, any state laws dealing with gay marriage can be easily struck down, using that decision as precedence. The states rights argument for gay marriage is very weak.

I'm not sure of your implecation, but I was never FOR gay rights.

I don't understand where a federal government has the right to provide a financial incentive in the form of tax breaks to a married couple, therefore discriminating against single people. Since I have many heterosexual friends who are single, the results are quite clear. Anytime the government provides a financial incentive for couples, the poor single guy has to work harder to hit the same goal....-with one paycheck.

Working for a living is tough, as it should be, but government hands manipulating the pot causing discrimination is NOT a Constitutionally viable option.

It has nothing to do with homosexual issues. Their very argument for sanctified anything flies out the window if all incentive is taken away.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by NewGuy
I'm not sure of your implecation, but I was never FOR gay rights.

I don't understand where a federal government has the right to provide a financial incentive in the form of tax breaks to a married couple, therefore discriminating against single people. Since I have many heterosexual friends who are single, the results are quite clear. Anytime the government provides a financial incentive for couples, the poor single guy has to work harder to hit the same goal....-with one paycheck.

Working for a living is tough, as it should be, but government hands manipulating the pot causing discrimination is NOT a Constitutionally viable option.

It has nothing to do with homosexual issues. Their very argument for sanctified anything flies out the window if all incentive is taken away.

Yes. I agree newguy. We should not social engineer toward marriage and family just as liberals shouldn't social engineer against it.


added a not

 

[mattskramer]

OCA - Your words "I'm guessing that mattskramer is queer" are in the form of a declarative but you applied a question mark. Are you asking if you are guessing whether or not I'm a "queer" or are you guessing that I'm a queer, or are you asking whether or not I'm a queer. Please make your comments clear. I am not a "queer". I am contentedly married to a woman. I have been in a monogamous relationship with my wife ever since we were married. Yet, my sexual orientation is irrelevant to the validity of my comments. Please be logical and attempt to criticize the argument and not the maker of the comment.

Your saying that homosexuality is wrong or your saying that homosexual behavior is wrong does not, in and of itself, make homosexuality or homosexual behavior wrong.

--------------------------------------------

jimnyc - You have yet to present a sound, logical, and irrefutable argument opposing homosexual marriage. I think that you, and OCA, are attempting to make the issue personal. (I stated an opinion.) Logic is not personal.

--------------------------------------------

NewGuy - In my opinion, homosexual marriage should be legal in every state. That is my opinion.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by mattskramer
jimnyc - You have yet to present a sound, logical, and irrefutable argument opposing homosexual marriage. I think that you, and OCA, are attempting to make the issue personal. (I stated an opinion.) Logic is not personal.

I don't need any argument. I couldn't care less what your take on the issues are. I owe you nothing. I'll vote in a NY minute against any and all homosexual activity - including gay marriages.

I didn't start this thread. I merely made my position. You seem to think anyone who opposes this deviant behavior needs a reason other than - IT'S DEVIANT BEHAVIOR.

Your little feet stomping in here about how your arguments are sound and logical and ours isn't is pathetic. Fortunately for us that oppose gay marriages - we don't need to convince you of a damn thing in order to vote against it.

If you don't have a problem with queers, fine, but don't come here looking for an explanation on why others are opposed and then pull a holier than thou attitude when people tell you how they feel.

 

[mattskramer]

Originally posted by acludem
Hey, Matt I never did properly welcome you to the board, so welcome! I do not think you are wasting bandwith, you at least attempt to engage in respectful intelligent debate which is, unfortunately, more than I can say for some who post here.

acludem - I didn't return your greeting until now. Thanks for welcoming me to the board. I like that you don't think that I waste bandwidth.

I prefer to debate and discuss issues by applying logic and formal reasoning (not by applying FEELINGS and personal bias) even though the application of logic is a mentally challenging activity and some people may find logic to be annoying.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by mattskramer
I prefer to debate and discuss issues by applying logic and formal reasoning even though it is a mentally challenging activity and some people may find it annoying.

I prefer to speak my mind and make my argument short an concise. I don't feel the need to obfuscate the issue with long winded drivel to appear smart.

 

[mattskramer]

Originally posted by jimnyc
I prefer to speak my mind and make my argument short an concise. I don't feel the need to obfuscate the issue with long winded drivel to appear smart.

Your posts include such comments as "I don't need any argument" and "...when people tell you how they feel."

Debate is the presenting and rebutting of arguments. It is to engage in a formal discussion or argument. Feeling don't apply in logical debate. They are irrelevant.

Short and concise arguments do not necessarily make you appear smart -- particularly when you use such obviously erroneous leaps in logic as "And that's exactly why so many oppose gay marriages. WE DON'T WANT TO BE ASSOCIATED!" and appealing to masses and emotion as in "people just don't want the vile fudgepackers around".

My intention is not to appear smart but to provide sound and logical argument as I have done.

 

[jimnyc]

Whatever, I'm not wasting my time with you anymore. You are the ultimate debater and the only one amongst us with a valid argument.

Queers still engage in deviant behavior and I'm still voting against gay marriages. This deviant behavior is reason enough for me to oppose gay marriages. I think homosexuality itself should be illegal. These are my personal beliefs, and I don't need an argument to justify my beliefs.

 

[MtnBiker]

Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage/civil unions = 44.83%

Looks like a winner for this board.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by MtnBiker
Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage/civil unions = 44.83%

And it stands at about 50% nationwide. And about 70 are opposed to gay marriages in general.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And it stands at about 50% nationwide. And about 70 are opposed to gay marriages in general.

Yup, and I don't see personal opinions changing too much on this subjcet. Yawn!!

 

[acludem]

I didn't really like any of these categories, but I voted for federal protection for gay marriage. I'd prefer to see government issued marriage licenses replaced with a certificate of civil union. Churches and synagogues should be free to perform religious marriage ceremonies for anyone they choose. The people in the relationship can say they are married, civilly unioned, or whatever they want.

acludem

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by acludem
I didn't really like any of these categories, but I voted for federal protection for gay marriage. I'd prefer to see government issued marriage licenses replaced with a certificate of civil union. Churches and synagogues should be free to perform religious marriage ceremonies for anyone they choose. The people in the relationship can say they are married, civilly unioned, or whatever they want.

acludem

Gay pole?

 

[mattskramer]

I thought that 75 percent of the public are opposed to gay marriage. I wonder what percentage of the public in Nazi Germany condoned the killing of the Jews. I also wonder what percentage of the population in Salem Massachusetts condoned the killing of alleged "witches".

If and when people vote on the issue of gay marriage, I doubt that they will have taken the time to think about the issue logically and rationally. I think that they will vote "from the gut" based on their particular emotion laden personal biases.