Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Silhouette]

Speaking of that. Do your english skills allow you to render meaning out of the poll results above to the way the questions were worded?

By 'above the way the questions were worded', you mean whatever you choose to imagine?
Again, the polls showing support for gay marriage are overwhelming. There are literally dozens of them. You ignore them all in favor of your imagination. But do you understand why your imagination doesn't actually effect the outside world?

There are polls and there are polls..

Unlike those polls you cite, the one on this thread is unique in that this thread allows you to see exactly how the questions were phrased. Sentences can be and often are manipulated in normal polling outlets. And that is because they are misleading on purpose. The pollsters know that virtually nobody will check up on how those questions were phrased. However here they can.

Unique also to here is a voluntary nature of the poll. People flocked to it. It didn't flock to them, like most polls that can and often do hand-pick a target "group of Americans" to favor a certain outcome (like polling a gay bar in a blue district to find "how most Americans feel"..). This is a poll where the topic was so important to people that a stunning record was set for USMB polls in the turnout, voluntary, and how they voted.

Oh what a difference context makes in polling...and how that affected the 2014 midterms as a result...

 

[Syriusly]

It's hardly "imaginary". Look at the poll!

This poll?
Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

Note it does not ask "Do you support homosexual weddings".

Hence your imaginary poll is the one where you imagine there is a poll that is asking "do you support homosexual weddings"

As an example- I am opposed to Churches being forced to accomodate homosexual, jewish or Muslim weddings.

But I support homosexual, jewish and muslim marriage.

 

[Syriusly]

Speaking of that. Do your english skills allow you to render meaning out of the poll results above to the way the questions were worded?

By 'above the way the questions were worded', you mean whatever you choose to imagine?
Again, the polls showing support for gay marriage are overwhelming. There are literally dozens of them. You ignore them all in favor of your imagination. But do you understand why your imagination doesn't actually effect the outside world?

There are polls and there are polls..t...

And the polls he cites are reputable polls based upon scientific sampling.

The one you keep mentioning doesn't ask about support for gay marriage at all, and is not reputable, and is not based upon scientific sampling.

 

[Skylar]

t is however, one of the most, if not THE most popular polls/topics in USMB history and lookie how people weighed in... and to how the questions were phrased. It wasn't a mediocre "no". It was a "oh HELL NO!" with fortitude. That might be a clue as to why dems got their butt whipped in the middle bloc voting against them last week (not for the GOP). That group was voting against something palpable clinging to the democratic label like a repugnant dingleberry. The poll is your "Here's your sign"... 82% is IMPRESSIVE...

We've been through this, Silo:

1) The straw poll doesn't ask about support for gay marriage. You insist it does. You're obvious wrong.

2) The poll is a straw poll. One of the most unreliable polling methods that exist because it involves only interested parties. Ron Paul, for example, won every straw poll in his 2008 presidential bid. Most by unheard of margins. But didn't carry a single state or come close to it. Which is why no credible pollster uses straw polls...as they're fantastically unreliable.

3) Your straw poll allows for multiple voting. As you've admitted yourself, anyone can create a new sock puppet (fake account). And every sock gets to vote. So we have no idea how many votes are from different people. And how many are the same person voting over and over again. Where in randomized polls ( like Gallup), each person only gets to vote once.

4) Your polling sample is too small. You have about 130 voters. That's a polling sample far beyond the threshold of any credible national poll. Most polls start at around 800 and work their way up to 3000.

5) Your straw poll is singular. So...even if your straw poll asked about support for gay marriage (which it doesn't), even if it wasn't a straw poll, but a randomized polling sample (which it isn't) even if you had a larger polling sample (which you don't), your straw poll would still be an outlier. As there are literally DOZENS of polls asking directly about support for gay marriage that show strong support. With margins of support being between 12 and 19 points. And growing. If a few dozen polls point in one direction, and one points in the other.....the 'other' is an outlier. And of no particular statistical significance.

6) Poll after poll after poll after poll (about 3 and half dozen at last count) show strong support for gay marriage. Gallup, Reuters, AP, NBC, CBS, Rasmussen, every major polling agency. And these polls avoid the blunders of your strawpoll.

First, they are randomized, meaning that you get a generic cross section of the population rather than exclusively interested parties.
Second, each respondent only gets to vote once.
Third, the polls ask about support for gay marriage. Your strawpoll never does.
Fourth, they have statistically significant polling samples.
Fifth, they all point in the same direction. The consistency of outcome, with almost all of the results in the same stastistical range strongly indicate that you're getting accurate results.

And you know all of this. But you cling to your delusion that all the scientific polls MUST be wrong. And only a random strawpoll on a message board can be right.

Um, no.

 

[Skylar]

It's hardly "imaginary". Look at the poll!

This poll?
Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

Note it does not ask "Do you support homosexual weddings".

Hence your imaginary poll is the one where you imagine there is a poll that is asking "do you support homosexual weddings"

As an example- I am opposed to Churches being forced to accomodate homosexual, jewish or Muslim weddings.

But I support homosexual, jewish and muslim marriage.

Exactly. The poll doesn't ask about support for gay marriage. Silho's conclusion that it does is refuted by merely looking to the top of the page and reading the question.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The poll results are meaningless in nuance and context in relationship to American culture.

Then all polls are meaningless in the nuance and context in relationship to American culture.
:

No- your poll is meaningless other than to find out how the people responding here on the boards think about forcing churches to marry homosexuals.

It is statistically irrelevant, even within the population of the posters here on USMB.

Again, and for the HUNDREDTH time, it is NOT MY POLL. I am NOT the OP of this thread!

It is however, one of the most, if not THE most popular polls/topics in USMB history and lookie how people weighed in... and to how the questions were phrased. It wasn't a mediocre "no". It was a "oh HELL NO!" with fortitude. That might be a clue as to why dems got their butt whipped in the middle bloc voting against them last week (not for the GOP). That group was voting against something palpable clinging to the democratic label like a repugnant dingleberry. The poll is your "Here's your sign"... 82% is IMPRESSIVE...

Your poll is irrelevant to marriage equality.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Sil's poll has nothing to with marriage equality acceptance, only with venues of marriage.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm talking about the culture built up over the years where homosexuality was a serious social stigma. Where people were killed for 'coming out'. But even today, the experience of young gay people can be traumatizing. I don't see how you can ignore the difficulties of facing a society that decides for you that you are 'anti-social'. Are gays more susceptible to anti-social behavior because mainstream culture has traditionally marginalized them? Or are they marginalized because of innate anti-social behavior? That's a chicken-and-egg question that requires more than statistical correlation.

I knew a "young gay person" once who committed suicide the long way. So let me tell you a little bit about his trauma..

He was QUITE social with his gayness. And in that way he also murdered hundreds, possibly even thousands by the time he finished killing himself.

He was born normal and then molested by a man as a boy. This imprinted him to seek out compulsively [and very promiscuously, typical of child victims of molestation] males for sex. Meanwhile he kept falling in love with women. It was pure psychological torture. Predictably he contracted HIV from raw anonymous sex that is very typical of his type of "gay youth". To get even with those he perceived that created his angst, he continued to go out and have endless anonymous sex with as many partners as his strength would maintain until his body began wasting away with AIDS.

Back then he still could've gotten reparative therapy he so longed for his condition, and to heal the wounds of child abuse he suffered. Today however, if he was alive and at that young age again, he would be prohibited by law from doing so in the state where he lived [California]. But in that state no effort is spared to coax "closeted gays" or "bi-curious" youth from the hetero ranks.

Instead, he killed hundreds, maybe thousands before the gun ultimately turned on him. You all don't want to talk about how common this scenario [at least the compulsive imprinting part of it] is among "young gay men". And you sure don't want to discuss how at the root of any suicidal thoughts they might have, may be lingering suppressed toxic memories of events where they were assaulted/learned to "love" what was done to them as innocent boys.

Yet the CDC didn't fear this discussion. They did a survey. And here's the results they came up with:

ATLANTA [2005 Clinical Psychiatry News] -- Substance abuse is pervasive among gay men and is so intricately intertwined with epidemics of depression, partner abuse, and childhood sexual abuse that adequately addressing one issue requires attention to the others as well, said Ronald Stall, Ph.D., chief of prevention research for the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta...

No scientifically sound study has linked sexual orientation or identity with parental role-modeling or childhood sexual abuse. Your story is in no way verifiable as true, and anyone could make up a story like that and post it online. But guess what? Even if it were true your story is purely anecdotal and serves as evidence for nothing.

Your denial of evidence neither stands as a viable contest of such or relevant to such.

In truth, there is no evidence that homosexuality is anything BUT an imprint of early molestation, by a loving and caring adult.

The fact is that homosexuality behavior, which is the only relevant issue here, is a CHOICE... one which homosexuals on this thread have already freely admitted. SOooo... well, you know.

You have given no evidence for me to deny. Perhaps you have mistaken your baseless assertions for evidence? In truth, there is no evidence that homosexuality has anything to do with molestation, as the source I gave you demonstrates. Meanwhile, you just have your ignorant opinion, nothing more. No surprise there.

ROFLMNAO!

And your concession is again, duly noted and, again... summarily accepted.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Where_r_my_Keys has just admitted per ad hom his submission to ShackledNation

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your nonsense little keys has rebutted conclusively many times on the Board.

Step along.

 

[beagle9]

The poll results are meaningless in nuance and context in relationship to American culture.

Then all polls are meaningless in the nuance and context in relationship to American culture.
:

No- your poll is meaningless other than to find out how the people responding here on the boards think about forcing churches to marry homosexuals.

It is statistically irrelevant, even within the population of the posters here on USMB.

Again, and for the HUNDREDTH time, it is NOT MY POLL. I am NOT the OP of this thread!

It is however, one of the most, if not THE most popular polls/topics in USMB history and lookie how people weighed in... and to how the questions were phrased. It wasn't a mediocre "no". It was a "oh HELL NO!" with fortitude. That might be a clue as to why dems got their butt whipped in the middle bloc voting against them last week (not for the GOP). That group was voting against something palpable clinging to the democratic label like a repugnant dingleberry. The poll is your "Here's your sign"... 82% is IMPRESSIVE...

I heard something today on Rush Limbaugh, where as a person called in and asked Rush what he thought about him (the caller) as a person having to attend a meeting in Minnesota I think it was, and there the topic was concerning transgender people, and them being able to use the restroom that best suits their gender in which they feel that they are as human beings, but yet wasn't born as in their own unscientific opinions. Rush didn't respond to him with an answer, because he felt he was being set up on the question, but I will respond... I think that it is pushing the envelope way to far in these things, because If I send my grandchildren into a rest room that matches their gender in which they were born as, and a man who thinks of himself as a woman or vice-verse a woman whom thinks herself as a man tries to go in afterwards, then there's gonna be trouble is all I can say. This is a no-brainier folks, where as the answer is of course, NOPE, NOTTA, NOT or maybe better put as ABSOLUTELY NOT, that anyone would go into the girls restroom as a man, and would do this because somehow they would think of themselves as a woman when entering in ? Not happening is what I think most people would agree to when asked, but why the push now toward all these things ? Is it because of Obama that some are feeling empowered in such a radical or militant way now ?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The poll results are meaningless in nuance and context in relationship to American culture.

Then all polls are meaningless in the nuance and context in relationship to American culture.
:

No- your poll is meaningless other than to find out how the people responding here on the boards think about forcing churches to marry homosexuals.

It is statistically irrelevant, even within the population of the posters here on USMB.

Again, and for the HUNDREDTH time, it is NOT MY POLL. I am NOT the OP of this thread!

It is however, one of the most, if not THE most popular polls/topics in USMB history and lookie how people weighed in... and to how the questions were phrased. It wasn't a mediocre "no". It was a "oh HELL NO!" with fortitude. That might be a clue as to why dems got their butt whipped in the middle bloc voting against them last week (not for the GOP). That group was voting against something palpable clinging to the democratic label like a repugnant dingleberry. The poll is your "Here's your sign"... 82% is IMPRESSIVE...

I heard something today on Rush Limbaugh, where as a person called in and asked Rush what he thought about him (the caller) as a person having to attend a meeting in Minnesota I think it was, and there the topic was concerning transgender people, and them being able to use the restroom that best suits their gender in which they feel that they are as human beings, but yet wasn't born as in their own unscientific opinions. Rush didn't respond to him with an answer, because he felt he was being set up on the question, but I will respond... I think that it is pushing the envelope way to far in these things, because If I send my grandchildren into a rest room that matches their gender in which they were born as, and a man who thinks of himself as a woman or vice-verse a woman whom thinks herself as a man tries to go in afterwards, then there's gonna be trouble is all I can say. This is a no-brainier folks, where as the answer is of course, NOPE, NOTTA, NOT or maybe better put as ABSOLUTELY NOT, that anyone would go into the girls restroom as a man, and would do this because somehow they would think of themselves as a woman when entering in ? Not happening is what I think most people would agree to when asked, but why the push now toward all these things ? Is it because of Obama that some are feeling empowered in such a radical or militant way now ?

That sizes it up pretty well... .

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Speaking of that. Do your english skills allow you to render meaning out of the poll results above to the way the questions were worded?

By 'above the way the questions were worded', you mean whatever you choose to imagine?

Again, the polls showing support for gay marriage are overwhelming. There are literally dozens of them. You ignore them all in favor of your imagination. But do you understand why your imagination doesn't actually effect the outside world?

Are you referring to the 'polls' wherein the VAST MAJORITY of the People elected by the VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE, reject the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality, setting the natural defining attributes of Marriage into their State Constitution, which sustains Nature's rejection of people of the same gender being qualified for marriage?

'Cause, those are the only polls that matter, because those polls are the result of people taking ACTION to express their feelings... . This contrasted with the subjective polls of those intent on using fraudulent methods to impart deceitful 'findings' as a means to influence the ignorant; such as yourself.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The poll results are meaningless in nuance and context in relationship to American culture.

Then all polls are meaningless in the nuance and context in relationship to American culture.
:

No- your poll is meaningless other than to find out how the people responding here on the boards think about forcing churches to marry homosexuals.

It is statistically irrelevant, even within the population of the posters here on USMB.

Again, and for the HUNDREDTH time, it is NOT MY POLL. I am NOT the OP of this thread!

It is however, one of the most, if not THE most popular polls/topics in USMB history and lookie how people weighed in... and to how the questions were phrased. It wasn't a mediocre "no". It was a "oh HELL NO!" with fortitude. That might be a clue as to why dems got their butt whipped in the middle bloc voting against them last week (not for the GOP). That group was voting against something palpable clinging to the democratic label like a repugnant dingleberry. The poll is your "Here's your sign"... 82% is IMPRESSIVE...

I heard something today on Rush Limbaugh, where as a person called in and asked Rush what he thought about him (the caller) as a person having to attend a meeting in Minnesota I think it was, and there the topic was concerning transgender people, and them being able to use the restroom that best suits their gender in which they feel that they are as human beings, but yet wasn't born as in their own unscientific opinions. Rush didn't respond to him with an answer, because he felt he was being set up on the question, but I will respond... I think that it is pushing the envelope way to far in these things, because If I send my grandchildren into a rest room that matches their gender in which they were born as, and a man who thinks of himself as a woman or vice-verse a woman whom thinks herself as a man tries to go in afterwards, then there's gonna be trouble is all I can say. This is a no-brainier folks, where as the answer is of course, NOPE, NOTTA, NOT or maybe better put as ABSOLUTELY NOT, that anyone would go into the girls restroom as a man, and would do this because somehow they would think of themselves as a woman when entering in ? Not happening is what I think most people would agree to when asked, but why the push now toward all these things ? Is it because of Obama that some are feeling empowered in such a radical or militant way now ?

beagle9, thank you for a well thought out and sensible idea.

 

[JakeStarkey]

keys, the polls over the last decade have grown to support marriage equality.

Even so, Jacksonian democracy does not determine constitutional procedures except through the Amendment process.

little buddy ro, you no longer have half of what you would need for an amendment.

Walk away.

 

[dblack]

Interesting how this thread has been diverted from its OP, to the tired debate over "marriage equality"

 

[Skylar]

Are you referring to the 'polls' wherein the VAST MAJORITY of the People elected by the VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE, reject the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality, setting the natural defining attributes of Marriage into their State Constitution, which sustains Nature's rejection of people of the same gender being qualified for marriage?

I'm speaking of the opinion polls taken by polling agencies across the country that have found strong support for gay marriage. With the margin of support being 12 to 19 points. And among moderates, support skyrockets to about 65%. Among liberals, above 70%. With moderates and liberals being the very voting block that republicans need to convince.

You were saying about 'vast majorities'?

'Cause, those are the only polls that matter, because those polls are the result of people taking ACTION to express their feelings... . This contrasted with the subjective polls of those intent on using fraudulent methods to impart deceitful 'findings' as a means to influence the ignorant; such as yourself.

Obviously not. As the fate of Prop 8 demonstrates.

And if you have any evidence that the results of the 3 dozen or so polls affirming the publics support for gay marriage, by all means present it.

 

[Syriusly]

The poll results are meaningless in nuance and context in relationship to American culture.

Then all polls are meaningless in the nuance and context in relationship to American culture.
:

No- your poll is meaningless other than to find out how the people responding here on the boards think about forcing churches to marry homosexuals.

It is statistically irrelevant, even within the population of the posters here on USMB.

Again, and for the HUNDREDTH time, it is NOT MY POLL. I am NOT the OP of this thread!

It is however, one of the most, if not THE most popular polls/topics in USMB history and lookie how people weighed in... and to how the questions were phrased. It wasn't a mediocre "no". It was a "oh HELL NO!" with fortitude. That might be a clue as to why dems got their butt whipped in the middle bloc voting against them last week (not for the GOP). That group was voting against something palpable clinging to the democratic label like a repugnant dingleberry. The poll is your "Here's your sign"... 82% is IMPRESSIVE...

I heard something today on Rush Limbaugh,

I got that far and realized I didn't need to read more.

 

[Syriusly]

Speaking of that. Do your english skills allow you to render meaning out of the poll results above to the way the questions were worded?

By 'above the way the questions were worded', you mean whatever you choose to imagine?

Again, the polls showing support for gay marriage are overwhelming. There are literally dozens of them. You ignore them all in favor of your imagination. But do you understand why your imagination doesn't actually effect the outside world?

Are you referring to the 'polls' wherein the VAST MAJORITY of the People elected by the VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE, reject the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality, setting the natural defining attributes of Marriage into their State Constitution, which sustains Nature's rejection of people of the same gender being qualified for marriage?

'Cause, those are the only polls that matter, because those polls are the result of people taking ACTION to express their feelings... . This contrasted with the subjective polls of those intent on using fraudulent methods to impart deceitful 'findings' as a means to influence the ignorant; such as yourself.

More bat guano keys crazy.

 

[protectionist]

The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.

So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?

How about against racial minorities as well?

Stupid question. The Constitution mentions religion, and protects churches from religious imposition in the 1st amendment. It doesn't say anything about race, so why do you ask ?