Gay marriage ban passes in NC

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

I do not know to whom the forum 'nanny' remark refers, but no moderator has contacted any member in regards to the content of this thread. We, like many of you, continue to watch the proceedings in rapt fascination.

The Management

While that may be the case - there I would say that there should have been action some time ago.

Originally Posted by steve_the_slim

[REDACTED] you [REDACTED] stupid bigoted [DATA EXPUNGED]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

Opponents of gay marriage should grow up and mind their own business...maybe if they stopped marrying their cousins, they would be able to think...

Originally Posted by AngusJS

I can only hope that in 100 years, when today's bigots are long since dead, we'll be able to look back on these laws and shake our heads in disbelief.

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

That's my thinking on it too. The inexorable march of progress will leave the bigots behind when they die off.

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

If someone doesn't like being called a bigot, then they shouldn't engage in bigotry.

Anyone who has disagreed with gay marraige has been called a bigot innumerable times - accused of marrying their cousin and told to "grow up". Not to mention, stupid and [redacted].... which in and of itself violates the rules here. Statements looking forward to the death of people probably are not within the guidelines either....

I mean come on - this thing STARTED with name calling.....
But it seems that its ok as long as your bashing people who are anti-gay marriage.

I haven't brought it up until now - but the above quotes were only in the first 4 pages - and there are more. Discussions are hard enough as it is in this medium - allowing blanket statements that say anyone who is anti-gay marraige is somehow a stupid bigot who marries their cousin..... well lets just say that those kinds of allowed comments don't make discourse any easier.

[August]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

I haven't brought it up until now - but the above quotes were only in the first 4 pages - and there are more. Discussions are hard enough as it is in this medium - allowing blanket statements that say anyone who is anti-gay marraige is somehow a stupid bigot who marries their cousin..... well lets just say that those kinds of allowed comments don't make discourse any easier.

You're wasting your time Hap, they see only what they want to see.

[Alex]

This country most of you live in is what it is, an area where every scientific/social/etc. innovation can be considered an improvement and essential advance for the betterment of humanity (lol), and so I'm sure being part of the homosexual/transsexual/bisexual/hermaphrodite/whatever community will be considered THE cutting edge of fashion worldwide the day when there will be this kind of people living in the White House for some years. It's trendy to be dark-skinned these days, after all.

[Bilge_Rat]

The case for same-sex marriage is based on civil liberties.

America was founded by men and women who wanted to escape from the oppressive tyrannies of Europe. America was founded on the principle that a man (or woman) should be free to live his life as he wishes, within reasonable limits.

The 1789 U.S. Bill of Rights codifies the principle that individual liberty must be protected as much as possible.

Over the years, the notion of what is an accepted right has evolved. Blacks were not considered to be human beings in 1789 and it was not until the 1960s that they achieved full legal equality. Women faced the same struggle.

Gays are the latest group to demand full equality. They want the right to get married. The Surpreme Court in Loring v. Virginia stated that the right to get married is a basic civil right.

Once you recognize that: 1) each individual is equal before the law; and 2) you can not discriminate against an individual based on his/her race, gender, disability, age, sexual orientation, then there is no rational argument to justify why black, mixed race and heterosexual couples are allowed to get married, but homosexual couples may not.

Team Haplo, you are up.

[Bilge_Rat]

Here is a news item which shows that this issue is no longer left-right. In Massachusetts, the Republicans are backing an openly gay, pro same-sex marriage candidate because he has the best chance to win:

The avid support from the National Republican Congressional Committee doesn’t represent a breakthrough for the party on gay rights, but it does reveal that there are certainly shades of gray within the GOP on the issue. At one point, it would have been unthinkable for an openly gay man to run on a GOP ticket, but now many Republicans in Washington privately profess that they’re not as adamant about things like gay marriage as the evangelicals in the party base.

But the national party isn’t exactly touting Tisei’s support for gay rights either — in fact, it goes unmentioned in all the endorsements from the GOP powers in Washington. Instead, they are focused on his experience as a 26-year veteran in the Massachusetts Legislature and his fiscal conservative bona fides. It also helps that Tisei was able to win 13 elections in a row as a state legislator in a part of the district he’s now running in — with the help of independent and Democratic voters. He’s also outraised his opponent in the first quarter of 2012: $354,467 to Tierney’s $325,125.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76291.html#ixzz1uwYwWvsJ

[AVGWarhawk]

Are there any compelling reasons other than religious that gay marriage should not be accepted and instituted? What does the gay couple achieve, receive, obtain or gain as a result of winning the right to marriage? Is itmonetary gain, self-esteem or just a equal right? What, in their lives, is being suppressed by not having the right to marriage? Is this just the fight for the right?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

While that may be the case - there I would say that there should have been action some time ago.

Based on what, exactly? Yes, people get to state opinions, even wrong ones. Most of the "bigot" comments were directed generally at all people who oppose gay marriage. While impolite and possibly not true, and unquestionably an insult, the term reflects an actual belief held by the user. And, as Mookie said "then don't act like one". I don't know what is in anyone's mind, so I don't necessarily agree with the sentiment, but to their minds the term is valid and true, so they use it.

Anyone who has disagreed with gay marraige has been called a bigot innumerable times - accused of marrying their cousin and told to "grow up". Not to mention, stupid and [redacted].... which in and of itself violates the rules here. Statements looking forward to the death of people probably are not within the guidelines either....

I mean come on - this thing STARTED with name calling.....
But it seems that its ok as long as your bashing people who are anti-gay marriage.

Yes it did, but again it was used generically. I don't see you objecting when people on the right talk about "Stupid lefties", and that happens at least once a week here. It now becomes a case of goose and gander.

Originally Posted by August

You're wasting your time Hap, they see only what they want to see.

"They" aren't the only ones. Again, goose and gander.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Based on what, exactly? Yes, people get to state opinions, even wrong ones. Most of the "bigot" comments were directed generally at all people who oppose gay marriage. While impolite and possibly not true, and unquestionably an insult, the term reflects an actual belief held by the user. And, as Mookie said "then don't act like one". I don't know what is in anyone's mind, so I don't necessarily agree with the sentiment, but to their minds the term is valid and true, so they use it.

Besides, all this occurred last week when everyone was more worked up about the issue. I think this is just a distraction by Team Haplo to cover up the fact that they don't have a strong argument.

[August]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

"They" aren't the only ones. Again, goose and gander.

But you only care when it's someone who holds a different opinion than you. In your little world the goose gets cooked and the gander is allowed a free pass to say whatever it wants.

Don't bother to reply. I think i'll take a break from you for awhile.

[Tribesman]

Are there any compelling reasons other than religious that gay marriage should not be accepted and instituted?

Be fair, the religious argement is no more compelling than all the other failed arguements.

So onto matters of measure.
Since the last big bigotted marriage amendment in NC took 96 years to get rid of how long will it take for this amendment to be struck off?

You're wasting your time Hap, they see only what they want to see.

An interesting statement, is this the same person who has been complaining about posts that only exist in his imagination?
But hey I will make it OK for you
Would you like the religious one sorted or the recent one man horde posting about tax?
Religion is on topic.
If I use time travel it can appear you were correct so here goes...

originally posted on this forum
no jesus on this forum, hide the jesus, jesus must be banned, jesus doesn't rulez, everyone put jesus on your ignore list so he can't be seen.

And back to the present...wow august you were right this forum is full of that
well "not quite" since that doesn't cover the "many" people.
So we need more time travellers to go back and make the same posts to show you are not just making it up.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Be fair, the religious argement is no more compelling than all the other failed arguements.

I was not being fair or unfair. I was asking a question. I don't find the religious reason to be compelling as some. Perhaps I should have worded it differently. At any rate, what of my other questions? What will the gay community gain other than an equal right to marry? Does the issue go away?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by August

But you only care when it's someone who holds a different opinion than you. In your little world the goose gets cooked and the gander is allowed a free pass to say whatever it wants.

Not true. I have a long record of going after people with whom I agree, mostly because they are so adamant in their "rightness" that they make the rest of us look bad. This has included Subman1, Frame57, and more recently Yubba and Bubblehead1980.

Don't bother to reply. I think i'll take a break from you for awhile.

You'll have to take a break from Subsim itself for that to work.

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Does the issue go away?

well, if I can talk about the canadian experience. Now that same-sex marriages are legal in Canada, the issue has completely disappeared. The medias no longer talk about it and it has had no impact at all otherwise.

As a straight man leading a boring middle class family life, I have no idea if there are any same-sex couples in my neighborhood or at my work. I have some acquaintances who are gay, some in long term relationships, but I have no idea if they are married, nor would I feel comfortable prying.

We know exactly one married same-sex couple and only because one woman is a high-school friend of my wife who came out of the closet a few years ago. They are both very discreet about it and if you did not know they were married, you would have no idea.

[Tribesman]

What will the gay community gain other than an equal right to marry? Does the issue go away?

Well if equal rights are granted thats what they gain and the issue should be sorted, after all they can't make a claim for equal rights if they have equal rights, that would be like women getting the vote and then asking for the vote.
A couple of people have tried the slippery slope argement earlier about what it would lead to but they were so ludicrous a single word was enough to shoot down every angle on that.
There may be a slight issue with religious institutions where they cross with the state on work, but as its nothing other than a legal issue on those levels it would be no different than where they cross on existing levels.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Well if equal rights are granted thats what they gain and the issue should be sorted, after all they can't make a claim for equal rights if they have equal rights, that would be like women getting the vote and then asking for the vote.
A couple of people have tried the slippery slope argement earlier about what it would lead to but they were so ludicrous a single word was enough to shoot down every angle on that.
There may be a slight issue with religious institutions where they cross with the state on work, but as its nothing other than a legal issue on those levels it would be no different than where they cross on existing levels.

It is not leading to anything other than a right. Perhaps the perceived notion that if this right is granted others will demand rights for just about anything?
A right is defined by what body of people or piece of paper? Is it encompassed by the notion of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness? What really constitutes a right to anything? Is marriage a right or just a practice of Monogamy? Ultimately the argument is not about marriage. It is about a right. I don't believe the issue will go away because equal rights do not stop discrimination. Sure, the battle was won but the war continues.