Obama says same-sex couples should be able to marry

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

05-09-2012, 23:03
bryjcom

The way I see it is this. Who gives a shit if gays marry?? We got FAR WORSE things to worry about then whether 2 dudes have to split their belongings after they break up.

Honestly, it should be left up to the states to decide. Nowhere in the constitution does it say the federal government can regulate marriages....At least nowhere that I know of....
05-09-2012, 23:34
Sharpienads

Here's my problem with the gay marriage movement.

Most of the activists are liberal. If they hadn't spent the last 100-ish years working so hard to centralize as much power as possible in the government, they would have the right to marry whoever they wanted. The way I see it, as long as you're not infringing on anybody else's rights, you should be able to do whatever you want. However, liberals disagree. They want the government to do everything for them, and then when they want something like gay marriage, they bitch about not having the right to do it.

You cannot separate rights from responsibility. You want the government to be responsible for everything? Well now you don't have the right to do what you want. You want the right marry whoever you want? Well then you need to take responsibility for your own life and quit relying on the government to provide you with everything you think you want/need.
05-09-2012, 23:47
XC700116

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpienads

Here's my problem with the gay marriage movement.

Most of the activists are liberal. If they hadn't spent the last 100-ish years working so hard to centralize as much power as possible in the government, they would have the right to marry whoever they wanted. The way I see it, as long as you're not infringing on anybody else's rights, you should be able to do whatever you want. However, liberals disagree. They want the government to do everything for them, and then when they want something like gay marriage, they bitch about not having the right to do it.

You cannot separate rights from responsibility. You want the government to be responsible for everything? Well now you don't have the right to do what you want. You want the right marry whoever you want? Well then you need to take responsibility for your own life and quit relying on the government to provide you with everything you think you want/need.

couldn't have said it any better
05-10-2012, 00:14
GilpinGuy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpienads

Here's my problem with the gay marriage movement.

Most of the activists are liberal. If they hadn't spent the last 100-ish years working so hard to centralize as much power as possible in the government, they would have the right to marry whoever they wanted. The way I see it, as long as you're not infringing on anybody else's rights, you should be able to do whatever you want. However, liberals disagree. They want the government to do everything for them, and then when they want something like gay marriage, they bitch about not having the right to do it.

You cannot separate rights from responsibility. You want the government to be responsible for everything? Well now you don't have the right to do what you want. You want the right marry whoever you want? Well then you need to take responsibility for your own life and quit relying on the government to provide you with everything you think you want/need.

While I agree with most of this, I've read the Constitution many times and don't recall that a US Citizen has a RIGHT to marry anyone but maybe I'm off-base. And maybe I'm being a little anal here, but let's not fall into the liberal trap of making common terms like "right to marry" a regular thing that we all utter like it is an actual right under the Constitution. There is no such right that I know of. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

And for the record I'm one of the "I really don't have a huge opposition to gay marriage or 'civil unions' (aka gay marriage), but it just doesn't SEEM like the right way to go to me" crowd. I'll leave it at that.

If it goes, fine. And I think we will see it nation-wide eventually, just like legalized pot, prostitution, etc. Weeeeeeee!
05-10-2012, 00:35
mevshooter

I'm not budging on gay marriage, because most of the people on that side of the argument have been infringing on my second amendment rights for longer than the gay marriage movement has been around.

Yes, you're dang right, this is my political ammunition to fight with.

Stay the hell away from my guns, and I will stay the hell out of your bedroom.

Until then, the fight continues.
05-10-2012, 00:40
Sharpienads

Quote:

Originally Posted by GilpinGuy

While I agree with most of this, I've read the Constitution many times and don't recall that a US Citizen has a RIGHT to marry anyone but maybe I'm off-base. And maybe I'm being a little anal here, but let's not fall into the liberal trap of making common terms like "right to marry" a regular thing that we all utter like it is an actual right under the Constitution. There is no such right that I know of. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

And for the record I'm one of the "I really don't have a huge opposition to gay marriage or 'civil unions' (aka gay marriage), but it just doesn't SEEM like the right way to go to me" crowd. I'll leave it at that.

If it goes, fine. And I think we will see it nation-wide eventually, just like legalized pot, prostitution, etc. Weeeeeeee!

"The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people"

On top of that, the federal government has no power to legislate on marriage. And by getting married you're not infringing on anybody else's rights or making anybody else carry any sort of responsibility for your actions.

I get what you're saying though. But I don't think something like the "right" to healthcare or the "right" to an education is the same as the the right to marry whoever you want.
05-10-2012, 00:50
Sharpienads

Quote:

Originally Posted by mevshooter

I'm not budging on gay marriage, because most of the people on that side of the argument have been infringing on my second amendment rights for longer than the gay marriage movement has been around.

Yes, you're dang right, this is my political ammunition to fight with.

Stay the hell away from my guns, and I will stay the hell out of your bedroom.

Until then, the fight continues.

True, but there are better arguments for the 2A than that.
05-10-2012, 01:04
Flatline

Quote:

Originally Posted by HBARleatherneck

there should NOT be government recognized marriage. just civil unions or contracts, as i see it.

if a religious institution wants to marry you, well thats yours and their business. be it man man, woman woman, man woman woman woman, etc. if your choice of religion will marry you go for it. the government should only recognize contracts between individuals.

Couldn't agree more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jumpstart

Part 1. Tell me why it is necessary for two men to get an arbitrary piece of paper that says they are together?

Part 2. Devaluation of real marriages = Divorces >children hurt > crime rates higher single family homes> teen pregnancy > higher drug use > moral decay > breakdown of societies.

Hence marriage needs valuation in our times, not devaluation.

Are you sure that the devaluation of marriage is affected by gays and not by the change in morals by straight couples?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BPTactical

3-Adoption-Bullshit. It takes a man and a woman to make a child and it takes a man and a woman to raise a child.

I can tell you as a fact that mammal offspring can be created by from only females.
Furthermore plenty of single parents have raised children successfully. Maybe you think I should head down to the battered women's shelter and tell those women that if they have children and they don't get back with a man ASAP then they risk forever corrupting their children!
05-10-2012, 01:08
GilpinGuy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpienads

"The enumeration in the constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people"

I believe (strongly) that these "certain rights" were the ones specifically outlined by the founders and further amendments. Nothing else, ever, unless ratified by the States as a new Right through the proper process (not judicial activism) is a right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sharpienads

On top of that, the federal government has no power to legislate on marriage. And by getting married you're not infringing on anybody else's rights or making anybody else carry any sort of responsibility for your actions.

I get what you're saying though. But I don't think something like the "right" to healthcare or the "right" to an education is the same asthe the right to marry whoever you want.

None of these things is a right, including the "right to marry whoever you want". The words "marry" or "marriage" are never once mentioned in the US Constitution. Marriage to whoever you want is simply not a "right" granted by the US Constitution.

Again, if I'm off here, someone please correct my Crown and Diet Pepsi basted brain. (yeah, I know...gotta lay off the diet pepsi...)
05-10-2012, 01:17
GilpinGuy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flatline

I can tell you as a fact that mammal offspring can be created by from only females.

Any of them ever been human? We are a bit different than, say, platypuses (are they even mammals?).

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page