|
On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 06:59 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 06:35 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
Unfortunately, gay marriage is about as divisive an issue as there is in America right now, so it's simply not something he could support in his first term. However, "don't ask, don't tell" was repealed during his first term. If you've listened to him talk, it's pretty clear that he supports gay rights, but he can't do things by himself and needs the support of the other politicians in Washington. so he lied to us his first term? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now". Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage?
Majority of CA is not the majority of the country.
Though what people say in polls and what people do in voting in person is very different imo.
|
On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 06:59 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 06:35 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
Unfortunately, gay marriage is about as divisive an issue as there is in America right now, so it's simply not something he could support in his first term. However, "don't ask, don't tell" was repealed during his first term. If you've listened to him talk, it's pretty clear that he supports gay rights, but he can't do things by himself and needs the support of the other politicians in Washington. so he lied to us his first term? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now". Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage?
There is this thing called a poll. It's when you ask about of people about their stance on a particular issue to get an idea of what the general opinion of population is on the subject. Apparently there have been some of these poll thingys conducted on the topic of gay marriage, finding that a majority of americans now support it, with overwhelming support among young people in particular.
|
On March 03 2013 08:32 Zooper31 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 06:59 dAPhREAk wrote:
[quote]
so he lied to us his first term? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now". Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage? Majority of CA is not the majority of the country.
no shit? but ca is one of the most progressive, if not the most progressive, states in the nation.
|
On March 03 2013 08:33 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:32 Zooper31 wrote:On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now".
Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage? Majority of CA is not the majority of the country. no shit? but ca is one of the most progressive, if not the most progressive, states in the nation.
Read it the first time, still doesn't change my response. Times are changing very rapidly and the poster above explained it more.
|
On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 06:59 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 06:35 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
Unfortunately, gay marriage is about as divisive an issue as there is in America right now, so it's simply not something he could support in his first term. However, "don't ask, don't tell" was repealed during his first term. If you've listened to him talk, it's pretty clear that he supports gay rights, but he can't do things by himself and needs the support of the other politicians in Washington. so he lied to us his first term? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now". Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage?
They seemed to have come to their senses afterwards tho. The changes in California nicely mirror Obama's 'evolving' position, which is another perfectly valid reason for him to get involved.
In California, public opinion clearly has shifted since Proposition 8 passed in 2008 and banned same-sex marriage. A Field Poll released this week showed that California voters, by a nearly 2-1 margin, now approve of allowing same-sex couples to marry, a finding in line with states that legalized gay marriage in November's election.
|
On March 03 2013 08:32 McBengt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 06:59 dAPhREAk wrote:
[quote]
so he lied to us his first term? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now". Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage? There is this thing called a poll. It's when you ask about of people about their stance on a particular issue to get an idea of what the general opinion of population is on the subject. Apparently there have been some of these poll thingys conducted on the topic of gay marriage, finding that a majority of americans now support it, with overwhelming support among young people in particular.
vote > polls. nobody says "awesome, we won the poll, but lost the vote."
|
On March 03 2013 08:35 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:32 McBengt wrote:On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now".
Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage? There is this thing called a poll. It's when you ask about of people about their stance on a particular issue to get an idea of what the general opinion of population is on the subject. Apparently there have been some of these poll thingys conducted on the topic of gay marriage, finding that a majority of americans now support it, with overwhelming support among young people in particular. vote > polls. nobody says "awesome, we won the poll, but lost the vote."
Whole nation > CA. Nobody says "awesome, CA banned something 5 years ago therefore case closed."
|
On March 02 2013 18:51 xwoGworwaTsx wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2013 11:53 Tomba wrote:
If you really are against gay marriage, don't marry the same sex. Why is this still a problem? Lol! Close this thread now! It is really actually this simple! LOL good job sir!
Yeah, it is actually that simple if you think about it...
|
On March 03 2013 08:35 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:32 McBengt wrote:On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now".
Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage? There is this thing called a poll. It's when you ask about of people about their stance on a particular issue to get an idea of what the general opinion of population is on the subject. Apparently there have been some of these poll thingys conducted on the topic of gay marriage, finding that a majority of americans now support it, with overwhelming support among young people in particular. vote > polls. nobody says "awesome, we won the poll, but lost the vote."
Once you vote on something you can never vote on that subject again, and never change your mind. Also, a country or a state can never evolve their social policies with new generations who may see things differently.
|
In a democratic country that promotes liberty, any law targeting the way its citizens choose to live need have a damn good reason for existing. Simply being offended by something that in no other way affects you is not one of those reasons.
With the US having such a recent history of discrimination against its coloured community, its quite shocking that so many appear to be unable to see this for what it really is. Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinion, morals and sense of right and wrong. Expressing opinions of what one think is right is however something entirely different from promoting laws to ensure that everyone else acts accordingly.
|
There are likely many people who will tell a pollster they are in favor of gay marriage, but when they get alone in that booth with a secret ballot....
It's failed in what, 30+ states, and passed in 2?
|
On March 03 2013 08:56 McBengt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:35 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:32 McBengt wrote:On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage? There is this thing called a poll. It's when you ask about of people about their stance on a particular issue to get an idea of what the general opinion of population is on the subject. Apparently there have been some of these poll thingys conducted on the topic of gay marriage, finding that a majority of americans now support it, with overwhelming support among young people in particular. vote > polls. nobody says "awesome, we won the poll, but lost the vote." Once you vote on something you can never vote on that subject again, and never change your mind. Also, a country or a state can never evolve their social policies with new generations who may see things differently.
im not sure what you mean. you can amend and repeal laws, so, yes, you can vote on it again. if you're referring to a constitutional amendment, it is obviously more difficult to amend or repeal, but also possible.
|
On March 03 2013 09:02 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:56 McBengt wrote:On March 03 2013 08:35 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:32 McBengt wrote:On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage? There is this thing called a poll. It's when you ask about of people about their stance on a particular issue to get an idea of what the general opinion of population is on the subject. Apparently there have been some of these poll thingys conducted on the topic of gay marriage, finding that a majority of americans now support it, with overwhelming support among young people in particular. vote > polls. nobody says "awesome, we won the poll, but lost the vote." Once you vote on something you can never vote on that subject again, and never change your mind. Also, a country or a state can never evolve their social policies with new generations who may see things differently. im not sure what you mean. you can amend and repeal laws, so, yes, you can vote on it again. if you're referring to a constitutional amendment, it is obviously more difficult to amend or repeal, but also possible.
Obviously I was dead serious and meant every word.
|
|
|
United States1591 Posts
On March 03 2013 09:00 rusedeguerre wrote:
There are likely many people who will tell a pollster they are in favor of gay marriage, but when they get alone in that booth with a secret ballot....
It's failed in what, 30+ states, and passed in 2?
I think that it's more likely that most people just aren't showing up to vote than lying about how they feel.
|
On March 03 2013 13:18 urashimakt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 09:00 rusedeguerre wrote:
There are likely many people who will tell a pollster they are in favor of gay marriage, but when they get alone in that booth with a secret ballot....
It's failed in what, 30+ states, and passed in 2? I think that it's more likely that most people just aren't showing up to vote than lying about how they feel.
Probably this.
Conservatives/Republicans are more likely to go the voting booths. So sometimes popular opinion polls are less likely to matter. Also older people are more likely to vote, and they tend to be against gay marriage,
What surprises me though, is that 2008 november elections were extremely good turnout for liberals, so that is kind of interesting when you think about this vote, Obama did win that election in California after all. Prop 8 was advertised EVERYWHERE out there, it was a big deal, I know several family members who voted for Obama but chose to vote against same sex marriage on prop 8...
I don't get it, but same-sex marriage will be allowed soon in this country, and I hope, more importantly for me at least, that lgbtq people are more accepted by their families, communities, etc as times change and our country evolves. The suicide rate is way too high for their community 
|
so after reading the discussion in this thread, I cant help but ask this question: who is ever hurt by gay marriage? honestly. present to me a reasonable argument over someone sustaining actual harm as a result of gay marriage. I bet that it cant be done.
|
On March 03 2013 16:16 Aveng3r wrote:
so after reading the discussion in this thread, I cant help but ask this question: who is ever hurt by gay marriage? honestly. present to me a reasonable argument over someone sustaining actual harm as a result of gay marriage. I bet that it cant be done.
That poor young girl who's still waiting for her one true love to come around, because she knows that two men can't ever love each other, because two men can't get married, and everyone knows that only two people that have true love can get married.
|
On March 03 2013 16:16 Aveng3r wrote:
so after reading the discussion in this thread, I cant help but ask this question: who is ever hurt by gay marriage? honestly. present to me a reasonable argument over someone sustaining actual harm as a result of gay marriage. I bet that it cant be done.
Yeah exactly this. Two gay people become happily married and that's it, how can anybody else be put out by it? The argument against gay marriage comes down to not wanting gay people to be happy. What other reason could there be?
At my University there's an overwhelming amount of people who support civil rights like this and that seems to be consistent among the younger generation. So the good news is this kind of bigotry won't last forever. When the world is run by today's youth gay marriage bans will be nothing but a bad memory.
I'm pretty proud of my generation mostly because of it's open mindedness. Telling kids what to think isn't working anymore, they question things anyway and that is just awesome.
|
On March 03 2013 08:28 dAPhREAk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2013 08:26 Derez wrote:On March 03 2013 08:00 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:56 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:48 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:42 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 07:33 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 07:23 Kerwin wrote:On March 03 2013 06:59 dAPhREAk wrote:On March 03 2013 06:35 Kerwin wrote:
[quote]
Unfortunately, gay marriage is about as divisive an issue as there is in America right now, so it's simply not something he could support in his first term. However, "don't ask, don't tell" was repealed during his first term. If you've listened to him talk, it's pretty clear that he supports gay rights, but he can't do things by himself and needs the support of the other politicians in Washington. so he lied to us his first term? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a quote from Obama saying he was against gay marriage. You'd be more likely to find him skirting the issue or saying something closer to "not right now". Edit: Also, a big reason conservatives want to keep the issue open is that it is a huge way to drive the common folk to the polls. The common people may not know much about politics, but they know the bible tells them gay people are evil. He said, "I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. But I also agree with most Americans, including Vice President Cheney and over 2,000 religious leaders of all different beliefs, that decisions about marriage should be left to the states as they always have been." http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/09/11623172-the-evolution-of-obamas-stance-on-gay-marriage?lite Saying he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman is not a political stance on gay rights, when in the next statement he says who he think should be making these decisions. That is not a lie. You can not practice something but believe others should be able to practice it. This was him deflecting the issue by saying it's not an issue he believes he should have to legislate on. you do know he is saying that it shouldnt be left up to the states now, right? You do realize that making a change in his stance does not constitute lying? My personal belief is that he had to skirt the issue in the debate in order to get elected. But he didn't lie in the debate. As a lawyer you consider all angles to a case. In the debate he was largely talking about a social issue. But in this case (since it's being taken to the supreme court) it's being viewed as a civil rights issue. Civil rights issues SHOULD NOT be voted on by the populace. Civil rights issues need to go before the Supreme Court. so instead of millions of people deciding what is best for the populace, a few old ass people should decide what is best for the populace. gotcha. whether he lied or not (debatable), he is a flip-flopper. You can call him a flip-flopper all you want, but it seems like at this point a majority of americans sees gay marriage as a right, while several years ago that was a minority. Obama's flip-flop pretty much happened once poll numbers started to show that majority. He seems to be doing exactly what the populace wants. I don't get the debate in the first place. Gay marriage is a done deal in the US, 7/10 people that reach the voting age favor it and that percentage keeps going up, while 7/10 that die oppose it. If it doesn't happen now, it'll happen in 5 years and the dems have a social issue they can exploit in the meantime. what? a majority of california (one of the most liberal states in the nation) voted to ban gay marriage. how can you say a majority support gay marriage?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_of_same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States
Ah yes, manipulate the ignorant masses for their own good.
I don't know why people even pretend to want democracy anymore. Everyone I talk to believes people are stupid and some elite should be ruling because they know what's best.
Support for a technocracy (or any kind of rule by the "elite") is an incredibly fringe idea that is very unpopular in the vast majority of academic and philosophical circles. The reasons are blatantly obvious. Just because you talk to a few random Joe's that haven't actually thought about this issue beyond "people are stupid" doesn't mean that democracy is bad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
