True conservatism. Gay marriage.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by J3ffr3y, Sep 28, 2012.

  1. J3ffr3y
    Offline

    J3ffr3y Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2012
    Messages:
    25
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +15
    Briefly. I am very conservative. I am a registered libertarian,(although i do not like Ron Paul because 1.he's a phony 2.I am not an isolationist. 3. he is a racist 4.his foreign policy can only be explained by the fact that he is an anti-semite) I got my conservatism honestly, I was raised by liberals and when i was young i was a registered democrat who voted for Bill Clinton twice. When i began debating politics online i did well, because i am very clever, but soon realized that because i didn't actually know anything i was either going to have to stop pretending i did, or go ahead and find out everything there was to know about the subject. I was sure this endeavor would only further solidify my liberal beliefs. I was wrong. I became a conservative as a side-effect of wanting to know the truth.

    I am a lifelong atheist. I can not remember ever feeling any other way. I am no longer an anti-religious jerk, as in my youth(not coincidentally when i was also a lib :p)

    Conservatives are WRONG about the issue of gay marriage. It is a departure from our commitment to the constitution and as such, it opens us up to the accusation of being less than genuine and only defending our precious constitution when it suits us. Just like the left does.

    The "equal protection" clause of the fourteenth amendment is clear and has been interpreted (an "originalist" interpretation) to mean that all citizens are to be treated as equals in the eyes of the law(govt). As such, it is absolutely unconstitutional for the federal govt to deny two homosexuals the right to marry as long as it is granting that right to heterosexuals. That is all. It is clear and undeniable.

    Why do you think gay marriage always wins in court? They can't ALL be activist judges, can they? And why do you think Republicans wanted to amend the constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman? Because, as written, the constitution supports gay marriage. That's why.

    I will attempt to counter a few of the objections that are sure to be raised.
    1.)slippery-slope. No. The equal protection clause would not support polygamy. If the federal govt wants to limit the number of spouses allowed, the constitution would not be violated. No one would be being denied their "civil rights" as the denial would not be based on any identifiable characteristic, they are not being denied based on gender, race, sexual orientation, ethnicity, etc. etc. Nor would it support bestiality or any of the other absurd slippery-slope arguments.

    2.)The GLBT agenda. As i said, i am a conservative. I oppose this organization and work to counter their agenda on a daily basis, as do most conservatives.

    3.)Special Rights. This is a rare case where the right they are seeking is not a "special right" but the exact same right as their fellow Americans enjoy. If the government was not in the business of sanctioning marriage, there would be no issue here. Which is probably the best answer in the end. However, since that is unlikely to happen, the constitution must be upheld and conservatives need to practice what I preach :)P) and have the courage and integrity to defend the principle of liberty in a case where it may be offensive to their own personal sensibilities. Do not tell me they can have civil unions with all the same legal rights. Unfortunately for you, they have every right to demand the same thing as heterosexuals have, even in name. They have every right to demand that it not only be the same thing, but also that it be called the same thing. Separate but equal is not equal.

    4.)the Sanctity of marriage. that is a joke. I am 40, my wife is 38. We have been married 22 yrs. When my son was born she was 15 and i was 17, we have 3 children now and plan to be married till we die. I have lived my belief in the sanctity of marriage. So until some of you conservatives start suggesting criminal penalties for adultery, divorce, or maybe making separate checking accounts illegal, i don"t want to hear about the sanctity of marriage. Brittany Spears and Madonna have done more to damage the sanctity of marriage than homosexual could ever hope to. So in a world of underwater elvis weddings, this argument needs to be dropped.

    Try to imagine the boost to the conservative movement this might bring. At some point, the religious conservatives, who i love and defend, are going to have to agree to let the constitution govern and leave their faith at home. The freedom of Religion is under assault. I will be there to defend it with you. But maybe you should consider our founding and the significance of how our founders handled it. When it came to the Declaration of Independence, a document that was very personal to the men who wrote and signed it, they paced their God prominently. We are a judeo-christian nation in founding. But when it came time for those same men(largely) to write a governing document for our nation, they left their God out. I will be there to dispel the myth of "separation" , to underscore the fact of "shall make no law", but on this matter i feel you religious conservatives are doing the movement a dis-service.


    Jeffrey
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Some Guy
    Offline

    Some Guy Deregulated User

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,512
    Thanks Received:
    249
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +380
    I'm more curious about this search for truth you speak of. But i agree with you on gay marriage: i ain't got no problem with it.
     
  3. J3ffr3y
    Offline

    J3ffr3y Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2012
    Messages:
    25
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +15

    What are you curious about?


    Jeffrey
     
  4. Matthew
    Online

    Matthew Blue dog all the way!

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    49,694
    Thanks Received:
    4,596
    Trophy Points:
    1,885
    Location:
    Portland Oregon
    Ratings:
    +15,162
    I guess anyone that doesn't want to give free shit to blacks=racist.

    Goddamn, what a closed minded bunch of people.
     
  5. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    56,027
    Thanks Received:
    9,334
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,554
    Hello, J3ffr3y. Welcome to the board.

    I, too, am a conservative, but not a convert. I am what is called a paleo-conservative. I have always been a conservative, long before it was cool to be a conservative. I have voted straight GOP my entire life, or not voted at all. Since 2006 it has been the latter since the party has been hijacked by loons.

    To supplement the list in your opening post, may I recommend my own?

    http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/222864-reasons-to-be-anti-gay-by-the-numbers.html

    .
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. Seawytch
    Offline

    Seawytch Information isnt Advocacy

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    28,998
    Thanks Received:
    3,962
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Peaking out from the redwoods
    Ratings:
    +7,043
  7. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    Meh....The state shouldn't be involved either way....That's the paleo answer.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  8. Seawytch
    Offline

    Seawytch Information isnt Advocacy

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    28,998
    Thanks Received:
    3,962
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Peaking out from the redwoods
    Ratings:
    +7,043
    But they are and it's VERY unlikely that they ever will be uninvolved.

    The "state" certainly should not be able to discriminate this way.
     
  9. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    That you choose to give away your liberties doesn't mean that everyone else has to slouch to Gomorrah with you.

    Wake the fuck up and recognize that you're trying to claim that going begging to a bureaucrat for a license is a "right".
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Some Guy
    Offline

    Some Guy Deregulated User

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    Messages:
    1,512
    Thanks Received:
    249
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +380
    What did you learn that changed your mind, specifically?

    Michael Medved, conservative talker out of Seattle, says he followed the same path. Used to be a big democrat, says he wised up and became a conservative. If not for the endless commercials on his show, i like listening to him cause he's reasonable and thoughtful, he doesn't just spout a bunch of far right talking points to get people worked up like Rush does. And he seems to know everything about history. He'll pull references out from 1884 like nothing.
     

Share This Page