Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    07 Feb '12 18:37 / 1 edit
    It seems so silly to me that with economy's around the world in trouble, rising tensions in the middle east, and all the other problems facing us today, our political leaders, and courts spend so much time and resources deciding weather or not gay's and lesbians can get married. I don't understand....

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/court-overturns-prop-8-california-says-state-t-181451250.html
  2. 07 Feb '12 18:53
    Originally posted by bill718
    It seems so silly to me that with economy's around the world in trouble, rising tensions in the middle east, and all the other problems facing us today, our political leaders, and courts spend so much time and resources deciding weather or not gay's and lesbians can get married. I don't understand....

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/court-overturns-prop-8-california-says-state-t-181451250.html
    What do you think these courts should do about the trouble in the world economy or tensions in the middle east?
  3. 07 Feb '12 19:33
    Originally posted by bill718
    It seems so silly to me that with economy's around the world in trouble, rising tensions in the middle east, and all the other problems facing us today, our political leaders, and courts spend so much time and resources deciding weather or not gay's and lesbians can get married. I don't understand....

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/court-overturns-prop-8-california-says-state-t-181451250.html
    Why do same sex couples want to get married, that is act like they are heterosexual?
  4. Standard member avalanchethecat
    Not actually a cat
    07 Feb '12 20:08
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Why do same sex couples want to get married, that is act like they are heterosexual?
    Why shouldn't they? And more to the point, why should the State give a toss either way?
  5. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    07 Feb '12 20:09 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by PsychoPawn
    What do you think these courts should do about the trouble in the world economy or tensions in the middle east?
    I think you're missing the point here Psysho...I didn't imply the courts should do anything about the economy or the middle east. I was speaking of society in general spending too much time and effort on an issue of little imporntance.
  6. 07 Feb '12 20:25 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by bill718
    I think you're missing the point here Psysho...I didn't imply the courts should do anything about the economy or the middle east. I was speaking of society in general spending too much time and effort on an issue of little imporntance.
    You specifically mentioned the courts are spending too much time on this issue when there are other issues such as tensions in the middle east. The implication is that the courts should somehow be paying attention to things like the tensions in the middle east.

    I don't think it is an issue of little importance, especially to the people this actually affects.

    The people trying to pass prop 8 spent millions of dollars trying to pass it - so I think they thought it was a big issue either.

    People individually decide what is a big issue to them. This has become a big issue because enough people in our society don't agree with you.

    This case went through the courts because it was brought up - period. Whether you or society thinks it is a small or large issue is irrelevant. Courts take on cases as they come and they can't just defer them because they think that it's somehow insignificant.
  7. 07 Feb '12 21:17
    Originally posted by bill718
    It seems so silly to me that with economy's around the world in trouble, rising tensions in the middle east, and all the other problems facing us today, our political leaders, and courts spend so much time and resources deciding weather or not gay's and lesbians can get married. I don't understand....

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/court-overturns-prop-8-california-says-state-t-181451250.html
    So people can only expect to have equal rights when there is no worldwide problems? Last century we had two world wars, a great depression, a Cold War many other wars and conflicts but if we used your reasoning women and blacks would not get to vote and segregation would be the law of land. Is there a reason why gay rights is less important than the rights of others?
  8. Standard member bill718
    Enigma
    07 Feb '12 22:14
    Originally posted by quackquack
    So people can only expect to have equal rights when there is no worldwide problems? Last century we had two world wars, a great depression, a Cold War many other wars and conflicts but if we used your reasoning women and blacks would not get to vote and segregation would be the law of land. Is there a reason why gay rights is less important than the rights of others?
    Right you are! We should spend most of our time debating the subject of weather gays and lesbians can marry, and forget about everything else. What WAS I thinking??? I'm sure glad you set me straight on that one!
  9. Standard member spruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    07 Feb '12 22:26
    Originally posted by bill718
    Right you are! We should spend most of our time debating the subject of weather gays and lesbians can marry, and forget about everything else. What WAS I thinking??? I'm sure glad you set me straight on that one!
    We even have to have gay weather now, too? Jeez louise...
  10. 07 Feb '12 22:36
    Originally posted by bill718
    Right you are! We should spend most of our time debating the subject of weather gays and lesbians can marry, and forget about everything else. What WAS I thinking??? I'm sure glad you set me straight on that one!
    Except we aren't spending most of our type debating whether gays and lesbians can marry, are we?
  11. 07 Feb '12 22:56
    Originally posted by avalanchethecat
    Why shouldn't they? And more to the point, why should the State give a toss either way?
    If someone is satisfied with who they are, then they don't feel it necessary to pretend to be what they aren't. The State has little to nothing to say about sexuality, the remaining laws on the books are largely ignored.

    Until the last couple of decades, the matter of marriage among homosexuals was not mentioned. Why now?

    The operative question is, What is marriage? Does the State have an interest in maintaining that definition or not? Is there a value to the institution, and what will be the position of the courts regarding it?

    These are questions that homosexuals haven't had to bother themselves with. I would be extremely glad to get the State out of my business in many areas of life, and certainly aren't inviting them into areas they aren't already imposing themselves.
  12. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    07 Feb '12 23:16
    Originally posted by normbenign
    If someone is satisfied with who they are, then they don't feel it necessary to pretend to be what they aren't. The State has little to nothing to say about sexuality, the remaining laws on the books are largely ignored.

    Until the last couple of decades, the matter of marriage among homosexuals was not mentioned. Why now?

    The operative question is ...[text shortened]... ife, and certainly aren't inviting them into areas they aren't already imposing themselves.
    Until the last couples of decades, it was illegal to be a homosexual in much of the United States. Until the State was constrained from making homosexual conduct a crime, of course it was pointless to discuss the recognizing of equal rights in marriage to homosexuals.

    The operative question is: what compelling interest does the State have that would justify discriminating against homosexuals by not allowing them to enter into legally recognized marriages? So far, I have not seen anything near an adequate one offered.
  13. 08 Feb '12 00:07 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by bill718
    Right you are! We should spend most of our time debating the subject of weather gays and lesbians can marry, and forget about everything else. What WAS I thinking??? I'm sure glad you set me straight on that one!
    There is no reason to deny people the right to marry based on sexual orientation. In fact there is no reason to allocate any rights (visitation in hospital, medical etc) to one sexual orientation and not to another. Therefore there is absolutely nothing to debate and people should simply be allowed to marry regardless of their sexual orientation. Then we could avoid all costs of debate and actually gave people equal rights.
  14. 08 Feb '12 00:39
    Originally posted by avalanchethecat
    Why shouldn't they? And more to the point, why should the State give a toss either way?
    egg friggin zach lee
  15. 08 Feb '12 00:40
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Until the last couples of decades, it was illegal to be a homosexual in much of the United States. Until the State was constrained from making homosexual conduct a crime, of course it was pointless to discuss the recognizing of equal rights in marriage to homosexuals.

    The operative question is: what compelling interest does the State hav ...[text shortened]... nto legally recognized marriages? So far, I have not seen anything near an adequate one offered.
    Again the matter of rights comes up. Where do right originate? Some say God, others say nature, still others say rights are privileges acknowledged by governments, or by cultures or religions, sometimes mixed with government power.

    I recognize marriage as a cultural phenomenon, partly religious, but in most cases recognized and supported by governments. Not that it matters, but from a personal perspective, I wish the State were not involved in marriage at all. No licensing, no special discriminatory rules favoring or limiting those married or who want to be. If that were the case, anybody or anything could marry, but there would be no incentives to do so.

    Why does anyone want to marry? Love? You can't love without marriage? Sharing of property? Lots of partnerships, cooperatives and corporations share property without marriage. So the brides father can spend big money on a party? Come on, its because it is socially and culturally acceptable. Yet more and more heterosexuals don't care anymore and just shack up.

    Even the old adage of marriage being for the kids, doesn't seem to work anymore, as they are more often than not just props in the divorce. Why do gay folks want to marry. Another form of S and M? They want all the problems and dysfunctions of straights.