Why is SSM such a big deal?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:53:52 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Why is SSM such a big deal?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7
Author Topic: Why is SSM such a big deal?  (Read 16926 times)
cinyc
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,721


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: May 21, 2015, 06:32:41 PM »

So Same-Sex Marriage should be legalized federally this very instant then, because the people our representatives supposedly represent support it as a majority.

No.  Marriage is an issue that has been left to the states.  Let them decide.

I have little conceptual issue with state legislatures passing same sex marriage laws.  I disagree with it, but respect the democratic process.  What I have a big problem with is courts creating a new-found right to something that hasn't existed for thousands of years.  Nothing has changed to make something that was illegal now the law of the land.
Logged
YaBoyNY
NYMillennial
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,469
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: May 21, 2015, 06:34:10 PM »
« Edited: May 22, 2015, 10:15:30 PM by True Federalist »

So Same-Sex Marriage should be legalized federally this very instant then, because the people our representatives supposedly represent support it as a majority.

No.  Marriage is an issue that has been left to the states.  Let them decide.

I have little conceptual issue with state legislatures passing same sex marriage laws.  I disagree with it, but respect the democratic process.  What I have a big problem with is courts creating a new-found right to something that hasn't existed for thousands of years.  Nothing has changed to make something that was illegal now the law of the land.

So, basically, the government should represent the people, except when it shouldn't.

(Edited to delete a reply to a deleted post in a multi-reply post. - TF)
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: May 21, 2015, 06:35:06 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

This was the left-wing's view just 3 short years ago.  Now, they're acting as if everyone else is a bigot for sharing those views.

You're absolutely right - they're essentially writing it into the constitution. 
Logged
SNJ1985
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,274
United States
Political Matrix
E: 0.19, S: 7.57

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: May 21, 2015, 07:24:49 PM »
« Edited: May 21, 2015, 07:29:09 PM by Thomas from NJ »


Then be a compassionate human being and start acting like it. Because I sense nothing but hate from you.

The idea that it is somehow ''hateful'' or ''un-Christlike'' to condemn sins such as homosexuality flies in the face of what is written in the Bible. That idea is grounded in the modern, secularized world's flawed understanding of what love and compassion actually are; as opposed to the Bible's understanding of what those terms mean.

The Bible defines love and hatred much differently from the modern world. Coddling people in their sins (and thus encouraging them to continue down a path that will lead them to Hell) is not considered loving or compassionate at all. Warning them about their sins (an act that you and many others apparently consider ''hateful'' and ''bigoted'') most definitely is, however. The Bible, in fact, calls upon us to do just that:

''Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.'' - Leviticus 19:17

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer%27s%20Corner/offend_them.htm

Jesus considered it loving and compassionate to condemn sin - which He did on a regular basis. What we (conservative/fundamentalist Christians) are doing by condemning homosexuality and other forms of sin is, in fact, an act of kindness. You might not perceive it that way personally, but that is simply because you are basing your definition of kindness on modern, secular ''morality'' as opposed to Biblical morality. If I somehow knew you were in danger of being hit by a bus and I failed to warn you, it would be quite unkind of me. Similarly, it would be unkind of us NOT to warn homosexuals (or any other types of sinners, for that matter) against their sin.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer%27s%20Corner/tough_love_jesus.htm

Finally, this article addresses the (false) notion that Jesus must have been OK with homosexuality since He never spoke about it specifically:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-homosexuality.html
Logged
Zioneer
PioneerProgress
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,451
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: May 21, 2015, 07:39:13 PM »


Then be a compassionate human being and start acting like it. Because I sense nothing but hate from you.

The idea that it is somehow ''hateful'' or ''un-Christlike'' to condemn sins such as homosexuality flies in the face of what is written in the Bible. That idea is grounded in the modern, secularized world's flawed understanding of what love and compassion actually are; as opposed to the Bible's understanding of what those terms mean.

The Bible defines love and hatred much differently from the modern world. Coddling people in their sins (and thus encouraging them to continue down a path that will lead them to Hell) is not considered loving or compassionate at all. Warning them about their sins (an act that you and many others apparently consider ''hateful'' and ''bigoted'') most definitely is, however. The Bible, in fact, calls upon us to do just that:

''Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.'' - Leviticus 19:17

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer%27s%20Corner/offend_them.htm

Jesus considered it loving and compassionate to condemn sin - which He did on a regular basis. What we (conservative/fundamentalist Christians) are doing by condemning homosexuality and other forms of sin is, in fact, an act of kindness. You might not perceive it that way personally, but that is simply because you are basing your definition of kindness on modern, secular ''morality'' as opposed to Biblical morality. If I somehow knew you were in danger of being hit by a bus and I failed to warn you, it would be quite unkind of me. Similarly, it would be unkind of us NOT to warn homosexuals (or any other types of sinners, for that matter) against their sin.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer%27s%20Corner/tough_love_jesus.htm

Finally, this article addresses the (false) notion that Jesus must have been OK with homosexuality since He never spoke about it specifically:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-homosexuality.html

Uh, you may not want to use those first two sources, as David J Stewart happens to be a maniac in entirely different ways. I mean, he's a complete lunatic.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: May 21, 2015, 08:02:42 PM »
« Edited: May 21, 2015, 08:08:19 PM by True Federalist »

What about Lev 18:22? 1 Corinth 6:9? The Bible is the inspired word of God, if it's said by an Apostle, we're supposed to just disregard it if we feel like it?
Leaving aside that fact that I hold the Bible to be inspired by God, but written by fallible men, there's also translation issues of language and culture to consider.  That "ἀρσενοκοίτης" refers to homosexuality in general appears to not be the case. Paul had a wide variety of existing Greek words he could have used to refer to homosexuality in general rather than coin a brand new word. Exactly which aspect of what we consider to be homosexuality today, he meant is debatable, but since he likely coined the word by compounding words used in the LXX translation of Lev 18:22, we can presume he meant a similar meaning.  But what of Lev 18:22?

From the context, Lev 18:22 is part of a list of practices that the Canaanites engaged in when worshiping their gods. So it's fairly clear that Yahweh takes a dim view of ritual male on male temple prostitution, but inferring from the Bible that homosexuality in general is being condemned is an inference. If indeed, homosexuality were a choice, then a blanket condemnation would be reconcilable with the concept of a loving God. However, the available evidence indicates that homosexuality is not a choice.  Thus, having God condemn a person for being true to how He made them would make God a rather vicious and spiteful being. Since God is love, an inference that makes God to be spiteful cannot be correct. I suppose that's why many desperately want to believe conversion therapy works.  If it doesn't, then one of their axioms is false.  Either God is not love, God is not responsible for all creation, God is mean and vicious, or their interpretation of the Bible is incorrect.
Logged
Joe Biden 2020
BushOklahoma
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,921
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.77, S: 3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: May 21, 2015, 10:06:31 PM »

Despite what all of us traditional marriage supporters have said, there is a God who loves each and every one of us.  We don't have to clean up our act or debunk homosexuality to meet Him.  He meets us right where we are and the rest is up to Him.  It doesn't matter at all how the world sees you on either side of the issue.  It all matters how God sees you.  God is in the business of loving souls, not condemning sinners.  The fact is we ALL have sinned, but God extends His love toward ALL of us in spite of our sins and shortcomings.  No sin is worse than any other sin.  God doesn't demand anything of us.  All He wants is for us to come to the cross to meet Him just as we are.  Whether or not you consider homosexuality to be a sin, I think we can all agree we have sinned in many other areas.  God doesn't care about our political views.  All He wants is our heart.  He has offered the free gift of salvation through the blood of Jesus.  All He asks is that we receive that offer.  That's it.  Pure and simple.  Nutmeg, if you have indeed trusted the Lord for your salvation, then good for you and welcome to the family, brother.  Unlike some of my fellow Christians, I believe that gays can be Christians because, like I said, the act of homosexuality is just like any other.  If it's a sin, which I believe it is, it is certainly no worse or no different from any other sin.  God can save despite it.  Like I said, all He asks is our heart and He will see to it to conform us to His will.  CountryClass, there is no need at all to feel ashamed or be hard on yourself because of your sexuality.  The same God who spoke the world into existence, is the same God that saved me 29 years ago this fall, and is the same God who wants to give you a new identity in Christ.  You don't have to renounce your homosexuality to come to Him.  Once you become His, it is up to Him how He wants to mold you and make you after that.  I believe you can be a great soldier of God with your testimony.

I don't mean to proselytize, but I had to share what the good news is in all this discussion.  There is room at the cross.  Will you receive His offer?
Logged
Ban my account ffs!
snowguy716
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,632
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: May 21, 2015, 10:11:14 PM »

My local rep in the state house overcame his own personal misgivings to support gay marriage for exactly the right reasons.

Take the four minutes to watch his speech.

http://youtu.be/FQi45bs-BNE
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: May 21, 2015, 10:15:48 PM »

My local rep in the state house overcame his own personal misgivings to support gay marriage for exactly the right reasons.

Take the four minutes to watch his speech.

http://youtu.be/FQi45bs-BNE

I'm sorry but this has been a Democrat strategy for a long time. "My kids got me to change my mind!" -- it probably polls well.  Many politicians use their children as an excuse for a blatant flip-flop. 
Logged
Mercenary
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,575


Political Matrix
E: -3.94, S: -2.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: May 21, 2015, 11:34:17 PM »

I'm not sure why it brings up such passion, whether one is for or against it.
I understand why someone could be on either issue and I can even understand it making a difference in who they vote for, but the degree people exaggerate it's importance is something I don't understand. It is like it is more than our foreign policy or taxation or whatever. Not saying it isn't important, but I think policy that impacts the entire nation is more important. It'd be nice if people fought as hard to get rid of the patriot act and government spying as they did to get the government to give a marriage license to two people of the same sex.

I am also a bit surprised how quickly public opinion has changed on it. Seems one of the fastest "civil rights" changes in history.
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: May 21, 2015, 11:40:16 PM »

Many in the tea party are doing just that.  Look at Rand Paul. 
Logged
Türkisblau
H_Wallace
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: May 22, 2015, 02:34:36 AM »
« Edited: May 22, 2015, 02:38:22 AM by Pacific Speaker Türkisblau »

Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: May 22, 2015, 05:53:42 PM »

Newsflash:  The Bible is not changing.  Religion should not get with the times.  It is time society stops trying to rip pages out of the Bible.

Then why did you try to rip pages out of the Bible two years ago?

Here is the reason for my new found support.

I know what the Bible says about marriage, but it also tells me not to judge anybody and to love everyone.  I refuse to deny people the chance to be happy.  I refuse to degrade and dehumanize and discriminate against someone who is attracted to the same sex like a lot of right-wing programs have been known to do.  I know what the Bible says.  But, I also knows that it tells me to love all of God's children and let Him be the judge.  Judging someone for who they love is not in my job description and is no longer in my personal code of ethics.  If it is a sin, then I still can't judge because I am not without sin.  Jesus said to the accusers of the woman who was caught committing adultery, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."  They all left from the eldest to the youngest.

The Bible doesn't change, but Kermit the Frog does.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: May 22, 2015, 09:59:41 PM »
« Edited: May 22, 2015, 10:27:36 PM by True Federalist »

This thread was temporarily locked while a much needed cleanup was done of these Augean Stables.

I think I cleaned the pity party and the posts encouraging said party out of here.  There was some collateral damage, but I don't think I destroyed the village while saving it.
Logged
Comrade Funk
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,135
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -5.91

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: May 23, 2015, 11:41:30 AM »

I just wish people has the same enthusiasm for economics. I can see why they don't though.
Logged
NeverAgain
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,659
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: May 23, 2015, 03:57:30 PM »

Now don't get me wrong, I have no problem with the gays, but they should not be sticking the doohickey in the outterhullsinker.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,577
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: May 23, 2015, 11:37:15 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep, the left thinks it's everyone else's fault but those who have governed for half a century in a failing city.

Of course, the people of Baltimore are too dumb to elect anyone who isn't ultra-liberal. Even Anthony Brown won the city of Baltimore last year despite losing the state.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,190
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: May 24, 2015, 03:45:27 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yep, the left thinks it's everyone else's fault but those who have governed for half a century in a failing city.

Of course, the people of Baltimore are too dumb to elect anyone who isn't ultra-liberal. Even Anthony Brown won the city of Baltimore last year despite losing the state.

One of the weirdest things about you is that you think people voting in line with their interests and ideologies are dumb, while arbitrarily changing your vote against your own beliefs because of the candidates personalities is the paragon of virtue.
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: May 24, 2015, 04:19:17 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think his point was that voters who are frustrated and unhappy should stop electing the same people over and over again, i.e. try something new for once.  Baltimore is a monolithic left-wing oligarchy, and it hasn't really served them well.
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,577
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: May 24, 2015, 05:12:31 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think his point was that voters who are frustrated and unhappy should stop electing the same people over and over again, i.e. try something new for once.  Baltimore is a monolithic left-wing oligarchy, and it hasn't really served them well.

Exactly.
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,763
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: May 24, 2015, 10:37:06 PM »

1.  Marriage is a civil right granted by the government.

2.  Everyone should have the same civil rights under the law, regardless of their sexual orientation.

3.  Same-sex marriage hasn't been recognized in every state, so it is not settled. 

4.  Same-sex marriage has come to symbolize the greater struggle for acceptance and legal equality for LGBT people.  It raises the basic question of whether it's OK to treat people differently because of the sexual orientation and whether being gay is wrong/a choice.  So, the fight for SSM has advanced acceptance and equality for gay people across the board. 

5.  The US still has tons of homophobia and mistreatment of gay people so we have a lot of work to do in general to make acceptance of homosexuality a social norm.  We've come a lot way in the past 10 years, but there are still anti-gay hate crimes, conversion therapy and bullying of gay kids going on.  We can't accept second-class citizen status on any issue or be complacent even when we've had some political success in recent years.  As if it's OK to be homophobic or legally discriminated against in some states.  It's never OK and we shouldn't have to take it any longer.


I have a reasonable counter here.

1. Marriage and the family was instituted before the concept of human government. Thus goes beyond civil rights. (Look at Genesis 2-4 on this)

2. Those who want to change that are trying to undermine cultural and societal norms that have always existed. Thus the burden of proof to change roughly the whole of human history is on the ones trying to change that incontrovertible fact.

3. The Founders to a man agreed with the Biblical view of marriage and family life and shouldn't we at least consider the wisdom of the founders even if many of you want to cast off the Bible and its role in American jurisprudence.

4. For the courts to undermine the will of the people specifically expressed through their legislatures or through voter referendum to codify traditional marriage as the only acceptable marriage in said state is a stain on the very courts themselves

5. The state's who had bans on SSM who had them overturned by federal courts (yes I'm looking at you too California and Prop Cool should have said bans restored and all said "unions" voided from the state records at minimum.


Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,230
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: May 24, 2015, 11:59:43 PM »

Counter-Counter:

1. Regardless of prior institutions, marriage in its current form exists as a civil right granted by the government. The current state is what matters.

2. Pretty much a bs argument here. Even if something is a cultural or societal norm, it doesn't mean we should keep it. Slavery was a pretty common part of society. The "whole of human history" has also included polygamy btw.

3. The Bible has no legal role in the American judicial system, and we should not have to look back to the common beliefs of the 18th century to find simple solutions to today's problems.

4. [insert Churchill quote about democracy] Some things are too important to be left up to the will of the majority. The rights of the minority must be protected, and requires extra-democratic processes. Loving v. Virginia did not stain the courts when it banned laws prohibiting interracial marriage. The only stains left in our history books our the pictures of racist protestors, and will soon include the pictures of homophobic protestors.

5. I don't even know how to begin to describe how messed up that is. Like, dude, reread that.
Logged
SteveRogers
duncan298
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,155


Political Matrix
E: -3.87, S: -5.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: May 25, 2015, 12:15:06 AM »


4. For the courts to undermine the will of the people specifically expressed through their legislatures or through voter referendum to codify traditional marriage as the only acceptable marriage in said state is a stain on the very courts themselves


Sigh. You don't actually believe this. You only espouse this view of the courts with regards to marriage. If the courts overturn a gun control law or campaign finance law with popular support on constitutional grounds, you don't bat an eyelash and you don't claim that the courts have somehow subverted democracy. This is not a counterargument to the reasoning of the court decisions you're talking about.
Logged
CountryClassSF
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,530


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: May 25, 2015, 01:14:51 AM »

There's a difference between judicial review and judicial supremacy.  A ruling imposing SSM on America would be judicial supremacy. It should be defied. It would be an unprecedented violation of multiple state constitutions. The court would essentially be invalidating the constitutions of the states. If same-sex marriage was granted by the founders, we would have had it since the 1700s.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,190
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: May 25, 2015, 04:32:23 AM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think his point was that voters who are frustrated and unhappy should stop electing the same people over and over again, i.e. try something new for once.  Baltimore is a monolithic left-wing oligarchy, and it hasn't really served them well.

Exactly.

So they should instead vote for a party that only mentions urban centres as a scare story to whip up their base? People won't just vote against their interest for a party that explicitly dislikes them, never mind how long Democrats have been in charge.

And I do feel nervous that many areas are one-party states, but the modern GOP is not a party interested in cities. Perhaps that is why electoral reform will be helpful.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 12 queries.