Democrats add gay marriage to party platform

[iCe]

1) State/City law is trumping federal law in this instance. We're primarily talking about the fact that the federal government does not recognize gay marriages or civil unions.

2) You keep talking about how you're paying so much in taxes...I thought that was part of your argument.

This is the problem you are worried about one little law. I think my right to bear arms trumps gay marriage in a heartbeat since I should be allowed to defend myself (You see the looneys out there today). I understand your talking about state/federal but the fact is the argument is based on equality, which will never happen. The fact is I can give you a million examples of things that will never be equal and why we are not. Also there are more important things right now that should be focused on besides gay marriage.

Also I do pay too much in taxes, but the whole tax format in the US needs an overhall. Not just taxing the wealthy, which is the dems biggest smoke and mirror show.

 

[DatGuy]

see, I don't think gay marriage should be a debate...just pass it, and focus on the more important things...

 

[skd_mrk]

This is the problem you are worried about one little law. I think my right to bear arms trumps gay marriage in a heartbeat since I should be allowed to defend myself (You see the looneys out there today). I understand your talking about state/federal but the fact is the argument is based on equality, which will never happen. The fact is I can give you a million examples of things that will never be equal and why we are not. Also there are more important things right now that should be focused on besides gay marriage.

Also I do pay too much in taxes, but the whole tax format in the US needs an overhall. Not just taxing the wealthy, which is the dems biggest smoke and mirror show.

You think that since inequality is too big of an issue it should just be ignored? Way to stick your head in the sand bro. The Democrats might be using it as a way to generate votes, but it's not like Bush didn't play the same card back in '04.

BTW legalizing gay marriage at least in Ohio would help close the state's budget gap. The deduction for married couples is smaller than that of two individuals.

 

[iCe]

You think that since inequality is too big of an issue it should just be ignored? Way to stick your head in the sand bro. The Democrats might be using it as a way to generate votes, but it's not like Bush didn't play the same card back in '04.
quote]

All the parties do it. Look at the title of the thread, who gives a fuck. If a liberal/democrat/republican/conservative said you'll have this, this, and this I wouldnt listen. Its all smoke and mirrors in the end. If Americans or the World had smarter people they would notice these things.

 

[Cock]

In iCe's opinion, equality will never happen, so stop fighting for it already.

If iCe can't be happy, then we all should all be miserable.

As he's stated before it's not about voting for what's best for everyone it's all about what's better for him.

 

[iCe]

In iCe's opinion, equality will never happen, so stop fighting for it already.

If iCe can't be happy, then we all should all be miserable.

As he's stated before it's not about voting for what's best for everyone it's all about what's better for him.

I am sorry that I do not care about the momo on welfare because they chose to be a momo, or the guy thats 45 working for mcdonalds b/c he didnt want to go to school and has no healthcare. Please you live in a fantasy world CoF. You think that most people are good and we should help people because its humane. Fact is most people care about sarah mclaughlin ruining your day with dog videos than the bum on the street. Liberals donate more to causes like gay rights/ animal cruelty/ nonsense, than worrying about the single mom with no healtcare. Why because you think the government should worry, WRONG. Things will get better when people have their priorities straight until then preach the good word brotha.

 

[Cock]

You talk about priorities and gay-marriage being "non sense" yet you get involved in trying to stop it. If it's such nonsense and the Country needs to focus on bigger things, then why you stalling your Country and fighting against it? It's such nonsense then you shouldn't care either way.

Now onto something interesting,
Tell me what the republicans are going to do for the Single Mother, I'm interested.
Also, Do you believe it's a Women's right to choose when to have a baby?

 

[Steve]

Now onto something interesting,
Tell me what the republicans are going to do for the Single Mother, I'm interested.

Cut taxes on the 1% so she can get a job at the new Walmart opening up down the street.

 

[skd_mrk]

I think the government should end the refundable child tax credit and make contraception free to all.

+1 on CoF...if you think its trivial Ice...help back it so it passes and I'm SURE the politicians will eagerly tackle those bigger issues you refer to.

 

[Macido]

as a christian i have recently wrestled with this topic myself and where i should stand based on the facts.
i realize there is no convincing an atheist homosexual of a christian view on marriage as he/she must first accept a creator who is lord over them. Without that people are left to their own and society to fend against temptations, desires, decide morality etc.
It's no secret society is currently telling us there is a great injustice in the world due to our lack of sexual fulfillment which humanity believes they need for love and happiness in life.
Christianity is opposite this thinking on all fronts, we focus on living above many of our impulses big and small. Love is not doing what makes you feel good, its doing what is good in spite of what it makes you feel. We get our understanding of "Good" from our creator, who is himself love.

 

[Tarin]

as a christian i have recently wrestled with this topic myself and where i should stand based on the facts.
i realize there is no convincing an atheist homosexual of a christian view on marriage as he/she must first accept a creator who is lord over them. Without that people are left to their own and society to fend against temptations, desires, decide morality etc.
It's no secret society is currently telling us there is a great injustice in the world due to our lack of sexual fulfillment which humanity believes they need for love and happiness in life.
Christianity is opposite this thinking on all fronts, we focus on living above many of our impulses big and small. Love is not doing what makes you feel good, its doing what is good in spite of what it makes you feel. We get our understanding of "Good" from our creator, who is himself love.

As an American (or Canadian), do you see how it is wrong to impose your religious beliefs on others? Not only is it wrong, in the United States it is unconstitutional. What if my religion condones same-sex marriages (which it does)? You are then infringing on my First Amendment right to freedom of religion.

You're free to do what you want in your church, that's your right. However when you impose your religious views on others you have crossed a line.

 

[excalibur]

50 % of ALL marriages end in divorce the other 50% end in death (not always old age, natural or illness)


i also prefer not to say where i stand on this subject

 

[Macido]

ill be the first to say split church from state, but a lot of laws/rules probably came over from religiously backed immigrants. People of all worldviews mostly agree upon stuff like not killing, stealing and marrying more than one person, at least in north america. A lot of people don't believe they need God to tell them not to do it anymore, its cool cause he wants you to have the free will to choose which path you like, and it's consequences, especially not a government to force you.
Yet it's ingrained in the culture so you have a hard battle ahead of you, i wish you luck. I already live my life according to God and not the government, laws are redundant when you have love (that was the whole purpose of the old testament, laws don't work).
Should those flood gates you want continue to open, i see a future in north america with people wanting to marry multiple people at the same time, practicing sharia law, and doing some very hard drugs legally. After all.. you claim what right does any one of any faith have the right to tell you how to live, even if it kills ya.

 

[Tarin]

ill be the first to say split church from state, but a lot of laws/rules probably came over from religiously backed immigrants. People of all worldviews mostly agree upon stuff like not killing, stealing and marrying more than one person, at least in north america. A lot of people don't believe they need God to tell them not to do it anymore, its cool cause he wants you to have the free will to choose which path you like, and it's consequences, especially not a government to force you.
Yet it's ingrained in the culture so you have a hard battle ahead of you, i wish you luck. I already live my life according to God and not the government, laws are redundant when you have love (that was the whole purpose of the old testament, laws don't work).
Should those flood gates you want continue to open, i see a future in north america with people wanting to marry multiple people at the same time, practicing sharia law, and doing some very hard drugs legally. After all.. you claim what right does any one of any faith have the right to tell you how to live, even if it kills ya.

I appreciate you including the slippery slope fallacy in your argument, it makes this super easy for me. These "flood gates" as you call them are a logical fallacy. A leads to B leads to C leads to Armageddon . . . doesn't work like that. I don't even need a counterpoint, though I could provide a few if you want.

The battle is nearly won. We just need all the old people to kick the bucket, most people in their teens and twenties don't care. It's older people that have all the money that make it a hard fight. Twenty or thirty years and the United States will be embarrassed of those who opposed gay marriage.

 

[Fanko]

So true Tarin

 

[iCe]

I appreciate you including the slippery slope fallacy in your argument, it makes this super easy for me. These "flood gates" as you call them are a logical fallacy. A leads to B leads to C leads to Armageddon . . . doesn't work like that. I don't even need a counterpoint, though I could provide a few if you want.

The battle is nearly won. We just need all the old people to kick the bucket, most people in their teens and twenties don't care. It's older people that have all the money that make it a hard fight. Twenty or thirty years and the United States will be embarrassed of those who opposed gay marriage.

Why because their views differ from yours? This doesn't make sense. Times change and people change simple fact.

 

[Tarin]

Why because their views differ from yours? This doesn't make sense. Times change and people change simple fact.

I cite slavery, apartheid, segregation, concentration camps, internment camps, etc. as precedent.

 

[iCe]

How can u compare not letting someone get "married" if thats what you call it, to slavery and genocide....

 

[Tarin]

How can u compare not letting someone get "married" if thats what you call it, to slavery and genocide....

Apartheid, internment camps, segregation, Jim Crow laws, the oppression of women...etc. No one died as a direct result of those, right? How's that, enough embarrassment for you?

 

[Pyro]

How can u compare not letting someone get "married" if thats what you call it, to slavery and genocide....

Not to put words in Tarin's mouth, but he compared it to slavery because you are denying that a certain group of people should have the same rights as a different group of people. he didn't compare it to genocide at all, which brings me back to my first post in this thread: arguing with iCe is pointless, as he does not use logic. this thread became a joke as soon as you entertained his fucking retarded posts, Tarin.