• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

President May be in Trouble

Nova_C said:
Man, I wish Wikipedia had been around when I was in 5th grade. The internet wasn't even available where I grew up until I was a teenager. And the bleeding edge modems were 14.4 kbit. :p

At this point, out of the two presidential candidates, Obama is the best bet to get gay marriage legalized across the US.
Click to expand...

That's laughable at best. Obama took his damn sweet time saying he was for gay marriage, and I doubt it was sincere!
 
Nova_C said:
Anyway, if there's no danger of regression, great, but the states that are refusing to allow gay marriage need to be brought to the 21st century. Some times individual rights need to trump states' rights and this is a case where the federal government should make gay marriage legal across the board.
Click to expand...

That's a matter of opinion. The people voted. They said no same-sex marriage in NC. The law that is in effect is individual's rights at work. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean that it is wrong.
 
vliberatore said:
That's a matter of opinion. The people voted. They said no same-sex marriage in NC. The law that is in effect is individual's rights at work. Just because you don't agree doesn't mean that it is wrong.
Click to expand...

It sure can.

A lot of people didn't think Blacks should have equal rights either, and there was certainly a lot of opposition to women's suffrage.

Sometimes the people are wrong and change needs to be shoved down their throats. This is one of those times.
 
So if the government is hired by the people, and the majority of people disagree with something, they should shove it down the majorities throat because they know they're right and the minority is wrong? Gee sounds pleasent.
 
Do we remember why the Civil War was started? Over states rights. I highly doubt any President is going to over turn states decisions that allow gay marriage. The marriage might not be seen legal federally but will be legal within the state.
 
I believe the government should stay out of marriage and what defines a legal marriage. I am all for gay marriage they should have the same rights as everyone else. Same benefits as well.
 
beautifullywild77 said:
I believe the government should stay out of marriage and what defines a legal marriage. I am all for gay marriage they should have the same rights as everyone else. Same benefits as well.
Click to expand...

It'd be great if the government would stay out of peoples' marriage rights, but they're not because the government is right now not letting people of the same sex get married.

Just like the government wasn't letting blacks marry whites.

So there's a movement to get the government out and right now Obama has publicly voiced support for this movement. No other president has done that, so it's a step. If it's an illusion, well, since that announcement, support for gay marriage has increased, especially in black communities. So it's a win.

Carinata, most things shouldn't be forced. But when a group of people are oppressing others, then yes, we should stop them whether they like it or not, especially when they are using the bludgeon of law to oppress.
 
Nova_C said:
It'd be great if the government would stay out of peoples' marriage rights, but they're not because the government is right now not letting people of the same sex get married.

Just like the government wasn't letting blacks marry whites.

So there's a movement to get the government out and right now Obama has publicly voiced support for this movement. No other president has done that, so it's a step. If it's an illusion, well, since that announcement, support for gay marriage has increased, especially in black communities. So it's a win.

Carinata, most things shouldn't be forced. But when a group of people are oppressing others, then yes, we should stop them whether they like it or not, especially when they are using the bludgeon of law to oppress.
Click to expand...

So Obama's a great guy because he said he supports gay marriage, but it's not sincere? That makes no sense at all. You say the government needs to keep out, but you also suggest they shove what's "right" down peoples throat. Majority rules, but minorities need protection. I personally think gays should be allowed to have civil unions, but they shouldn't be called marriages.
 
Nova_C said:
I don't think the ad hominem attack was necessary.
Click to expand...
I apologize.

Nova_C said:
It just sounded like you were being critical of Obama for saying that there shouldn't be any laws against gay marriage. If you were agreeing with him, well, okay then.
Click to expand...
I was being critical but not for what he said but why he said it. I believe he is simply USING the LGBT community to meet his ends and in reality has little concern for their situation. The fedgov does not have the constitutional authority to control marriage. Thus it would take a constitutional amendment. So for Obama it's a vote buy nothing more.

Nova_C said:
Because the vast majority of the Republican party is a lot more interested in getting into your bedrooms and deciding what birth control is okay for you to use and who you should be marrying than the Democrats, and certainly than Obama is.
Click to expand...
I thought it was Obama and the super majority that forced birth control and abortion drug options on everyone through the unconstitutional Obamacare. :shrugs:

Nova_C said:
But I guess I just misunderstood. Glad to see at least you can find common ground with Obama on this one.
Click to expand...
I don't share common ground with him. I share common ground with friends here and offline that struggle for this equality. I don't share common ground with Obama using their fight as a poker chip to get votes!

Nova_C said:
Man, I wish Wikipedia had been around when I was in 5th grade. The internet wasn't even available where I grew up until I was a teenager. And the bleeding edge modems were 14.4 kbit. :p

At this point, out of the two presidential candidates, Obama is the best bet to get gay marriage legalized across the US.
Click to expand...
lol when I was in 5th grade home computers were extremely uncommon let alone the intertubes. Heck our schools didn't even have them.

Nova_C said:
... Sometimes the people are wrong and change needs to be shoved down their throats. This is one of those times.
Click to expand...
Wrong! Sure people are wrong sometimes but this country was founded to escape a gov that shoved its rules down the people's throat. What is needed is less control.

Nova_C said:
It'd be great if the government would stay out of peoples' marriage rights, but they're not because the government is right now not letting people of the same sex get married.

Just like the government wasn't letting blacks marry whites.

So there's a movement to get the government out and right now Obama has publicly voiced support for this movement. No other president has done that, so it's a step. If it's an illusion, well, since that announcement, support for gay marriage has increased, especially in black communities. So it's a win.

Carinata, most things shouldn't be forced. But when a group of people are oppressing others, then yes, we should stop them whether they like it or not, especially when they are using the bludgeon of law to oppress.
Click to expand...
We finally agree on something. Less oppressive gov, not more gov control! A step in the right direction for you Nova. :D
 
tsst said:
We finally agree on something. Less oppressive gov, not more gov control! A step in the right direction for you Nova. :D
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, I am all for smaller government and less governmental interference in people's private lives. Unfortunately people like Carinata exist, who want to tell gay couples that they aren't allowed to get married because marriage is, for some reason, not for them. So we have to step up and create a law to protect the rights of the few from the tyranny of the many.

In my opinion, that is the sole responsibility of government. If the tyranny of the majority did not exist, then government would be completely unnecessary. But it does.

And so we make do.
 
Nova_C said:
Believe it or not, I am all for smaller government and less governmental interference in people's private lives. Unfortunately people like Carinata exist, who want to tell gay couples that they aren't allowed to get married because marriage is, for some reason, not for them. So we have to step up and create a law to protect the rights of the few from the tyranny of the many.

In my opinion, that is the sole responsibility of government. If the tyranny of the majority did not exist, then government would be completely unnecessary. But it does.

And so we make do.
Click to expand...

It's terribly unfortunate I exist. I said allow them to get the benefits of marriage, but call it something like a civil union. That's a compromise. I'm sorry I'm such an awful person. Your comment was unnecessary and immature.
 
Nova_C said:
It sure can.

A lot of people didn't think Blacks should have equal rights either, and there was certainly a lot of opposition to women's suffrage.

Sometimes the people are wrong and change needs to be shoved down their throats. This is one of those times.
Click to expand...


No. Generations bring change, governments do not. A collective shift of mindeset is what made these go from acceptable to wrong.

Who knows, maybe in the future we'll be scoffed at by future generations for our use of fossil fuels and nonrenewable resources. It is fine now, but in 100 years, it may be "wrong". Who are you to say what is right and wrong?
 
Carinata said:
It's terribly unfortunate I exist. I said allow them to get the benefits of marriage, but call it something like a civil union. That's a compromise. I'm sorry I'm such an awful person. Your comment was unnecessary and immature.
Click to expand...

So, Separate but equal?

I don't know if you're an awful person. But you are trying to decide what is 'allowed' for a gay couple. What does it matter to you whether they get married or not? Why do you believe some couples should have a 'marriage' while other couples get a 'civil union'?

vliberatore, it takes generations to change the beliefs of society. It takes a government to protect an oppressed minority. Go and read about the suicides in Anoka-Hennepin and you tell me that there isn't a horrific oppression going on, that we should allow this abuse to go on and on because 'one day, some day, it'll change.'

It won't. Not until we draw a line and tell people they can no longer cross it.
 
So Obama is just doing this for votes?... We have overwhelmingly more states that outlaw same-sex marriages that those that allow it. So please tell me of this secret voting pool that you see.

It's just another example of the anti-ism. It's another attempt to say "Yeah, he might be for gay marriage (which is a strong statement towards social justice and equality), but he didn't really mean it". Which is reminiscent of the "Yeah, he might have been born here (in America), but I still don't think he's Christian". Or the other "Well, OBL was killed on his watch, but he was too arrogant about it to give him credit".

If people can't give credit where it's due, it's a redundant discussion. The only goal is progress, and some of his decisions as president have been of incredible progress.
 
Michael823 said:
So Obama is just doing this for votes?... We have overwhelmingly more states that outlaw same-sex marriages that those that allow it. So please tell me of this secret voting pool that you see.

It's just another example of the anti-ism. It's another attempt to say "Yeah, he might be for gay marriage (which is a strong statement towards social justice and equality), but he didn't really mean it". Which is reminiscent of the "Yeah, he might have been born here (in America), but I still don't think he's Christian". Or the other "Well, OBL was killed on his watch, but he was too arrogant about it to give him credit".

If people can't give credit where it's due, it's a redundant discussion. The only goal is progress, and some of his decisions as president have been of incredible progress.
Click to expand...

So what we say doesn't have to be genuine, as long as it is progressive? If your foundation is flawed, it just leads to a bigger eventual collapse.
 
Carinata said:
Nova, have you ever lived in the United States?
Click to expand...
This is the most ridiculous argument one person could make. There is so much diversity in this country socioeconomically, culturally, progressively, etc... for you do be so arrogant as to question someone else for their personal American experience.

I'm sure that many of the southern states would hold some ideals of no value to some of the more progressive and liberal states. So Nova would most likely have a more validated political opinion in some of those states than you could scratch the surface on having with your own experience, if confronted with views of those in other American states.
 
Carinata said:
So what we say doesn't have to be genuine, as long as it is progressive? If your foundation is flawed, it just leads to a bigger eventual collapse.
Click to expand...
Wrong. If your results are that of people's hopes and expectations, why is there such a need to even question the intent.

Sure, we could all dumb it down and argue about people's true intention. But we're not trying to seat a prophet. We want physical change/progress, and some people aren't so privileged to start demanding what form that comes in. If it's by accident or favor, it still benefits us to have social changes such as allowing same-sex marriage (on behalf of equal rights and social justice). So for the more privileged, to who may not have any stake in these issues, it's fun to just throw dirt and rocks. But for people who do care to live in a truly free and equal society, they're not squabbling over how the change came about.
 
Michael823 said:
This is the most ridiculous argument one person could make. There is so much diversity in this country socioeconomically, culturally, progressively, etc... for you do be so arrogant as to question someone else for their personal American experience.

I'm sure that many of the southern states would hold some ideals of no value to some of the more progressive and liberal states. So Nova would most likely have a more validated political opinion in some of those states than you could scratch the surface on having with your own experience, if confronted with views of those in other American states.
Click to expand...

Arrogant? Really? If you've never lived here, it's like the kid who runs around on the internet compiling all the information he can about snakes. But he's never owned one a single day in his life. When he finally gets a snake all that research is never going to be as good as hands on experience.

If you're not from America, you don't necessarily know how it works here. There's this thing called "assimilation" and people who come here from otehr countries learn our culture, and how we act.

See part of the reason were so divided is because we're so diverse. Is that a bad thing? Not always, but it often leads to divisions.

Marriage has always been between a man and a woman, let's preserve that and call it something else. It's a compromise. It's a common ground compromise that appeals to both sides IMO. Your never going to please everyone. It's not separate but equal. Equal benefits, equal tax breaks, equal everything. It's just not called marriage.
 
Michael823 said:
Wrong. If your results are that of people's hopes and expectations, why is there such a need to even question the intent.

Sure, we could all dumb it down and argue about people's true intention. But we're not trying to seat a prophet. We want physical change/progress, and some people aren't so privileged to start demanding what form that comes in. If it's by accident or favor, it still benefits us to have social changes such as allowing same-sex marriage (on behalf of equal rights and social justice). So for the more privileged, to who may not have any stake in these issues, it's fun to just throw dirt and rocks. But for people who do care to live in a truly free and equal society, they're not squabbling over how the change came about.
Click to expand...

So sentiment means nothing? If Obama really hates all gays but is saying he doesn't just to get re-elected it's still a good thing.

This is the problem with the general liberal population, they think everything everyone says is from the heart, they think no body lies, they think an equal society is achievable. When it's not. Everybody lies, there will be sin and evil in this world until the very end, we have to work through it and strive for a better society, but we can never make it perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top