Orlando Magic criticized for donation opposing gay marriage

[hawkfan]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/orlando-magic-amway-boycotted-anti-gay-marriage-donation/story?id=16812037

Looks like another Chik Fil A.

[Fiasco]

why is this an issue?

[G-train]

first world problems

[Levity]

they just cant get anything right this off season....

:hammerhead:

[leopoldstotch]

they just cant get anything right this off season....

:hammerhead:

+1. even though this shouldn't be an issue, people will stir it into one easily.

[Deuce Bigalow]

What's wrong with that?

Good job Orlando :applause:

[Yung D-Will]

As an independent libertarian minded fellow, I fail to see the issue with an organization donating, or verbally stating their support for either side of any issue. To my knowledge, neither Chick-fil-a or the Magic organization discriminate against gay employees; so it would seem that both organizations are simply exercising their rights. I disagree with them on the issue, but it's not like I'm gonna boycott Chick-fil-a because their owner is exercising their freedom of speech.

Private message me when Orlando or Chick-fil-a try to deny Gay couples entrance into their venues, until then it's a non issue.

[NOHCP3]

Just wonder why.. MJ once said "Republicans buy shoes too"... Same goes for gays buying tickets.. But I'll leave it at that before it gets all political in this piece :lol

[SpecialQue]

Another non-issue that will be exploited by pissy members of the left for political ends.

As someone on the left, it sickens me.

[Mr. Incredible]

Here we go.....

[PJR]

What's wrong with that?

Good job Orlando :applause:

Yep. Nothing wrong with it at all.

[Nelson14]

that's my team

[BabyBull]

I applaud them. I don't hate gays, but it's called holy matrimony for a reason.

[JaggerCommaMick]

There aint no point to same sex marriage, mates.

They deserve equal freedoms (which they have - all people are subject to the same guidelines of marrying the opposite sex), equal employment opportunities, and a life free of harassment and intimidation. But mates, what is the bloody point of a same sex marriage?

Mates the point of a straight marriage quite honestly is that a man wants access to a woman's honey jar, and in return she makes him commit to her. It's like an insurance policy for each and it unifies them domestically. Most marriages these days are ending in divorce anyhow, as a result of extended life expectancy, increased opportunities for infidelity, and relaxed viewpoints on the sanctity of the bloody thing anyway. Allowing homosexuals to start marrying each other is frivolous and unnecessary. You know how many spontaneous 'marriages' will result after two mates hook up at Trunks' Rainbow Bar? And how frequently ensuing annulments and divorces will happen? The dynamic aint the same as opposite sex relations, mate. This is an absolutely unnecessary Pandora's box to open up. It's sheer madness. Respect people for who they are but leave the marriage dynamic bloody well alone.

These people only 'want' it because they can't have it, mates. Marriage serves them no purpose. This is just frankly some political attention whorin' to the max. Drives me up the bloody wall.

[SpecialQue]

There aint no point to same sex marriage, mates.

They deserve equal freedoms (which they have - all people are subject to the same guidelines of marrying the opposite sex), equal employment opportunities, and a life free of harassment and intimidation. But mates, what is the bloody point of a same sex marriage?

Mates the point of a straight marriage quite honestly is that a man wants access to a woman's honey jar, and in return she makes him commit to her. It's like an insurance policy for each and it unifies them domestically. Most marriages these days are ending in divorce anyhow, as a result of extended life expectancy, increased opportunities for infidelity, and relaxed viewpoints on the sanctity of the bloody thing anyway. Allowing homosexuals to start marrying each other is frivolous and unnecessary. You know how many spontaneous 'marriages' will result after two mates hook up at Trunks' Rainbow Bar? And how frequently ensuing annulments and divorces will happen? The dynamic aint the same as opposite sex relations, mate. This is an absolutely unnecessary Pandora's box to open up. It's sheer madness. Respect people for who they are but leave the marriage dynamic bloody well alone.

These people only 'want' it because they can't have it, mates. Marriage serves them no purpose. This is just frankly some political attention whorin' to the max. Drives me up the bloody wall.

You use the word "mates" way too much. Also, stop calling a bunch of dudes "mate." They can't BE your "mate," because same sex marriage is illegal in most states here.

[ncrizzle]

As an independent libertarian minded fellow, I fail to see the issue with an organization donating, or verbally stating their support for either side of any issue. To my knowledge, neither Chick-fil-a or the Magic organization discriminate against gay employees; so it would seem that both organizations are simply exercising their rights. I disagree with them on the issue, but it's not like I'm gonna boycott Chick-fil-a because their owner is exercising their freedom of speech.

Private message me when Orlando or Chick-fil-a try to deny Gay couples entrance into their venues, until then it's a non issue.

Exactly. I support gay couples, but Chik-fil-a is just expressing freedom of speech. They arent beating up gay people. they simply expressed their opinions

[NumberSix]

It's like their trying to sabotage their business. Why would you do this. You know it's not going to go over well.

[JaggerCommaMick]

You use the word "mates" way too much. Also, stop calling a bunch of dudes "mate." They can't BE your "mate," because same sex marriage is illegal in most states here.


Did you intend for this to be funny, mate? It wasn't.

[SpecialQue]

Did you intend for this to be funny, mate? It wasn't.

There you go again. That's really desperate. You're like Madonna when she does that fake British accent.

[JaggerCommaMick]

It's like their trying to sabotage their business. Why would you do this. You know it's not going to go over well.

Mate first of all you don't know the difference between 'their' and 'they're', second of all... maybe they did this out of passion, maybe out of calculation.

Chik fil A probably has a more conservative clientele anyway. The backlash they got from lefties who likely never eat there anyway was more than negated by the support they received from their right wing customers. They probably actually have seen surging sales since this whole kerfuffle began.

I don't bloody know if Orlando is a conservative or liberal town or somewhere in between, but maybe these blokes figure they can get more support from their hometown fans by makin this public. I'd reckon in general basketball fans are more liberal but then again, mate, NBA players themselves are known to shout '****in ******' when the mood strikes them. So maybe this calculation will pay off, who bloody well knows??

[DStebb716]

This definitely is an issue. No, they aren't right for supporting a rights-denying, old-age company that opposes fairness and rights for everybody. We are decades behind on this, and it's getting ridiculous. It's time to grow the hell up. Because of christianity and other religions, we are decades behind in technology, science and morals. It's time to change this.

[JaggerCommaMick]

All I know mates is that Chris Bosh is certainly circling the Orlando game on his calendar, that's all I'm bloody sayin....

[DStebb716]

I applaud them. I don't hate gays, but it's called holy matrimony for a reason.

Holy matrimony isn't defined by a sex.

[BabyBull]

This definitely is an issue. No, they aren't right for supporting a rights-denying, old-age company that opposes fairness and rights for everybody. We are decades behind on this, and it's getting ridiculous. It's time to grow the hell up. Because of christianity and other religions, we are decades behind in technology, science and morals. It's time to change this.
Marriage is a religious ceremony ... you do know that right ?

How can religion be holding back marriage when it's the route of the event ? The government doesn't get to come in and change it to accommodate gays.

[BabyBull]

Holy matrimony isn't defined by a sex.
Yes it is, it is specifically defined, with tremendous detail.

I can't even believe you said that.

[Yung D-Will]

This definitely is an issue. No, they aren't right for supporting a rights-denying, old-age company that opposes fairness and rights for everybody. We are decades behind on this, and it's getting ridiculous. It's time to grow the hell up. Because of christianity and other religions, we are decades behind in technology, science and morals. It's time to change this.

Those are two separate issues, The first is whether or not it's an issue for someone to utilize their freedom of speech to take an unpopular stance on a controversial subject; whiles the other is simply whether or not their position on the issue is logical or moral.

[DStebb716]

Marriage is a religious ceremony ... you do know that right ?

How can religion be holding back marriage when it's the route of the event ? The government doesn't get to come in and change it to accommodate gays.

They don't have to be. The reasons for marriage are to gain protection through the state. There is a separation of church & state. Which is why there are plenty of marriages done without religion involved in any way now. Marriage used to be purely religious, it is no longer that way. Religion should no longer be allowed to rule marriages.

[JaggerCommaMick]

This definitely is an issue. No, they aren't right for supporting a rights-denying, old-age company that opposes fairness and rights for everybody. We are decades behind on this, and it's getting ridiculous. It's time to grow the hell up. Because of christianity and other religions, we are decades behind in technology, science and morals. It's time to change this.


My, someone is Queen of the Closet.

Step on out, sister! Show your pride.

[DStebb716]

Yes it is, it is specifically defined, with tremendous detail.

I can't even believe you said that.

Depends on where you look.

[DStebb716]

My, someone is Queen of the Closet.

Step on out, sister! Show your pride.

I'm assuming that since you're posting here, you support the world-class athletes of the NBA. Does that make you a world-class athlete?

[DStebb716]

Really the "Orlando Magic" didn't do anything. The owner did.

[JaggerCommaMick]

They don't have to be. The reasons for marriage are to gain protection through the state. There is a separation of church & state. Which is why there are plenty of marriages done without religion involved in any way now. Marriage used to be purely religious, it is no longer that way. Religion should no longer be allowed to rule marriages.


Mate, marriage arose in the first place due to the fundamental, distinctive dynamic of the opposite sexes. Religion provided the guidelines, but Ma Nature provided the necessity.

There is absolutely no POINT to a same sex marriage, mate! It's a silly notion, and queens like you only want it because you have a fetish for sticking it to the right wing faction in your country. Mate if you learned to compromise you'd probably get a lot farther instead of fighting stupid battles for your bloody ego. If you'd drop the whole 'marriage' thing, especially since it's absolutely, utterly unnecessary, you'd probably get some reciprocity on issues that actually are meaningful that others may be stubbornly refusing.

You're too schyoopid to understand there can be compromise and middle ground. The idear of same bloody sex marriage is quite silly, chap. If you were smart you'd use that as a sacrifice to encourage others to meet closer to your side on a real issue of importance. But people like you always take the extreme right or left side of every issue, and with you I suspect it's the left side. I bet there aint even one topic you have moderate views on. You're full on to the left, all day err'day. Why? Because mate you probably don't think rationally. You only see red and blue so you are on autopilot for blue. Show's a lack of intellectual development, mate.

Bloody madness, 'its not fair that a man and a man can't say they're married!' guess what mate, the dynamic in same sex relations aint the same as it is in opposite sex relations. That unique dynamic is the whole bloody antecedent to marriage, ya jackass!

[JaggerCommaMick]

I'm assuming that since you're posting here, you support the world-class athletes of the NBA. Does that make you a world-class athlete?


No, but I aint supportin' em with whiny little hissy fits, mate.

[DStebb716]

No, but I aint supportin' em with whiny little hissy fits, mate.

No hissy fit, mate. I'm just saying that the issue of gay marriage's pure existence is a disgrace to this country, mate. We are denying human beings their rights to marriage for no reason, mate. The only reason is "because the bible says so," mate. Which it really doesn't, mate. People just want something to hate, mate. They want something they can oppose and take away from others, mate. Mainly because they have their own insecurities that they want to turn the attention away from, mate. In the bible it is pretty much more of a crime to be rich or fat than to be gay, but people ignore that completely, mate.

Mate, you see what I'm saying, mate?

















mate

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

Guess it's time for the libs to start vandalizing the Amway Center and degrading the Magic players in public. Man, I love libs! Spineless hypocrites.

[DStebb716]

Mate, marriage arose in the first place due to the fundamental, distinctive dynamic of the opposite sexes. Religion provided the guidelines, but Ma Nature provided the necessity.

There is absolutely no POINT to a same sex marriage, mate! It's a silly notion, and queens like you only want it because you have a fetish for sticking it to the right wing faction in your country. Mate if you learned to compromise you'd probably get a lot farther instead of fighting stupid battles for your bloody ego. If you'd drop the whole 'marriage' thing, especially since it's absolutely, utterly unnecessary, you'd probably get some reciprocity on issues that actually are meaningful that others may be stubbornly refusing.

You're too schyoopid to understand there can be compromise and middle ground. The idear of same bloody sex marriage is quite silly, chap. If you were smart you'd use that as a sacrifice to encourage others to meet closer to your side on a real issue of importance. But people like you always take the extreme right or left side of every issue, and with you I suspect it's the left side. I bet there aint even one topic you have moderate views on. You're full on to the left, all day err'day. Why? Because mate you probably don't think rationally. You only see red and blue so you are on autopilot for blue. Show's a lack of intellectual development, mate.

Bloody madness, 'its not fair that a man and a man can't say they're married!' guess what mate, the dynamic in same sex relations aint the same as it is in opposite sex relations. That unique dynamic is the whole bloody antecedent to marriage, ya jackass!

This is where you show your strong inability to understand a person off of a single view, mate. I have no "side." I have no "party." I am a person first. I don't just choose a side because I am "left, right, up, down, democrat, republican, whatever." I decide on an issue because it's how I feel. Don't act like you know me. If there's no big deal, then why not just let the people get married? It doesn't hurt anything and the government can make money off of it.

[KyrieTheFuture]

I highly doubt this dude is actually British but I'm pretty sure they are notorious for homophobia. So he's either trolling or anti-gay which is just a hilarious position to take these days. Being gay takes a lot of eligible men out of the selection pool you should be thanking them.

[guy]

Maybe they are just trying really hard to keep Howard by appealing to his Christian values?

[MetsPackers]

Maybe they are just trying really hard to keep Howard by appealing to his Christian values?

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Sarcastic]

Magic trying hard to take the title of worst franchise in sports away from the Clippers.

[JaggerCommaMick]

Magic trying hard to take the title of worst franchise in sports away from the Clippers.

How so, mate? By consistently spending money to compete, making a Finals in the last 5 years, and supporting the preservation of a normal country?

[Jameerthefear]

Magic trying hard to take the title of worst franchise in sports away from the Clippers.
I don't think that's possible.

Good job magic :applause:

[Sarcastic]

How so, mate? By consistently spending money to compete, making a Finals in the last 5 years, and supporting the preservation of a normal country?

How many teams have had THREE number 1 picks overall in the last 20 years, and still don't have a ring to show for it? How many teams would allow the coach to throw their star player completely under the bus, and not reprimand him? How many teams could have a top 2 player in the league, and still run at a negative operating income?


Their arena is named after Amway, better known as Scamway.

[Is He Ill]

There aint no point to same sex marriage, mates.

They deserve equal freedoms (which they have - all people are subject to the same guidelines of marrying the opposite sex), equal employment opportunities, and a life free of harassment and intimidation. But mates, what is the bloody point of a same sex marriage?

Mates the point of a straight marriage quite honestly is that a man wants access to a woman's honey jar, and in return she makes him commit to her. It's like an insurance policy for each and it unifies them domestically. Most marriages these days are ending in divorce anyhow, as a result of extended life expectancy, increased opportunities for infidelity, and relaxed viewpoints on the sanctity of the bloody thing anyway. Allowing homosexuals to start marrying each other is frivolous and unnecessary. You know how many spontaneous 'marriages' will result after two mates hook up at Trunks' Rainbow Bar? And how frequently ensuing annulments and divorces will happen? The dynamic aint the same as opposite sex relations, mate. This is an absolutely unnecessary Pandora's box to open up. It's sheer madness. Respect people for who they are but leave the marriage dynamic bloody well alone.

These people only 'want' it because they can't have it, mates. Marriage serves them no purpose. This is just frankly some political attention whorin' to the max. Drives me up the bloody wall.

Yeah, except for the benefits that a married couple receives. (ICU visitation rights,insurance benefits from spouse's employer, family rates for insurance, family leave if spouse is in need of care, etc...)

[Jameerthefear]

How many teams have had THREE number 1 picks overall in the last 20 years, and still don't have a ring to show for it? How many teams would allow the coach to throw their star player completely under the bus, and not reprimand him? How many teams could have a top 2 player in the league, and still run at a negative operating income?


Their arena is named after Amway, better known as Scamway.
A Knicks fan making fun of other teams?
http://i44.tinypic.com/r1y17a.jpg

[Sarcastic]

A Knicks fan making fun of other teams?
http://i44.tinypic.com/r1y17a.jpg

I'm not making fun. I am calling the Magic the worst team in sports.

[Droid101]

Yes it is, it is specifically defined, with tremendous detail.

I can't even believe you said that.
I seem to remember a lot of that talk going on in the 60's.

How does it feel to be on the wrong side of history?

https://p.twimg.com/AstEjKGCMAAvkv9.jpg

Gay Marriage Killed the Dinosaurs

Top 17 Reasons Why Gay Marriage is Wrong

17. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven

[Droid101]

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

[Sarcastic]

Only because their owner supports regular marriage?


Wow, mate, aren't you a sensitive ******.

I didn't even bring up the gay marriage issue.

And how did you like using those lips on David Bowie back in the day? How did you feel when your wife walked in?

[50inchvertical]

There aint no point to same sex marriage, mates.

They deserve equal freedoms (which they have - all people are subject to the same guidelines of marrying the opposite sex), equal employment opportunities, and a life free of harassment and intimidation. But mates, what is the bloody point of a same sex marriage?

Mates the point of a straight marriage quite honestly is that a man wants access to a woman's honey jar, and in return she makes him commit to her. It's like an insurance policy for each and it unifies them domestically. Most marriages these days are ending in divorce anyhow, as a result of extended life expectancy, increased opportunities for infidelity, and relaxed viewpoints on the sanctity of the bloody thing anyway. Allowing homosexuals to start marrying each other is frivolous and unnecessary. You know how many spontaneous 'marriages' will result after two mates hook up at Trunks' Rainbow Bar? And how frequently ensuing annulments and divorces will happen? The dynamic aint the same as opposite sex relations, mate. This is an absolutely unnecessary Pandora's box to open up. It's sheer madness. Respect people for who they are but leave the marriage dynamic bloody well alone.

These people only 'want' it because they can't have it, mates. Marriage serves them no purpose. This is just frankly some political attention whorin' to the max. Drives me up the bloody wall.
You HAVE to be trolling. It's a basic right, and that's why they want and deserve it.


Renowned Astronaut

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law.
except I'm sure all of those are man's law (inspired by God or not) that were later included in an anthology document for certain religious followers to base their life values on.

I'm no Bible master, but other than the Ten Commandments, I think God himself said very little regarding law.

Sorry, but I'm just weary of ppl misinterpreting or misrepresenting what the Bible is. Atheists, agnostics, Christians, etc are all guilty of this.

[50inchvertical]

So then should heterosexuals, who for any reason are unable to procreate, not be granted the right to be married?

[G-train]

So then should heterosexuals, who for any reason are unable to procreate, not be granted the right to be married?

:biggums:

[CelticBaller]

:lol

[TMacMagic]

My reaction to this thread :

:facepalm :facepalm :biggums: :biggums:

[OmniStrife]

It's crazy how a country that has just put a freaking rover on ****ing Mars
has the majority of it's population spoon fed bullshit from some old-ass book
of some ancient Judeo-Roman-Pagan mashup of a religion.

[TMacMagic]

^ Your point?

[OmniStrife]

^ Your point?
My point is: Live and let live.
Let people marry if they want to. No "belief" you might have is more important than human rights.

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

My point is: Live and let live.
Let people marry if they want to. No "belief" you might have is more important than human rights.
but is marriage a human right? A natural human right?

[Myth]

As an independent libertarian minded fellow, I fail to see the issue with an organization donating, or verbally stating their support for either side of any issue. To my knowledge, neither Chick-fil-a or the Magic organization discriminate against gay employees; so it would seem that both organizations are simply exercising their rights. I disagree with them on the issue, but it's not like I'm gonna boycott Chick-fil-a because their owner is exercising their freedom of speech.

Private message me when Orlando or Chick-fil-a try to deny Gay couples entrance into their venues, until then it's a non issue.

Nobody is saying that they don't have the right to do this. They are just saying that it is stupid to do this publicly. We are just exercising our own rights to say we don't support what they are doing.

[G-train]

My point is: Live and let live.
Let people marry if they want to. No "belief" you might have is more important than human rights.

You have the right to remain silent.

:pimp:

[Punpun]

Congratulation Orlando. I'd expect that shit from Sterling. Not from you. But hey, have got to find a way to have newspaper talking about you one way or another.

Pathetic.

[funnystuff]

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from you, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. How should I deal with this?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as it suggests in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may buy slaves from the nations that are around us. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not Canadians. Can you clarify?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
God didn't write the bible.

[coin24]

Smh at the religious nuts. You're basing your faith on a book written by who knows, and preached by money hungry, child molesting, self righteous fu*ks..

Marriage is a joke now anyway. Look at the divorce rate, people marrying for money/ fame etc. I don't see a problem with gay ppl getting married.

[senelcoolidge]

Who cares they have a right to donate to anyone they want as long as it's not a terror group or drug dealers..pedophiles..etc. It's a free country. People that complain about these things are so intolerable.

[DaSeba5]

I support gay marriage, but who cares if their owner opposes gay marriage? It doesn't make me think anything of the Magic organization.

[LJJ]

Definitely a good place to send your money.

I mean, God forbid you throw some of that money Unicef's way, or some other humanitarian or scientific effort.

It's much better to spend it on intolerant, religious fundamentalists who's only goal in life is to try and impede freedom.

[TOUCH MY BODY]

Gays getting married doesn't bother me, but I give the Orlando Magic a lot of credit for not giving a damn about being politically correct. Good stuff.

Bible-thumpers are still a joke though.

[NumberSix]

So we gonna act like "god" isn't just something that primitive morons made up?

What about the big dragon in the sky that wakes up every morning? We gonna pretend that's real too?

[dunksby]

I didn't even bring up the gay marriage issue.

And how did you like using those lips on David Bowie back in the day? How did you feel when your wife walked in?
http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/wait.gif

:lol :lol

[DukeDelonte13]

yes its "free speech"

yes its bigotry.

[franchise#3]

Homophobes make me sick.

[Owl]

Private individuals have their rights to their view on this. If large companies (or the heads thereof) wish to make large donations to political and/or controversial groups then they risk other individuals exercising their right to boycott said company. They are probably more likely to do so if said company then engages in moral grandstanding. The company rep said that the DeVos family believes
one of the highest callings of any individual is to express their own personal beliefs [through large cash payments] as a participant in the democratic process

So the DeVos family can do what they like, and would be Magic customers can do likewise.

[miller-time]

I applaud them. I don't hate gays, but it's called holy matrimony for a reason.

in christianity it is. but christians didn't invent marriage nor do they own the rights to it. if your particular church doesn't want to marry gay people then that is fine, the state has no right to force them to. but conversely the church doesn't get to tell the state who has the right to be married.

[BlueandGold]

As an independent libertarian minded fellow, I fail to see the issue with an organization donating, or verbally stating their support for either side of any issue. To my knowledge, neither Chick-fil-a or the Magic organization discriminate against gay employees; so it would seem that both organizations are simply exercising their rights. I disagree with them on the issue, but it's not like I'm gonna boycott Chick-fil-a because their owner is exercising their freedom of speech.

Private message me when Orlando or Chick-fil-a try to deny Gay couples entrance into their venues, until then it's a non issue.
That explains why your an idiot.

And fyi "libertarian" and "independent minded fellow" are contradictions of each other.

Anyone can exercise their right to free speech, doesn't mean i'm going to respect their decision or not call them a retard. Were the neo-nazis, then, "exercising their rights" as well?

I'm not going to go further into this discussion with a bunch of blindly indoctrinated religious nuts who think marriage is only suppose to be a christian heterosexual monogamous type of interaction.

Try to grow up and learn something. Hetero-normative type of behaviors weren't even in style until the turn of the 18th century. The Romans didn't even believe in love between a man and a woman, supposedly only men were worthy of love back in classical times.

[coin24]

in christianity it is. but christians didn't invent marriage nor do they own the rights to it. if your particular church doesn't want to marry gay people then that is fine, the state has no right to force them to. but conversely the church doesn't get to tell the state who has the right to be married.

This:applause:

[Warners0]

This:applause:

LOL Marriage is a Judeo Christian tradition. They got that tradition straight from God.

[LJJ]

LOL Marriage is a Judeo Christian tradition. They got that tradition straight from God.

Nope, false. Marriage predates written history even.

[Droid101]

but is marriage a human right? A natural human right?
Meh. But since it does confer legal status (over 1,000 different legal rights, some of which CANNOT be granted otherwise), it's a legal matter and therefore must be equal for everyone. See: Constitution, The.

except I'm sure all of those are man's law (inspired by God or not) that were later included in an anthology document for certain religious followers to base their life values on.

I'm no Bible master, but other than the Ten Commandments, I think God himself said very little regarding law.

Sorry, but I'm just weary of ppl misinterpreting or misrepresenting what the Bible is. Atheists, agnostics, Christians, etc are all guilty of this.You realize that post was a joke, right? Anybody who views the bible that literally... well... let's just say they're probably a waste of oxygen.


God didn't write the bible.
Jokes man, thems jokes.

This is why we can't have nice things.

[Droid101]

Nope, false. Marriage predates written history even.
Bingobangobongo.

"Traditional" marriage was a transference of goods, really. Nobody got married for love.

Then, people started to get married for love.

Then, people of different religions started to get married (frowned upon back in the day).

Then, people of different races started to get married (frowned upon back in the day).

See a trend?

Things changed. Things will continue to change.

[bagelred]

As an independent libertarian minded fellow, I fail to see the issue with an organization donating, or verbally stating their support for either side of any issue. To my knowledge, neither Chick-fil-a or the Magic organization discriminate against gay employees; so it would seem that both organizations are simply exercising their rights. I disagree with them on the issue, but it's not like I'm gonna boycott Chick-fil-a because their owner is exercising their freedom of speech.

Private message me when Orlando or Chick-fil-a try to deny Gay couples entrance into their venues, until then it's a non issue.

What if they supported Nazi causes? Would you still eat at Chick-Fil-A and go to Magic games? I'm serious. What would you do then?

[Yung D-Will]

That explains why your an idiot.

And fyi "libertarian" and "independent minded fellow" are contradictions of each other.

Anyone can exercise their right to free speech, doesn't mean i'm going to respect their decision or not call them a retard. Were the neo-nazis, then, "exercising their rights" as well?

I'm not going to go further into this discussion with a bunch of blindly indoctrinated religious nuts who think marriage is only suppose to be a christian heterosexual monogamous type of interaction.

Try to grow up and learn something. Hetero-normative type of behaviors weren't even in style until the turn of the 18th century. The Romans didn't even believe in love between a man and a woman, supposedly only men were worthy of love back in classical times.

Yawn, your hostility bores me so early in the morning.

If you're going to attack me please at least know the difference between "your" and "you're".

You didn't even offer anything to back up your assertion that I'm an "idiot", so I'll just assume you're a kid who has to resort to petty name calling when you can't prove your point. :sleeping

Let me clarify my statement, since it clearly went way over your head. I classify myself as an independent, but on social issues, I'm ideologically closer to the libertarian side of the spectrum, whiles on economic issues I follow the Austrian school of economic thought. I despise conservatives, but there's nothing that annoys me more than Liberals, who have this superiority complex when ever they find themselves arguing with someone from another political affiliation.

Did I say you had to agree with their opinion? I simply stated that unless they're mistreating their gay employees, denying them of their liberties, or anything of that nature, then they're simply exersing their rights to fall on either side of an issue.

Yes, Neo-Nazi's were exercising their rights, have you ever read our constitution? The KKK still has meetings, not because the state doesn't know about it, but simply because they have the constitutional right to do so. The constitution is not there, to protect people from the consequences of their own actions, but is simply there to protect their right to take such actions. The constitution doesn't protect people from falling prey to criticism as a result of their actions.

Your last two paragraphs make me question if you lack reading comprehension. Primarily because I openly stated that I'm pro-gay marriage. I not only have gay friends, but I'm also part of Pride and other gay rights support groups. Which you seemed to have completely ignored, for the sake your idiotic rant.

And even if that wasn't a fact, I'm also an atheist, which means I lack religious affiliation, which unfortunately also means your assertion that you're arguing with a religious fanatic is also invalid.

[NuggetsFan]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TyfL7KyYsYI/TzH73FoHU_I/AAAAAAAAEQE/6WRr7KziFos/s1600/Bigot.jpg

You often see people compare racism to people hating gays. Which I guess is fair because both are ridiculous and it's never right to hate somebody because their different. Equality and all that other stuff. Which I agree with 100%.

That being said I feel like the hate is different. If everybody in the world was black we'd still have a race 100 years from now. If everybody was gay than well in 100 years are race would cease to exist, no? By theory anyways so no test tube babies and shit like that.

Just saying. It's 2012 so I don't really know anybody who openly hates gay people in my personal life. It would seem that those that do are those crazy religious nuts and it leads back to pro creation in some form. Didn't white people just think they were superior to black people? Seems like gay bashers think their just sick.

Either way seems at the end of the no matter what their will always be douchebags who will hate on somebody.

[Yung D-Will]

What if they supported Nazi causes? Would you still eat at Chick-Fil-A and go to Magic games? I'm serious. What would you do then?

You have to be more specific, Nazi causes as in funding groups that carry out anti-Semitic hate crimes within the country?

Or Nazi causes as in the owner states that he's not the biggest fan of Jews?

Two completely different scenarios. Within our country right now, we have people who have completely intertwined the actions of Israel with their perception of Jews within our country.

[NumberSix]

What if they supported Nazi causes? Would you still eat at Chick-Fil-A and go to Magic games? I'm serious. What would you do then?
I'm personally against gay marriage, but I'm against straight marriage too.

[Droid101]

That being said I feel like the hate is different. If everybody in the world was black we'd still have a race 100 years from now. If everybody was gay than well in 100 years are race would cease to exist, no? By theory anyways so no test tube babies and shit like that.
No... just...

no. :facepalm

[NumberSix]

You have to be more specific, Nazi causes as in funding groups that carry out anti-Semitic hate crimes within the country?

Or Nazi causes as in the owner states that he's not the biggest fan of Jews?

Two completely different scenarios. Within our country right now, we have anti Semitic people who dislike Jews because of the actions of Israel.
This is pure stupidity. You couldn't be more wrong

There's a big difference between hating jews and disagreeing with the policies of a county with a large jewish population. That's like saying people hate Catholics because a few latin countries are communist.

[bagelred]

Two completely different scenarios. Within our country right now, we have anti Semitic people who dislike Jews because of the actions of Israel.

OK, let's say the second one. He says he dislikes Jews and spouts opinions that they are an inferior race. He feels that the right to vote should be taken away from all Jews. And funds legal organizations that work to make that happen.

Still eating at chick fil a?

[NuggetsFan]

No... just...

no. :facepalm

I dunno, I don't hate gay people and like I said can't say I really know anybody who does nor have I really looked into homosexual hate :confusedshrug:

I'd have to think that's a big part of their hate tho, right? Procreation?

[Yung D-Will]

This is pure stupidity.

There's a big difference between hating jews and disagreeing with the policies of a county with a large jewish population. That's like saying people hate Catholics because a few latin countries are communist.



Yea I agree with you, but I've met people who classify the actions of Israel as a reflection on all Jewish people. In fact last week, after there was a moment of silence for Israel during the Olympics, I found myself arguing with someone on facebook claiming that Hitler needed to return to punish the Jews for their actions against Palestine.

It's expected though, remember we live in a country where Japanese American's were treated liked dirt, simply because of the actions of Japan, an Island they happen to be hundreds of miles away from.

[9512]

OKC's ownership group ( McClendon and some other schmuck) donated money to a political group called "American to preserve marriage."

And they get away with it scott free?

[Sarcastic]

I don't think that anyone is saying the Devos family doesn't have the right to not support gay marriage, but when you are the owner of an NBA franchise that is trying to attract customers from all walks of life, it is not good for business to alienate any fan bases. I am sure David Stern loves to take money from gays, just as much as he loves to take money from straight people, white people, black people, Jews, Muslims, Christians, etc, etc, etc.

In fact I am pretty sure that a large chunk of the business for the WNBA comes from the lesbian community. Now if all the sudden that segment feels that the NBA and WNBA does not support them, then they can possibly take their entertainment dollars elsewhere.

[Droid101]

I dunno, I don't hate gay people and like I said can't say I really know anybody who does nor have I really looked into homosexual hate :confusedshrug:

I'd have to think that's a big part of their hate tho, right? Procreation?
No way. Or else they wouldn't support old people or sterile people getting married, amirite?

Ask someone who hates 'teh gheys.'

They'll spout some bullshit about religion and "one man and one woman" and "God's will" and whatnot.

What they really mean is "It's icky."

Unless it's two (attractive, young) girls then it's okay.

They are hypocritical bigots, plain and simple.

[NumberSix]

I don't think that anyone is saying the Devos family doesn't have the right to not support gay marriage, but when you are the owner of an NBA franchise that is trying to attract customers from all walks of life, it is not good for business to alienate any fan bases.
Exactly.

They can think whatever they want to think. It's just not smart to support things like this when you're running a business. You'd have to be retarded to not understand that this will cause negative publicity.

[NuggetsFan]

No way. Or else they wouldn't support old people or sterile people getting married, amirite?

Ask someone who hates 'teh gheys.'

They'll spout some bullshit about religion and "one man and one woman" and "God's will" and whatnot.

What they really mean is "It's icky."

Unless it's two (attractive, young) girls then it's okay.

They are hypocritical bigots, plain and simple.

I would agree 100%. I wasn't talking about gay marriage specifically I guess. Just meant people that are against gay people, procreation is probably a big part of it I'd imagine.

Really tho I have no clue. Just seems like no matter what the human race enjoys hating :oldlol:

[Droid101]

Really tho I have no clue. Just seems like no matter what the human race enjoys hating :oldlol:
We have a winner!

[9512]

The coincidence out of all of this is that John Amaechi played for the Magic! :lol :roll:

[Overdrive]

LOL Marriage is a Judeo Christian tradition. They got that tradition straight from God.



I applaud them. I don't hate gays, but it's called holy matrimony for a reason.


God didn't do shit. The god you believe in wasn't even invented before marriage was.
Christians tag everything holy incase you try to behave against those holy credos and/or dogmas you get stigmatized as a sinner. Church made alot of money by that for about a thousand years.
Proclaim holy rules alot of people break-> declare breaking of rules as sin-> infuse remorse into people(hell)-> make them confess(go to heaven again)-> make them pay money to confess->build golden palaces->back to point 1.

The "holy" marriage was an excuse to oppress women under the name of some mythical thing for about 2000 years. There's nothing holy about that really..



Bingobangobongo.

"Traditional" marriage was a transference of goods, really. Nobody got married for love.

Then, people started to get married for love.

Then, people of different religions started to get married (frowned upon back in the day).

Then, people of different races started to get married (frowned upon back in the day).

See a trend?

Things changed. Things will continue to change.

Another trend is that every 50-100 years physics, biology, geology and astronomy showed and show that christian or other religious theories are wrong.

First god created everything, the earth is the center of everything, the stars, moon and planets were hanging in the sky which was half a sphere around a flat earth.

Then the renaissance kicked in. Earth was a sphere, circling around the sun, the other planets circle around the sun aswell and the stars are other suns.
Planets and the moon in opposite to christian dogmas weren't perfect round shaped.
So god was kinda no that much involved in creating the earth and everything else as much church wanted it to be.

Fast forward(leaving out dinosaur, radio carbon dating - earth being older than some 10.000 years and so on) the biggest scientifical mystery is what happened at and before the big bang and since human being might never find out, they believe god made it happen.

Essentially people saw god in everything they couldn't explain and since there's only death and the big bang left they believe god lies within that.

The weird thing is that people who strongly believe in god see that gay people love each other, try to adopt children, behave in the same good way overall that other men do but they say that this wasn't made by their god. The god that created everything? Who created gay people then? Satan? Satan is a concept to stop people from blaming god for the bad things happening.

[Yung D-Will]

OK, let's say the second one. He says he dislikes Jews and spouts opinions that they are an inferior race. He feels that the right to vote should be taken away from all Jews. And funds legal organizations that work to make that happen.

Still eating at chick fil a?

If he's discriminating against and treating Jewish people who try to eat and work at his establishment badly then no.


I'm usually against taking moral stances again a company, unless I feel they're completely crossing boundaries way past their freedom of speech. Whiles I was simply pointing out it's existence within our country.


* And number6, I edited my other post, because I think I gave you the impression that I was validating that way of thinking.

[NumberSix]

I would agree 100%. I wasn't talking about gay marriage specifically I guess. Just meant people that are against gay people, procreation is probably a big part of it I'd imagine.

Really tho I have no clue. Just seems like no matter what the human race enjoys hating :oldlol:
You're trying to look for a rational reason where there isn't any.

Why would people of different skin color hate each other? The only different is amount of pigment in their skin. The exact same thing that makes people's hair different colors.

You don't hear about hatred between people of the same skin color with different hair color. There's no anti-brunette hate groups made up of blonde people. There very idea seems ridiculous.

Light hair people and dark hair people hating each other sounds absurd but when it's skin, it makes sense to people only because they've been brainwashed into thinking it's sensible.

The thing you have to remember about humans is that in general they're not very smart. Anything thing that has ever been accomplished has been done by a small group of people, usually against the wishes of the stupid masses.

[bagelred]

If he's discriminating against and treating Jewish people who try to eat and work at his establishment badly then no.



I didn't say that. Read what I wrote. He just supports causes considered anti-Jewish.

And anti-Black too. He supports causes that want Black and White facilities separated again. Like back in the '60s. It's his legal right to support those causes right?

So are you eating at Chick Fil A?

[Droid101]

Photos from right after New York allowed gay marriage:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/portraits-of-gay-couples-just-married-in-new-york

Truly, history's greatest monsters.

http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal01/2011/7/25/9/enhanced-buzz-30493-1311602311-0.jpg

http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal01/2011/7/25/10/enhanced-buzz-30497-1311602778-2.jpg

http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal01/2011/7/25/10/enhanced-buzz-30498-1311602487-1.jpg

[Redoks]

These homophobes look so stupid :facepalm

[NumberSix]

http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal01/2011/7/25/9/enhanced-buzz-30493-1311602311-0.jpg

http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal01/2011/7/25/10/enhanced-buzz-30497-1311602778-2.jpg

http://s3-ak.buzzfed.com/static/enhanced/terminal01/2011/7/25/10/enhanced-buzz-30498-1311602487-1.jpg
Clearly, these are terrible and evil people. Giving these creatures the benefits of marriage will ruin everything. How?




............... GOD!!!!

[Yung D-Will]

I didn't say that. Read what I wrote. He just supports causes considered anti-Jewish.

And anti-Black too. He supports causes that want Black and White facilities separated again. Like back in the '60s. It's his legal right to support those causes right?

So are you eating at Chick Fil A?


I thought I just clarified that I wouldn't take some kind of Moral stance unless I felt they were discriminating or bullying their costumers/employees.

At the same time, I'm not gonna make my way through crowds of protesters just for the sake of a burger.

If I wasn't gonna eat at Chick Fil A, it'd be because of the long lines of supports for anti-gay marriage, and the crowds of protesters giving me a headache outside. Not because I want to take any type of particular stance.

You're not a freedom rider for protesting Chick-Fil-A

[madmax17]

It's funny because John Amaechi used to play for Magic :lol

[KingBeasley08]

props. Why are people pissed off at him donating to cause he believes in? Not everyone is required to support same sex-marriage. Get over it

[NumberSix]

I thought I just clarified that I wouldn't take some kind of Moral stance unless I felt they were discriminating or bullying their costumers/employees.

At the same time, I'm not gonna make my way through crowds of protesters just for the sake of a burger.

If I wasn't gonna eat at Chick Fil A, it'd be because of the long lines of supports for anti-gay marriage, and the crowds of protesters giving me a headache outside. Not because I want to take any type of particular stance.
Ok. Let's make this very easy for you.

Let's say I own a restaurant. I don't attack black people's right, but I pay other to do it. Are you going to spend your money at my restaurant so that I can then use it to pay someone to attack black people's right?

[NumberSix]

props. Why are people pissed off at him donating to cause he believes in? Not everyone is required to support same sex-marriage. Get over it
Not everyone is required to get over it.

[Yung D-Will]

Ok. Let's make this very easy for you.

Let's say I own a restaurant. I don't attack black people's right, but I pay other to do it. Are you going to spend your money at my restaurant so that I can then use it to pay someone to attack black people's right?

No.

And this is why I specifically stated that the actions of the group their donating to are significant. It's one thing for to donate to a group that holds anti-gay marriage protest, whiles it's entirely different to donate to a group that goes around spray painting "God hates f*aggs" on peoples houses.

[Droid101]

props. Why are people pissed off at him donating to cause he believes in? Not everyone is required to support same sex-marriage. Get over it
My restaurant, Beef-fil-a, just donated money to support a cause I believe in, repealing the "Loving vs. Virginia" supreme court decision (the one that allows Black people to marry White people, which was illegal previously [see the "Racial Integrity Act of 1924"]).

Not everyone is required to support inter-race marriage.

Get over it.






:facepalm

[KingBeasley08]

Not everyone is required to get over it.
True. Making a point tho. I personally support gay marriage because I believe they have the right to get married. Just as other people have the right to find homosexuality a 'sin'. Also a right

[dunksby]

Actually it's really simple guys: Do you support funding of hate groups or not? You can rationalize all you want to silence your conscience but it all boils down to that question.

[Yung D-Will]

Actually it's really simple guys: Do you support funding of hate groups or not? You can rationalize all you want to silence your conscience but it all boils down to the above question.

Well actually, there are no Chick-Fil-A's in the state where I live, so either way it makes no difference to my conscience.

[dunksby]

Well actually, there are no Chick-Fil-A's in the state where I live, so either way it makes no difference to my conscience.
Haha deflection and rationalization :applause: :applause:

[KingBeasley08]

Actually it's really simple guys: Do you support funding of hate groups or not? You can rationalize all you want to silence your conscience but it all boils down to that question.
I buy Chick-fil-A if thats what you're asking. Shits good

[Yung D-Will]

Haha deflection and rationalization :applause: :applause:


Well clearly the way you stated the question, didn't actually clarify what you considered a hate group. It would seem our definitions our different.

Vague questions call for vague answers.

[NumberSix]

True. Making a point tho. I personally support gay marriage because I believe they have the right to get married. Just as other people have the right to find homosexuality a 'sin'. Also a right
YEs. Just as other people have the right to disagree.


You have the right to think Latinos are evil. I have the right to tell you that you're an idiot and I don't like your face in response.

[TMacMagic]

I like cheese.

[NumberSix]

I never even heard of chick-fil-a before this controversy

[KingBeasley08]

YEs. Just as other people have the right to disagree.


Yeah, fair enough

[Yung D-Will]

I never even heard of chick-fil-a before this controversy

When I lived in Georgia for a bit I ate there. Chicken was really good, but then again all the southern food I tasted seemed significantly better than the food I ate up north.

[get these NETS]

Ok. Let's make this very easy for you.

Let's say I own a restaurant. I don't attack black people's right, but I pay other to do it. Are you going to spend your money at my restaurant so that I can then use it to pay someone to attack black people's right?


no disrespect but I've seen this comparison and analogy made a few times before and it's invalid.

Civil Rights....the rights of AMERICANS to have education, housing, etc rights and protections that ALL Americans are GUARANTEED in the Constitution & Amendments is what "Black people's" rights are....I guess.

In what way shape or form can this be compared to the same sex marriage issue?

[Droid101]

no disrespect but I've seen this comparison and analogy made a few times before and it's invalid.

Civil Rights....the rights of AMERICANS to have education, housing, etc rights and protections that ALL Americans are GUARANTEED in the Constitution & Amendments is what "Black people's" rights are....I guess.

In what way shape or form can this be compared to the same sex marriage issue?
:facepalm

Get educated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_Integrity_Act_of_1924

[dunksby]

Well clearly the way you stated the question, didn't actually clarify what you considered a hate group. It would seem our definitions our different.

Vague questions call for vague answers.
Yes, just as I thought, you cannot even answer a simple question damn you are so transparent, keep dodging it.

[NumberSix]

no disrespect but I've seen this comparison and analogy made a few times before and it's invalid.

Civil Rights....the rights of AMERICANS to have education, housing, etc rights and protections that ALL Americans are GUARANTEED in the Constitution & Amendments is what "Black people's" rights are....I guess.

In what way shape or form can this be compared to the same sex marriage issue?
One set of rights cannot be given to some people and denied to others. It's that simple.

Marriage is a legal contract. It's unconstitutional for the government to tell me who I can and can't agree to a contract with.



Btw. Housing isn't a right.

[Yung D-Will]

Yes, just as I thought, you cannot even answer a simple question damn you are so transparent, keep dodging it.

You're making a topic we've been speaking about for 10 pages, into a simple "yes or no question", clearly you're the one dodging a debate. No one's going to respond to an overly simplified question, if you don't first clarify what you consider a hate group.

[JaggerCommaMick]

One set of rights cannot be given to some people and denied to others. It's that simple.

Marriage is a legal contract. It's unconstitutional for the government to tell me who I can and can't agree to a contract with.



Btw. Housing isn't a right.


Wait, come again?

[NumberSix]

Wait, come again?
What do you not understand?

[get these NETS]

:facepalm

Get educated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_Integrity_Act_of_1924


AMERICANS fighting for equal rights and protection under the law as GUARANTEED by the constitution and Amendments is what the civil rights movement was about.

posting a few wiki links is not an answer to my question about what the comparison is.

Maybe you think you're talking to some young kid who doesn't read and spends all day on facebook or something, but that's not the case.


Come again.

[dunksby]

You're making a topic we've been speaking about for 10 pages, into a simple "yes or no question", clearly you're the one dodging a debate. No one's going to respond to an overly simplified question, if you don't first clarify what you consider a hate group.
A group that is trying discriminate a minority for their sexual orientation is a hate group, now you can try to complicate things and rationalize it but it IS a simple matter really simple matter.

[Yung D-Will]

One set of rights cannot be given to some people and denied to others. It's that simple.

Marriage is a legal contract. It's unconstitutional for the government to tell me who I can and can't agree to a contract with.



Btw. Housing isn't a right.

:cheers:

Exactly, your line pretty much sums up my position on it. I believe in people's rights to marry whoever they please, and I question the constitutionality of the government denying that right; but I'm not really offended by people who may feel otherwise.

[JaggerCommaMick]

What do you not understand?


Marriage is a legal contract for which you must submit a government application.

But government shouldn't have anything to do with approving marriages?

So, how exactly does that work? You go to get a marriage license and the government says 'sorry, we don't have anything to do with it'

So then where do you get the license?


Oh, and do you realize polygamous marriages are prohibited in your country, as well as marriages between siblings? Do you speak out about those equality injustices as well, mate?

Go ahead and answer both questions, thanks.

[JaggerCommaMick]

:cheers:

Exactly, your line pretty much sums up my position on it. I believe in people's rights to marry whoever they please, and I question the constitutionality of the government denying that right; but I'm not really offended by people who may feel otherwise.


Mate, your constitution says nothing about marriage, because it was bloody unthinkable that this topic would ever even come up when the Constitution were drafted.

If it had been brought up at the time, how do you think its authors would have felt?




:hammerhead:

[Yung D-Will]

A group that is trying discriminate a minority for their sexual orientation is a hate group, now you can try to complicate things and rationalize it but it IS a simple matter really simple matter.

Ah, ok I don't consider the anti-gay marriage faction a hate group, I consider the people claiming that we should exterminate all gays, a hate group. I don't agree with their positions, but I don't believe most of them(That I've met) actually hate homosexuals. Therefore It's impossible for me to classify them as a hate group.

[Yung D-Will]

Mate, your constitution says nothing about marriage, because it was bloody unthinkable that this topic would ever even come up when the Constitution were drafted.

If it had been brought up at the time, how do you think its authors would have felt?




:hammerhead:

From what I read of the constitution I was under the impression it just left most of the decisions on marriage up to the state. We'd probably need another "Loving v Virginia" case to legalize it country wide.

[JaggerCommaMick]

Ah, ok I don't consider the anti-gay marriage faction a hate group, I consider the people claiming that we should exterminate all gays, a hate group. I don't agree with their positions, but I don't believe most of them(That I've met) actually hate homosexuals. Therefore It's impossible for me to classify them as a hate group.


It's just convenient to their argument of tolerance and understanding to use stereotyping, emotional manipulation, and false dichotomies to get their point across. It's because they're such bloody intelligent and pacifistic debaters.

[NumberSix]

Oh, and do you realize polygamous marriages are prohibited in your country, as well as marriages between siblings? Do you speak out about those equality injustices as well, mate?

Go ahead and answer both questions, thanks.
I really don't see anything wrong with polygamy. If 3 people want to get married, what the fck do I care?


As far as siblings. I'm pretty sure immediate family members already have access to the same legal rights gained through marriage. If my sister is sick I can visit her in the hospital, and if she dies, she can leave her assets to me tax free. I wouldn't need to marry my own sister to obtain these legal rights, as I would already have access to them in the first place.

[get these NETS]

One set of rights cannot be given to some people and denied to others. It's that simple.

Marriage is a legal contract. It's unconstitutional for the government to tell me who I can and can't agree to a contract with.



Btw. Housing isn't a right.



The "rights" fought for in the civil rights movement should have been the birthright of NATIVE born African Americans.So the rights weren't GIVEN.....government just started enforcing the protection of rights that were already on the books for all Americans.



Please with the talk of contracts, you speak like a guy who just took his first legal studies classes in college. You sign a contract tomorrow with a 16 year old kid to cut your lawn every Saturday...and then tell me if the courts will recognize your "contract"






The "housing" is most definitely a RIGHT when it's not owned by a private citizen but by the state, and is therefore LEGALLY available to ALL qualified applicants tenants. I used housing and education together because STATE colleges and universities legally are open to qualified citizens who qualify for entry.

[Yung D-Will]

With Polygamy, I think it's another case of the Government trying to protect people from their own actions, which always ends badly. If everyone's comfortable with the situation, why should the government restrict it?

[NumberSix]

The "rights" fought for in the civil rights movement should have been the birthright of NATIVE born African Americans.



Please with the talk of contracts, you speak like a guy who just took his first legal studies classes in college. You sign a contract tomorrow with a 16 year old kid to cut your lawn every Saturday...and then tell me if the courts will recognize your "contract"
minors aren't eligible to consent to contracts.


The "housing" is most definitely a RIGHT when it's not owned by a private citizen but by the state, and is therefore LEGALLY available to ALL qualified applicants tenants. I used housing and education together because STATE colleges and universities legally are open to qualified citizens who qualify for entry.
You can't deny hamburgers to customers. It doesn't mean hamburgers are a right.

Plenty of people are homeless. Housing isn't a right.

[JaggerCommaMick]

With Polygamy, I think it's another case of the Government trying to protect people from their own actions, which always ends badly. If everyone's comfortable with the situation, why should the government restrict it?


Who knows, what I do know is that there are certain sects in the States where people do wish to have polygamous marriages in accordance with their religious traditions, and it aint allowed.

Where are the pickets? Where's all the fussing and shouting? All the hate for intolerance over that issue? I know many of them have tried to challenge it in court and in the legislature. Where is their support from the masses? Where's all the talk of hate and discrimination of polygamists?

I don't seem to see it anywhere.

[Droid101]

AMERICANS fighting for equal rights and protection under the law as GUARANTEED by the constitution and Amendments is what the civil rights movement was about.

posting a few wiki links is not an answer to my question about what the comparison is.

Maybe you think you're talking to some young kid who doesn't read and spends all day on facebook or something, but that's not the case.


Come again.
One of the rights African-Americans fought for was the legal right to marry white people. Those two links detail how that used to be illegal, and how it was finally overturned.

[Yung D-Will]

Who knows, what I do know is that there are certain sects in the States where people do wish to have polygamous marriages in accordance with their religious traditions, and it aint allowed.

Where are the pickets? Where's all the fussing and shouting? All the hate for intolerance over that issue? I know many of them have tried to challenge it in court and in the legislature. Where is their support from the masses? Where's all the talk of hate and discrimination of polygamists?

I don't seem to see it anywhere.

Remember a couple decades back people were protesting Interracial marriage, and no one was talking about homosexuality. These things take time.

[dunksby]

Are we comparing polygamy with same sex marriage? Polygamy is being married to multiple people, gays can't even marry, damn homophobes are idiots.

[get these NETS]

minors aren't eligible to consent to contracts.


You can't deny hamburgers to customers. It doesn't mean hamburgers are a right.

Plenty of people are homeless. Housing is a right.


OK..so the government had ALREADY determined and defined who can enter a contract..but you're saying that they can't tell you WHO you can and can't agree to a contract with.
Government can define who is able to sign a business contract but you're telling me that they cannot define who can sign a marriage contract.?



explained housing/education rights as it pertains to the state....

[SilkkTheShocker]

I have no problem with gay marriage. Just don't care enough about to really have an opinion on it. But why would the Magic put themselves in this situation? Nothing good was going to come of this.

[get these NETS]

One of the rights African-Americans fought for was the legal right to marry white people. Those two links detail how that used to be illegal, and how it was finally overturned.


I'm familiar with the case and the ruling.
Blacks were NOT fighting for the right to marry white people.

the rules or official laws of this country are the United States Codes....the constitution is the framework but the USC are the nuts and bolts of American law.then there are 50 separate sets of state laws.

Usually when a case comes to the Supreme Court....they determine that the state law is unconstitutional....and it gets overturned.


Again....existing laws or amendments are ENFORCED.

[JaggerCommaMick]

Mates, I'll sum this up nice and clean, then the rest of you can continue to beat the dead horsey in this thread and I'll move on:


Marriage is a tradition that regulates the unique dynamic between men and women. There clearly is a distinct difference between OPPOSITE sexes. Hormones, perspective, reproductive abilities, needs, wants, etc.

Marriage is the agreement that regulates how a man and woman's permanent relationship functions, whether it be in religious, government, or other terms. It has nothing to do with god, nothing to do with hate. It has everything to do with the same basic reasons men and women typically don't share the same locker rooms, the same bunks at summer camp, the same athletic fields, the same barracks in the army. Men would be more than happy to share the locker rooms of course, but WOMEN FEEL DIFFERENTLY! THE GENDERS ARE DIFFERENT!

When you have two people of the same gender, you don't need something like marriage to bind them. They're already on the same page. It's a completely unnecessary Pandora's Box, mates. You'll have Juan in California marrying his friend Jose who's still back in Tijuana and getting him residence, then divorcing the next day and marrying his friend Paco and getting him residence, etc. You'll have Billy who just got out of school and can't find a job marrying his good buddy Donald who found a great job as a lawyer right out of school, and now Donald's firm is paying for both of their health insurance just because they're friends and take advantage of the system.

It's stupid mates. Gay people can love each other, (isn't that what people are sayin this is about? What's love got to do with [government]??) they can walk around holdin hands, they can do whatever they want. Why not just make certain visitation and estate rights more accessible, and leave the entire blanket of marriage well enough alone?


The straight people who support this are likely the kind of men who would walk those little lapdogs around the neighborhood. Gay blokes are their little chihuahuas and it makes them feel like helpful mothers to support their gay little puppy dogs. Awww, aren't you sensitive mates? The gay people sure do love you. And that's all the pro-gay marriage crowd wants, is to feel like someone likes them or is proud of them or whatever. They're just using this issue to get accepted by the 'progressive' crowd. The notion of the actual politics involved is absolultely bloody absurd, but they don't care. Gays are like their little chihuahua pets and they're actin like Paris Hilton, pretending it's their special child and feeling all good for being so caring and motherly. Way to go, men. You're gettin off by feelin like your a mom, or a nurse. Some bloody testament to your gender you are.

[JaggerCommaMick]

Honestly, this is nothing but the loser crowd going overboard with sensitivity. Flat out overdosing on it.

Inter racial marriage? Rightly permitted, as there is still a distinct natural dynamic between man and woman regardless of race. Progress? Check mark.

Two men marrying each other? Now you're just being silly. No check mark. It's like you got bored after the interracial marriage thing was around for a while and just took up somethin for the hell of it. Marriage protects no dynamic between two people of the same sex. That's because there is none. Both magnets have the same charge. It doesn't require marriage.

But we're bored, and want to advertise how bloody super sensitive and tolerant we are! Oh, and because of how insecure we are we reallllly hate the man, and hate the establishment, and everything that makes losers like us feel excluded because of our own self doubt. Let's scream for people of the same sex to start marrying each other! Even if it makes no sense, it'll really get those Republican's goats! Boy, I hate Republicans, I'll do anything to stick it to them. Sorry, what's the issue we're promoting today in order to piss them off? Oh, right, gay marriage. Ok well I guess that works. As long as it pisses off traditionalists. That's really all that matters to me. So I guess we need gay marriage, it's real real important, mates! Let's start smear campaigns and stereotype anyone in our path who disagrees!

Champion the tolerance!

Bloody ridiculous.

[JaggerCommaMick]

god i ****ing own you little teenage retard pansies.


unfortunately tho i've got to be off. shows to perform and such, you understand.

[get these NETS]

Jagger,

nah

hardly think the issues are as cut and dry as you'd like them to be(most issues aren't)

side versus side stuff , I thought was the result of 20 + years of political radio and tv talk shows..us versus them....and other silly grade school nonsense


I support legally binded couples sharing the rights and responsibilities that the govt. affords to married people .....which is what the issue originally was about.

anything beyond that, can't support ....implication that this is analogous to the civil rights movement gets me angry because I think current generation of Black people are so far removed from what that was about that they don't instantly see that it's disrespectful to even write that.

[TMacMagic]

@Jagger

This kid actually thinks he knows stuff.

:yaohappy:

[dunksby]

@Jagger

This kid actually thinks he knows stuff.

:yaohappy:
He is just another attention whore prick, he will be on his way out if people don't get in a discussion with him. Let him break his fingers :lol

[Droid101]

I support legally binded couples sharing the rights and responsibilities that the govt. affords to married people .....which is what the issue originally was about.

Yeah, that totally worked before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal

Face it. You're probably an African-American who thinks "I got mine, so **** you!" about (homosexual) civil rights.

[bagelred]

I thought I just clarified that I wouldn't take some kind of Moral stance unless I felt they were discriminating or bullying their costumers/employees.

At the same time, I'm not gonna make my way through crowds of protesters just for the sake of a burger.

If I wasn't gonna eat at Chick Fil A, it'd be because of the long lines of supports for anti-gay marriage, and the crowds of protesters giving me a headache outside. Not because I want to take any type of particular stance.

You're not a freedom rider for protesting Chick-Fil-A

ONCE AGAIN, you didn't answer my specific question. Just say yes or no.

[Yung D-Will]

ONCE AGAIN, you didn't answer my specific question. Just say yes or no.
Read the first line. If they weren't involved in those circumstances I expressed, then yes.


I though we finished this like an hour ago?

[get these NETS]

Yeah, that totally worked before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal

Face it. You're probably an African-American who thinks "I got mine, so **** you!" about (homosexual) civil rights.


1) I've replied to all of your posts directed towards me.....I'm noting that you avoided that last post that I wrote directly in reply to to you.
constitution..U.S.C....state laws.


2) if you show me where there are gay only..and straight only ENTRANCES, SITTING AREAS, WATER FOUNTAINS, SCHOOLS,LIBRARIES with signs up and LEGAL enforcement....I'll start listening to your case

You show me where a gay man or woman was denied entrance to a STATE university based on their sexual orientation, I'll start listening to your case


DON'T disrespect the dead people who had to live under JIM crow and STATE protected system where whites were freeto do ANYTHING they wanted to them (including raping their daughters or lynching men) with NO legal recourse...and compare THAT with gay couples wanting to get married. please don't do that..


3) Actually Black but an immigrant , and I benefit every day from the blood, sweat,tears and lives of African Americans who sacrificed so that civil rights legislation was passed to protect the rights of ALL Americans.

[Droid101]

1) I've replied to all of your posts directed towards me.....I'm noting that you avoided that last post that I wrote directly in reply to to you.
constitution..U.S.C....state laws.


2) if you show me where there are gay only..and straight only ENTRANCES, SITTING AREAS, WATER FOUNTAINS, SCHOOLS,LIBRARIES with signs up and LEGAL enforcement....I'll start listening to your case

You show me where a gay man or woman was denied entrance to a STATE university based on their sexual orientation, I'll start listening to your case


DON'T disrespect the dead people who had to live under JIM crow and STATE protected system where whites were freeto do ANYTHING they wanted to them (including raping their daughters or lynching men) with NO legal recourse...with gay couples wanting to get married. please don't do that..


3) Actually Black but an immigrant , and I benefit every day from the blood, sweat,tears and lives of African Americans who sacrificed so that civil rights legislation was passed to protect the rights of ALL Americans.
Are you a crazy person?

Marriage was one of the civil rights that they fought for. Yet, now they're happy to allow the discrimination to continue (since it's no longer against them).

You do realize there are hate crimes against homosexuals, right?

[Clifton]

I have no problem with gay marriage. Just don't care enough about to really have an opinion on it. But why would the Magic put themselves in this situation? Nothing good was going to come of this.
Well when you have resources, and principles, it's hard to say, "don't use your resources to further your principles in a legal and ethical way, because some people might not like you for it."

They're wasting their time, of course. Gay marriage is an inevitability. Marriage is no longer viewed in this country as an institution that brings together men and women in a productive and harmonious way, and that centers on sacrifice and duty and honor and of course... fruit (kids). Now it's a sticker of legitimacy for you and your f*ck-buddy. Whatever good there is in a marriage is something extra that the couple chooses to insert into it. But those complaining about what this is doing to marriage... marriage has totally been deflated in this country. It's a "right" not a responsibility. So "why shouldn't they marry?" There's no basis for being against it according to most peoples' value systems. That's why it just registers as "hate" and "intolerance."

When interracial couples weren't allowed to marry, that was because people hated and distrusted black people and didn't want them taking their white women away. There was never any basis in the tradition of marriage for it. Perhaps a bit of wariness of cultures mixing so much that the cultures get totally left behind and forgotten... but not really. It was mostly just hatred born of paranoia.

But gay marriage is different. There is a principled opposition to it. Here it is from the male point of view, as I understand it: Marriage is for men. And a man loves and serves one woman. Period. Almost everyone I know who lives any other way is a boy to me. Pond-scum. Marry another man? What the f*ck? It wouldn't even occur to someone with a sense of duty and sacrifice and service. But who has that any more.

[Droid101]

But gay marriage is different. There is a principled opposition to it. Here it is from the male point of view, as I understand it: Marriage is for men. And a man loves and serves one woman. Period. Almost everyone I know who lives any other way is a boy to me. Pond-scum. Marry another man? What the f*ck? It wouldn't even occur to someone with a sense of duty and sacrifice and service. But who has that any more.
You are sexist, homophobic scum. The world would be a better place if you didn't exist.

If marriage is about sense of "duty" as you put it, why do so many anti-gay-marriage people keep getting multiple divorces?

**** you.


Edit: I just re-read your post, and I'm not sure if the self-righteous bullshit you're spouting is your opinion or your view on other peoples' (dumb) opinions. If these are your opinions, **** you. If you are explaining about other stupid peoples' stupid opinions, then I apologize.

[KingBeasley08]

You are sexist, homophobic scum. The world would be a better place if you didn't exist.

If marriage is about sense of "duty" as you put it, why do so many anti-gay-marriage people keep getting multiple divorces?

**** you.
chill the f*ck out you closet homosexual. people accuse others of hating and then make posts like this :facepalm

[Droid101]

chill the f*ck out you closet homosexual. people accuse others of hating and then make posts like this :facepalm
Check my edit.

Also, if you are a bigot, **** you, you deserve hate.

I hate haters. Live and let live. If you are actively trying to restrict other people's freedoms, you deserve hate. Hating someone for what they are is wrong.

If you can't see the difference, there is no hope for you.

[TMacMagic]

This thread is getting out of hand. I thought this was the NBA forum, not the i'm going to speak my religious or political thoughts and diss other people for thinking differently forum.

[get these NETS]

Are you a crazy person?

Marriage was one of the civil rights that they fought for. Yet, now they're happy to allow the discrimination to continue (since it's no longer against them).

You do realize there are hate crimes against homosexuals, right?


ok...

you've avoided my points repeatedly

either you are trolling or realize that you can't counter any of my points and are just taking the easy way out.


Who is "they"? Are you saying Black people?

Outside of a handful of openly gay activists/politicians and some gay Black members of the movement.....where is evidence of large % of gay people supporting the civil rights movement, from which they benefited also?


When you find that, you bring it back here and re-read what you wrote.


Your premise is flimsy..

and yes, there are HATE crimes against gay people....


bottomline..address what's already been discussed here or admit you are trolling or just overmatched

[get these NETS]

ok...even though i haven't resorted to name calling and other stuff...this thread has a lot of that stuff,

if it gets locked or erased....

just remember

gay marriage in NO way shape or form can be compared to the civil rights movement. ....and if it can,that case has NOT yet been made.

[Droid101]

gay marriage in NO way shape or form can be compared to the civil rights movement. ....and if it can,that case has NOT yet been made.
Yes it can.

Civil rights (including marriage) should be for everyone, not just one race.

[General]

Prop 8 was voted into law in one of the most liberal states in the country, California. The people are against gay marriage and polls show it, DeVos with the smart move:applause:

[Droid101]

Prop 8 was voted into law in one of the most liberal states in the country, California. The people are against gay marriage and polls show it, DeVos with the smart move:applause:
Prop 8 was voted into law because the commercials lied and because of millions of dollars of funding from Utah.

Prop 8 was also overturned as unconstitutional by California courts.

But keep wearing that hate on your sleeve there, bud.

https://p.twimg.com/AstEjKGCMAAvkv9.jpg

[bagelred]

https://p.twimg.com/AstEjKGCMAAvkv9.jpg

:cheers: Exactly.

[get these NETS]

Yes it can.

Civil rights (including marriage) should be for everyone, not just one race.


ok..no more benefit of the doubt.

You're overmatched , avoiding points, and just repeating the same stuff over and over....You might want to educate yourself(real education, not google or wiki) before you try to debate people in the future.

another addition to ignore list

[JaggerCommaMick]

:cheers: Exactly.

Imagine how gay you are looking...


RIGHT NOW.

[Droid101]

ok..no more benefit of the doubt.

You're overmatched , avoiding points, and just repeating the same stuff over and over....You might want to educate yourself(real education, not google or wiki) before you try to debate people in the future.

another addition to ignore list
You're a bigot who wants to withhold civil rights from an entire segment of the population. :confusedshrug:

[Yung D-Will]

You people are really dragging this thread, should have ended after page 10. :oldlol:

[Burgz V2]

why is this an issue? I dont care if a man marries a lawnmower just don't expect everyone to like/agree with it.

[Burgz V2]

you know JaggerCommaMick they say those who are most opposed to gay marriage are secretly closet homos in denial of their own homoness

if that's the case you're the biggest f@g on ISH :applause:

[Droid101]

you know JaggerCommaMick they say those who are most opposed to gay marriage are secretly closet homos in denial of their own homoness

if that's the case you're the biggest f@g on ISH :applause:
Yep! Here's a partial list. Might be outdated by now.

Top 10 Anti-Gay Politicians who where caught being gay (http://www.ranker.com/list/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay/joanne)

[Yung D-Will]

why is this an issue? I dont care if a man marries a lawnmower just don't expect everyone to like/agree with it.
The sex with a lawnmower would be extremely painful :biggums:

[dunksby]

Seriously why would a rational mature human being even contemplate spending resources to fight against something that absolutely has nothing to do with him/her?

[Yung D-Will]

Seriously why would a rational mature human being even contemplate spending resources to fight against something that absolutely has nothing to do with him/her?

The same reason people fight against issues such as Abortion and the death penalty. We live in a country created based on the idea of being governed by the will of the people, so for that reason everyone is allowed to express their opinion. And if people feel strongly enough about any opinion, they'll fight for it, and eventually find enough support for it, or it'll die out.

[dunksby]

The same reason people fight against issues such as Abortion and the death penalty. We live in a country created based on the idea of being governed by the will of the people, so for that reason everyone is allowed to express their opinion. And if people feel strongly enough about any opinion, they'll fight for it, and eventually find enough support for it, or it'll die out.
Do I have to explain every basic thing to you? If your gay neighbors who have been living together for 10 years get the right to marry how the **** does it affect your life? What would be the difference if one of them was a woman? Why would a sane human being go out spend energy and resources to make sure that does not happen? Stop making this look like a holy war or some sacred cause, it's stupid and wrong, if you can't get that you are just dumb. No mature self respecting adult would do that.

[ThatCoolKid]

The Orlando Magic are criticized for supporting the selection of those eligible for civil liberties by the church? :confusedshrug:

[Yung D-Will]

Do I have to explain every basic thing to you? If your gay neighbors who have been living together for 10 years get the right to marry how the **** does it affect your life? What would be the difference if one of them was a woman? Why would a sane human being go out spend energy and resources to make sure that does not happen? Stop making this look like a holy war or some sacred cause, it's stupid and wrong, if you can't get that you are just dumb. No mature self respecting adult would do that.


Yawn, again before I even read your rant, point out where in this thread i stated it would affect me in any way. Or better yet, state where I said I didn't believe this country would be better if they allowed gay marriage.



Waiting :rolleyes:

And a Holy war is far dumber than this, but lets not get into my atheist beliefs.

[Yung D-Will]

Btw, don't talk down to me, because you haven't defended any points you've tried to make in this thread.


Firstly, you tried to attack me when I openly stated my support for gay marriage, because I wouldn't join a moral boycott.

And Secondly you came into this thread with a vague "yes or no question", thats only purpose was to oversimplify things and give you a feeling of moral satisfaction.


I've been pro gay rights all my life, but I don't find myself superior to people who have an opinion that differs from mine.


Don't waste my time with your arrogance. :coleman:

[dude77]

well technically speaking .. if two people want to be together, cohabitate and all that other good stuff .. they should be able to do that .. as for the marriage issue .. marriage, civil union .. isn't it the same shit ? .. the whole debate is really over the term 'marriage' because of the religious connotations .. but it's the same damn thing as a civil union with regards to the 'government benefits'

edit: I don't know what the benefits are with a civil union .. I just assumed they were similar or the same as being 'married' .. correct me if I'm wrong

[LJJ]

well technically speaking .. if two people want to be together, cohabitate and all that other good stuff .. they should be able to do that .. as for the marriage issue .. marriage, civil union .. isn't it the same shit ? .. the whole debate is really over the term 'marriage' because of the religious connotations .. but it's the same damn thing as a civil union with regards to the 'government benefits'

edit: I don't know what the benefits are with a civil union .. I just assumed they were similar or the same as being 'married' .. correct me if I'm wrong

What religious connotations? Marriage doesn't have anything to do with religion fundamentally. Just because some religions have their own idea of marriage has nothing to do with the laws of the country.

More importantly: why in hell is the government basing law on religion?

[dude77]

What religious connotations? Marriage doesn't have anything to do with religion fundamentally. Just because some religions have their own idea of marriage has nothing to do with the laws of the country.

More importantly: why in hell is the government basing law on religion?

yeah you're right .. no place for that

[Yung D-Will]

What religious connotations? Marriage doesn't have anything to do with religion fundamentally. Just because some religions have their own idea of marriage has nothing to do with the laws of the country.

More importantly: why in hell is the government basing law on religion?


The government bases it's laws on it's constituents, so whether or not the people they govern are influenced by religion is a matter completely out of their hands. If you want to be reelected you implement laws, for the constituents you want to win.


I find organized religion a horrible thing, but I understand why religion still ends up being influential. Until the people in America become more secular, it'll continue to be influential as long as these people have a vote.

[LJJ]

The government bases it's laws on it's constituents, so whether or not the people they govern are influenced by religion is a matter completely out of their hands. If you want to be reelected you implement laws, for the constituents you want to win.

Laws should uphold a modicum of human rights, to protect minorities from being abused by and discriminated against by the majority.

Gay citizens are paying for all the exceptions and benefits married people get too, yet these benefits can never apply to them because they are second class citizens in that regard in the USA. For no good reason. Laws should always prevent minorities from suffering governmental abuse like that.

[Yung D-Will]

Laws should uphold a modicum of human rights, to protect minorities from being abused by and discriminated against by the majority.

Gay citizens are paying for all the exceptions and benefits married people get through taxes too, yet these benefits can never apply to them because they are second class citizens in that regard the USA. For no good reason. Laws should always prevent minorities from suffering governmental abuse like that.

Well yea, I understand where you're coming from. As a criminology major though, I'm still inclined to believe laws should be defined by what the majority of the people(Governed by the laws) find acceptable/unacceptable. And if those laws violate civil liberties, then the supreme court should take up the case.

And I really don't put that much stock into tax dollars, because billions of the tax dollars ends up in the hands of Israel, wasteful military spending/occupations, and bankrupt social programs.

[dude77]

from merriam-webster:

matrimony

: the union of man and woman as husband and wife :

so I guess the editors of a dictionary are bigots ? :oldlol:

[Yung D-Will]

from merriam-webster:

matrimony

: the union of man and woman as husband and wife :


Webster alters definitions quite often these days, as society evolves, so that wouldn't be an issue.

[dude77]

from merriam-webster:

marriage:

a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage

[LJJ]

Well yea, I understand where you're coming from. As a criminology major though, I'm still inclined to believe laws should be defined by what the majority of the people(Governed by the laws) find acceptable/unacceptable. And if those laws violate civil liberties, then the supreme court should take up the case.

And I really don't put that much stock into tax dollars, because billions of the tax dollars ends up in the hands of Israel, wasteful military spending/occupations, and bankrupt social programs.

So you feel majority should rule huh, regardless of whether th majority chooses to attack the human rights of the minority.

That sounds like an ochlocracy to me. Basic human rights should be constitutional and there should be separation between church and state. That's the fundament of a civilized society to me. And if you don't have those two things in check you get issues like this: people using their power dominate people's rights and liberty over barbaric and petty opinions.

[Yung D-Will]

So you feel majority should rule huh, regardless of whether th majority chooses to attack the human rights of the minority.

That sounds like an ochlocracy to me. Basic human rights should be constitutional and there should be separation between church and state. That's the fundament of a civilized society to me. And if you don't have those two things in check you get issues like this: people using their power dominate people's rights and liberty over barbaric and petty opinions.

No I think the majority should heavily influence the laws they're governed by, but I don't believe that will always lead to the best results. There should always be checks on the laws that are implemented, but I think what I'm getting at is I trust the people to protect their own liberties more than the government these days.

Laws like the patriot act, which clearly violated 3 amendments in the bill of rights, are what you get when you let the government have complete freedom when it comes to creating laws.

[JaggerCommaMick]

Laws should uphold a modicum of human rights, to protect minorities from being abused by and discriminated against by the majority.

Gay citizens are paying for all the exceptions and benefits married people get too, yet these benefits can never apply to them because they are second class citizens in that regard in the USA. For no good reason. Laws should always prevent minorities from suffering governmental abuse like that.


Mate in which countries is a person who is gay not allowed to marry?

[JaggerCommaMick]

Can any bloke in here tell me which law prohibits a gay personfrom marrying in the States? I wasnt aware there is one.

[Yung D-Will]

Can any bloke in here tell me which law prohibits a gay personfrom marrying in the States? I wasnt aware there is one.


This is clearly a bait post. What'll happen is someone will post a gay marrige law, and you'll counter it by saying they have the same rights to marry someone of the opposite sex ,as everyone else within the country.

[JaggerCommaMick]

This is clearly a bait post. What'll happen is someone will post a gay marrige law, and you'll counter it by saying they have the same rights to marry someone of the opposite sex ,as everyone else within the country.

So can you tell me how the rights are different? If youcant mate then I hope neither you nor anyone else who cant explain how theyre different will continue using the patently false rhetoric of 'equality'

If logic cant carry your argument you can do two things, mate.You can reexamine your conclusion or you can lie through your teeth. The left wing evangelicals are doing every bit the latter, though they always claim the right wing vangies as the ones who do it. The left nuts here are yammerin about hate and bigotry with no proof, throwin labels and stereotypes around, and using phony, non applicable buzz words like equality aroud in a guerilla warfare type battle to feel righteous. Some progressive, classy people they are, huh.

Two bloody peas in a pod. Hatfields vs McCoys, mates. I got news for you, far left extremists. Not one of you has show yoursef to be the least bit more intelligent than the average right wing extremist. Two peas in a pod indeed.

[Yung D-Will]

So can you tell me how the rights are different? If youcant mate then I hope neither you not anyone else who cant explain how theyre different will cintjnue using the patently false rhetoric o 'equality'

If logic cant carry your argument you can do two things. You can reexamine our conclusion or you can lie through your teeth. The left wing evangelicals are doing every bit the latter, though they always laintthe right wing vangies as the ones who do it.

Two bloody peas in a pod. Hatfields vs McCoys, mates. I got news for you, far left extremists. Not one of you has show yoursef to be the least bit more intelligent than the average right wing extremist. Two peas in a pod indeed.

I'm not a liberal or a conservative so I don't actually get what you're going on about.

The thing is I never presented the argument that they're denied rights, I simply stated that marrige should evolve as society continues to evolve.

[JaggerCommaMick]

I'm not a liberal or a conservative so I don't actually get what you're going on about.

The thing is I never presented the argument that they're denied rights, I simply stated that marrige should evolve as society continues to evolve.


Instead of responding to the question I posed you called it a bait. But you didnt bother to illustrate any fallacies, because you couldnt. in other words you were just runnin your bloody trap with no purpose mate.

[Yung D-Will]

Instead of responding to the question I posed you called it a bait. But you didnt bother to illustrate any fallacies, because you couldnt. in other words you were just runnin your bloody trap with no purpose mate.


Because I wasn't arguing with you, I was just pointing out where you were heading with your argument if someone responded to you.

[JaggerCommaMick]

Because I wasn't arguing with you, I was just pointing out where you were heading with your argument if someone responded to you.


Why did you feel the need to put words in me mouth, mate?

[NumberSix]

The government bases it's laws on it's constituents, so whether or not the people they govern are influenced by religion is a matter completely out of their hands. If you want to be reelected you implement laws, for the constituents you want to win.
Somebody needs to grow up and enter the real world.

[ThatCoolKid]

Why did you feel the need to put words in me mouth, mate?

He was saving time because it was quite obvious the exchange you were looking to have.

What it really comes down to is republicans want to arbitrarily define the word marriage, use God to justify it, and then vehemently deny anyone who wants to redefine it. In other words: My definition is right and you're not allowed to do anything about it. Marriage is no longer a solely religious institution, it is a social one that includes people outside of religion, so religion should not serve as its basis. Is there any particular reason Republicans object to the redefinition of the word other than bigotry? I don't think so. Is there any particular reason Democrats want to redefine it? Yes, it allows a previously neglected segment of the population to enjoy something that everyone else has for thousands of years.

Do you disagree?

[JaggerCommaMick]

He was saving time because it was quite obvious the exchange you were looking to have.

What it really comes down to is republicans want to arbitrarily define the word marriage, use God to justify it, and then vehemently deny anyone who wants to redefine it. In other words: My definition is right and you're not allowed to do anything about it. Marriage is no longer a solely religious institution, it is a social one that includes people outside of religion, so religion should not serve as its basis. Is there any particular reason Republicans object to the redefinition of the word other than bigotry? I don't think so. Is there any particular reason Democrats want to redefine it? Yes, it allows a previously neglected segment of the population to enjoy something that everyone else has for thousands of years.

Do you disagree?


Mate, same sex marriage was voted down in California, an overwhelmingly Democratic state.

But go on, keep recreating reality to conveniently fit your argument. Its not like facts are going to stop you anyhow.

[ThatCoolKid]

Mate, same sex marriage was voted down in California, an overwhelmingly Democratic state.

But go on, keep recreating reality to conveniently fit your argument. Its not like facts are going to stop you anyhow.

What facts conflict with what I just said? Explain to me, using reasons, why we should not redefine marriage to include same sex couples.

[JaggerCommaMick]

What facts conflict with what I just said? Explain to me, using reasons, why we should not redefine marriage to include same sex couples.


Mate you just made a post dedicated to diagraming the difference between republicans and democrats on marriage policies. That was what your entire lengthy paragraph was about. The California population which is OVERWHELMINGLY blue voted NO to same sex marriage.

Your whole post, mate, is what the kids on the internet would refer to as FAIL.

[ThatCoolKid]

Mate you just made a post dedicated to diagraming the difference between republicans and democrats on marriage policies. That was what your entire lengthy paragraph was about. The California population which is OVERWHELMINGLY blue voted NO to same sex marriage.

Your whole post, mate, is what the kids on the internet would refer to as FAIL.

You did not answer my question, but I'll fill in the blank you left. There is no good reason why same sex marriage should not be allowed.

I really don't understand what you are saying. You keep citing the fact that people have not voted in approval of same sex marriage. I am not disputing that. I am disputing whether there is an actual reason for not approving same sex marriage. Do you see the difference? I am saying that people who object to same sex marriage do it for no reason, and, thus, the right or just course of action is to allow it.

[JaggerCommaMick]

You did not answer my question, but I'll fill in the blank you left. There is no good reason why same sex marriage should not be allowed.

I really don't understand what you are saying. You keep citing the fact that people have not voted in approval of same sex marriage. I am not disputing that. I am disputing whether there is an actual reason for not approving same sex marriage. Do you see the difference? I am saying that people who object to same sex marriage do it for no reason, and, thus, the right or just course of action is to allow it.


Mate you made a self righteous speech about how republicans are bigots and democrats are inclusive. Its like 4 posts above, mate. Scroll up. Its right there. We can all see it. You look absolutely bloody ridiculous pretending it didnt happen.

[ThatCoolKid]

Mate you made a self righteous speech about how republicans are bigots and democrats are inclusive. Its like 4 posts above, mate. Scroll up. Its right there. We can all see it. You look absolutely bloody ridiculous pretending it didnt happen.

You don't seem to be disputing anything I'm saying. Why don't you take your own advice and use reason to disprove me if what I said is ridiculous? How am I wrong?

[JaggerCommaMick]

You don't seem to be disputing anything I'm saying. Why don't you take your own advice and use reason to disprove me if what I said is ridiculous? How am I wrong?
Because you already made a lengthy post based entirely on a false premise, mate. Theres no reason to engage you when you disregard facts. If you'd like my perspective it is supplied amply throughout the whole bloody topic.

[ThatCoolKid]

Because you already made a lengthy post based entirely on a false premise, mate. Theres no reason to engage you when you disregard facts. If you'd like my perspective it is supplied amply throughout the whole bloody topic.

What false premise? Reference it specifically or I will assume you are fabricating it.

[Real Men Wear Green]

It's funny that Kobe Bryant gets fined thousands for a slur tat he uttered in a thoughtless moment but there will be no punishment for the Magic owner whose donation is going to intentionally do more damage to the homosexual community than Bryant could have ever wanted to.

[JaggerCommaMick]

What false premise? Reference it specifically or I will assume you are fabricating it.


I just referenced it 10 times mate. Everyone whos read the bloody topic has seen it. Are you batty?

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

What if they supported Nazi causes? Would you still eat at Chick-Fil-A and go to Magic games? I'm serious. What would you do then?
conversely, if a private company discovered and sold the cure for cancer for an affordable price, yet the owner supported slavery, nazis, homophobia, would you boycott the company?

Boycotting a company b/c their owner/CEO/President has a bigoted/offensive/disagreeable opinion is irrational. A company should be judged based on its actual business - practices or products. Not the 1 guy that controls most of it and his opinions.

Also, I haven't read anything since page 7, so apologies if this has been brought up.

[JaggerCommaMick]

conversely, if a private company discovered and sold the cure for cancer for an affordable price, yet the owner supported slavery, nazis, homophobia, would you boycott the company?

Boycotting a company b/c their owner/CEO/President has a bigoted/offensive/disagreeable opinion is irrational. A company should be judged based on its actual business - practices or products. Not the 1 guy that controls most of it and his opinions.

Also, I haven't read anything since page 7, so apologies if this has been brought up.


It hasnt been brought up, mate, in fact its been specifically avoided by people like the one you just respond to because it makes their precious agenda look frivolous.

[ThatCoolKid]

I just referenced it 10 times mate. Everyone whos read the bloody topic has seen it. Are you batty?

I just said to reference it specifically and you failed to do so. Nothing you have said thus far has any relevance to disproving what argument I have presented. If you feel otherwise, cite the false premise in your next post. If you do not, I will assume you are evading my questions because you have no answer or don't want to consider them because you are afraid you will have no answer.

[Real Men Wear Green]

conversely, if a private company discovered and sold the cure for cancer for an affordable price, yet the owner supported slavery, nazis, homophobia, would you boycott the company?

Boycotting a company b/c their owner/CEO/President has a bigoted/offensive/disagreeable opinion is irrational. A company should be judged based on its actual business - practices or products. Not the 1 guy that controls most of it and his opinions.

Also, I haven't read anything since page 7, so apologies if this has been brought up.
What does and does not get boycotted can and will be influenced by the value of the product. I don't think Chick-fil-a or Amway are sufferring much because there aren't enough of their customers who feel strongly about this issue. But generrally speaking when people do care a boycott can be a powerful tool for change. And if you desire change of course it's a rational thing to do.

[ThatCoolKid]

*** homos man

*** stoners man.

They do something I don't enjoy doing so they do not qualify to have civil liberties.

Damn stoners.

[crisoner]

Hate is hate and wrong is wrong.

Some people are f*cking gay get over it!

Shame on the Magic for the donation.

This should not be a Right or Left issue...it's just wrong to hate on a certain group of people and make that law.

[JaggerCommaMick]

Mates, I'll sum this up nice and clean, then the rest of you can continue to beat the dead horsey in this thread and I'll move on:


Marriage is a tradition that regulates the unique dynamic between men and women. There clearly is a distinct difference between OPPOSITE sexes. Hormones, perspective, reproductive abilities, needs, wants, etc.

Marriage is the agreement that regulates how a man and woman's permanent relationship functions, whether it be in religious, government, or other terms. It has nothing to do with god, nothing to do with hate. It has everything to do with the same basic reasons men and women typically don't share the same locker rooms, the same bunks at summer camp, the same athletic fields, the same barracks in the army. Men would be more than happy to share the locker rooms of course, but WOMEN FEEL DIFFERENTLY! THE GENDERS ARE DIFFERENT!

When you have two people of the same gender, you don't need something like marriage to bind them. They're already on the same page. It's a completely unnecessary Pandora's Box, mates. You'll have Juan in California marrying his friend Jose who's still back in Tijuana and getting him residence, then divorcing the next day and marrying his friend Paco and getting him residence, etc. You'll have Billy who just got out of school and can't find a job marrying his good buddy Donald who found a great job as a lawyer right out of school, and now Donald's firm is paying for both of their health insurance just because they're friends and take advantage of the system.

It's stupid mates. Gay people can love each other, (isn't that what people are sayin this is about? What's love got to do with [government]??) they can walk around holdin hands, they can do whatever they want. Why not just make certain visitation and estate rights more accessible, and leave the entire blanket of marriage well enough alone?


The straight people who support this are likely the kind of men who would walk those little lapdogs around the neighborhood. Gay blokes are their little chihuahuas and it makes them feel like helpful mothers to support their gay little puppy dogs. Awww, aren't you sensitive mates? The gay people sure do love you. And that's all the pro-gay marriage crowd wants, is to feel like someone likes them or is proud of them or whatever. They're just using this issue to get accepted by the 'progressive' crowd. The notion of the actual politics involved is absolultely bloody absurd, but they don't care. Gays are like their little chihuahua pets and they're actin like Paris Hilton, pretending it's their special child and feeling all good for being so caring and motherly. Way to go, men. You're gettin off by feelin like your a mom, or a nurse. Some bloody testament to your gender you are.


Here ya go Coolkid. Pretty straight forward for ya, chap. I'd love to ear which facts you dispute.

Im expecting a whole lot of 'nah uhhh' and 'republicans stink!' as your mode of response.

[ThatCoolKid]

Mate I am on my phone so i cant retype everything, I will quote the posts i made earlier and we can see how bloody well your wits are about you.

Okay. I quiver with anticipation.

[MaxFly]

first world problems

Exactly...

[JaggerCommaMick]

Mate, marriage arose in the first place due to the fundamental, distinctive dynamic of the opposite sexes. Religion provided the guidelines, but Ma Nature provided the necessity.

There is absolutely no POINT to a same sex marriage, mate! It's a silly notion, and queens like you only want it because you have a fetish for sticking it to the right wing faction in your country. Mate if you learned to compromise you'd probably get a lot farther instead of fighting stupid battles for your bloody ego. If you'd drop the whole 'marriage' thing, especially since it's absolutely, utterly unnecessary, you'd probably get some reciprocity on issues that actually are meaningful that others may be stubbornly refusing.

You're too schyoopid to understand there can be compromise and middle ground. The idear of same bloody sex marriage is quite silly, chap. If you were smart you'd use that as a sacrifice to encourage others to meet closer to your side on a real issue of importance. But people like you always take the extreme right or left side of every issue, and with you I suspect it's the left side. I bet there aint even one topic you have moderate views on. You're full on to the left, all day err'day. Why? Because mate you probably don't think rationally. You only see red and blue so you are on autopilot for blue. Show's a lack of intellectual development, mate.

Bloody madness, 'its not fair that a man and a man can't say they're married!' guess what mate, the dynamic in same sex relations aint the same as it is in opposite sex relations. That unique dynamic is the whole bloody antecedent to marriage, ya jackass!


This one too, chap

[JaggerCommaMick]

There aint no point to same sex marriage, mates.

They deserve equal freedoms (which they have - all people are subject to the same guidelines of marrying the opposite sex), equal employment opportunities, and a life free of harassment and intimidation. But mates, what is the bloody point of a same sex marriage?

Mates the point of a straight marriage quite honestly is that a man wants access to a woman's honey jar, and in return she makes him commit to her. It's like an insurance policy for each and it unifies them domestically. Most marriages these days are ending in divorce anyhow, as a result of extended life expectancy, increased opportunities for infidelity, and relaxed viewpoints on the sanctity of the bloody thing anyway. Allowing homosexuals to start marrying each other is frivolous and unnecessary. You know how many spontaneous 'marriages' will result after two mates hook up at Trunks' Rainbow Bar? And how frequently ensuing annulments and divorces will happen? The dynamic aint the same as opposite sex relations, mate. This is an absolutely unnecessary Pandora's box to open up. It's sheer madness. Respect people for who they are but leave the marriage dynamic bloody well alone.

These people only 'want' it because they can't have it, mates. Marriage serves them no purpose. This is just frankly some political attention whorin' to the max. Drives me up the bloody wall.

Here mate

[hawke812]

I applaud them. I don't hate gays, but it's called holy matrimony for a reason.

What is the reason?

[hawkfan]

I really flamed up the board starting this thread.

[ThatCoolKid]

This one too, chap

You operate under the assumption that the sole reason people marry is to facilitate procreation. This is the entire basis for your argument. Not only is this simply false, it is incredibly arrogant of you to decide that you get to define marriage and you get to decide what other people will do.

You essentially say, "Same-sex marriage is silly. I don't see a point to it, therefore no one else will, therefore I get to decide that no one of the same sex should be allowed to be married."

Here's the thing: You don't get to decide how other people will live their life because people are entitled to their freedom. Just because you think it is illogical doesn't mean that everyone in the world should be forced to live by your opinion.

If two adults want to consummate their relationship in the way that people conventionally achieve this in our society, marriage, they should be allowed to, regardless of what you think it is irrational or not.

[JaggerCommaMick]

You operate under the assumption that the sole reason people marry is to facilitate procreation. This is the entire basis for your argument. Not only is this simply false, it is incredibly arrogant of you to decide that you get to define marriage and you get to decide what other people will do.

You essentially say, "Same-sex marriage is silly. I don't see a point to it, therefore no one else will, therefore I get to decide that no one of the same sex should be allowed to be married."

Here's the thing: You don't get to decide how other people will live their life because people are entitled to their freedom. Just because you think it is illogical doesn't mean that everyone in the world should be forced to live by your opinion.

If two adults want to consummate their relationship in the way that people conventionally achieve this in our society, marriage, they should be allowed to, regardless of what you think it is irrational or not.

They can consummate all they want behind closed doors. If theyre asking the goverment to get involved, it is up to society as a whole to decide if thyd like it to. I just illustrated why many do not see a rational explanation for government involvement in homosexual relationships. Less government is better anyway, mate. Regular marriage at least has roots. We dont need to add more to the governments plate for somethin utterly unnecessary.

You just support somethin silly because you are afraid to be the 'bad guy' when the group seeks to misguidedly blame someone, mate. Dont hate the player, hate the game. Aint my fault anyone was born gay. Aint societies fault either. We shouldnt have to go and rearrange things for no reason other than some blokes who only make a fuss because theyre told they cant have it. If nobody opposed it they probably would never marry anyway.

[hawkfan]

This thread needs to be moved to the off topic section, and I'm the one who started it.

[ThatCoolKid]

They can consummate all they want behind closed doors. If theyre asking the goverment to get involved, it is up to society as a whole to decide if thyd like it to. I just illustrated why many do not see a rational explanation for government involvement in homosexual relationships. Less government is better anyway, mate. Regular marriage at least has roots. We dont need to add more to the governments plate for somethin utterly unnecessary.

You just support somethin silly because you are afraid to be the 'bad guy' when the group seeks to misguidedly blame someone, mate. Dont hate the player, hate the game. Aint my fault anyone was born gay. Aint societies fault either. We shouldnt have to go and rearrange things for no reason other than some blokes who only make a fuss because theyre told they cant have it. If nobody opposed it they probably would never marry anyway.

You accuse other people of stereotyping? I think that's your problem actually. I've already said that it should not matter what you think about same sex marriage, people should be free to decide for themselves. If you think the government is going to collapse from a few more marriages, you are delusional. Oh no, what if we use up too much paper printing all of the extra marriage certificates? Be real here, it's hardly more responsibility for the government, it is a basic and natural extension of a currently existing service.

Yes, it is not anyone's fault that gays exist. But they do. To act like society should ignore them because they are different is xenophobic bigotry. Yes, you are a bigot if you think that the government should not make a effortless change in order to allow people equal freedoms.

As for your last sentence :biggums:

Heterosexuals aren't denied the right to marry and they still do. Why? Because people like companionship and marriage is a way to consummate it. They can't consummate it behind closed doors because it is illegal (in some states) although they could if it weren't.

Marriage hurts nobody. What reason is there to deny it to any segment of the population? All of these supposed arguments you propose are essentially how people justified segregation.

[JaggerCommaMick]

You accuse other people of stereotyping? I think that's your problem actually. I've already said that it should not matter what you think about same sex marriage, people should be free to decide for themselves. If you think the government is going to collapse from a few more marriages, you are delusional. Oh no, what if we use up too much paper printing all of the extra marriage certificates? Be real here, it's hardly more responsibility for the government, it is a basic and natural extension of a currently existing service.

Yes, it is not anyone's fault that gays exist. But they do. To act like society should ignore them because they are different is xenophobic bigotry. Yes, you are a bigot if you think that the government should not make a effortless change in order to allow people equal freedoms.

As for your last sentence :biggums:

Heterosexuals aren't denied the right to marry and they still do. Why? Because people like companionship and marriage is a way to consummate it. They can't consummate it behind closed doors because it is illegal (in some states) although they could if it weren't.

Marriage hurts nobody. What reason is there to deny it to any segment of the population? All of these supposed arguments you propose are essentially how people justified segregation.


Youre just emotion mongerig over and over mate.

Do me a favor and highlight the examples of potentially rampant fraud i highlighted with regards to american residency as well as joint benefits, and respond to those points chap.

'Love' is as arbitrary as religion, mate. 'They love each other you should marry them!" aint an argument, mate. In fact, 'gay' is ambiguous as well, no? Your arguments are designed to appeal to blokes who are soft and think with their heart not their head.

You keep repeatin falsehoods. The rights are equal right now. Nobody is mistreating gays (by opposing same sex marriage). You are purposely trying to create the false arguments that all SSM opponents are hateful. You are purposely tryin to imply defining marriage with a practical approach that doesnt inolve same sex is some kind of harsh persecution.

This is the littlest deal in the world mate. This dont hurt anybody who's gay. Marriage doesnt servethem any purpose so theyre not missin anything. Again, youre only cryin so much because you are sensitive, and you want others to see you bein so bloody sensitive. Go have a big group hug mate. Youre a girl.

[ThatCoolKid]

Youre just emotion mongerig over and over mate.

Do me a favor and highlight the examples of potentially rampant fraud i highlighted with regards to american residency as well as joint benefits, and respond to those points chap.

'Love' is as arbitrary as religion, mate. 'They love each other you should marry them!" aint an argument, mate. In fact, 'gay' is ambiguous as well, no? Your arguments are designed to appeal to blokes who are soft and think with their heart not their head.

You keep repeatin falsehoods. The rights are equal right now. Nobody is mistreating gays (by opposing same sex marriage). You are purposely trying to create the false arguments that all SSM opponents are hateful. You are purposely tryin to imply defining marriage with a practical approach that doesnt inolve same sex is some kind of harsh persecution.

This is the littlest deal in the world mate. This dont hurt anybody who's gay. Marriage doesnt servethem any purpose so theyre not missin anything. Again, youre only cryin so much because you are sensitive, and you want others to see you bein so bloody sensitive. Go have a big group hug mate. Youre a girl.

Ad hominem attacks. I think this is over. If you ever have answers for any of my questions hit me up, if not, don't bother. I'm done with this thread. Peace out.

[Jailblazers7]

People can fight it all they want but gay marraige will be legal eventually. Only a matter of time.

[Real Men Wear Green]

People can fight it all they want but gay marraige will be legal eventually. Only a matter of time.
Truth. This country has been trending towards social liberalism since it's inception.

[NumberSix]

Youre just emotion mongerig over and over mate.

Do me a favor and highlight the examples of potentially rampant fraud i highlighted with regards to american residency as well as joint benefits, and respond to those points chap.

'Love' is as arbitrary as religion, mate. 'They love each other you should marry them!" aint an argument, mate. In fact, 'gay' is ambiguous as well, no? Your arguments are designed to appeal to blokes who are soft and think with their heart not their head.

You keep repeatin falsehoods. The rights are equal right now. Nobody is mistreating gays (by opposing same sex marriage). You are purposely trying to create the false arguments that all SSM opponents are hateful. You are purposely tryin to imply defining marriage with a practical approach that doesnt inolve same sex is some kind of harsh persecution.

This is the littlest deal in the world mate. This dont hurt anybody who's gay. Marriage doesnt servethem any purpose so theyre not missin anything. Again, youre only cryin so much because you are sensitive, and you want others to see you bein so bloody sensitive. Go have a big group hug mate. Youre a girl.
You're trying a little too hard to seem anti-gay.

Reverse psychology much?

[JBrizzy]

The people that argue for traditional marriage are often from religious backgrounds who don't realise that 'traditional marriage' includes polygamy and having concubines and all that stuff.

[Dr. Cheesesteak]

The people that argue for traditional marriage are often from religious backgrounds who don't realise that 'traditional marriage' includes polygamy and having concubines and all that stuff.
I know! If only it were like that in the US today...

[DirtySanchez]

Separate church from state.... If a church don't want marry gays that's their prerogative. But to make that law?

The bible ain't the law.... It is not our constitution.

Matter of fact there are crazy things written about marriage in the bible. Like suggestion if a man dies his wife must conceive a child with his brother. Are you people pushing for that?

Point is....if gays want to get married your beliefs in your faith has nothing to do with our freedoms from our constitution.

[Freedom Kid7]

:facepalm Goddamnit this bullshit is like Chic Fil A. Look, you don't criticize Chic Fil A because the owner disagrees with your views. You criticize it because the food is shitty. You don't criticize the Orlando Magic because the opinions they have differ from yours. You criticize them because they're a shitty organization.

Goddamnit people.

[DirtySanchez]

:facepalm Goddamnit this bullshit is like Chic Fil A. Look, you don't criticize Chic Fil A because the owner disagrees with your views. You criticize it because the food is shitty. You don't criticize the Orlando Magic because the opinions they have differ from yours. You criticize them because they're a shitty organization.

Goddamnit people.

It's not that simple. The view is a form of prejudge and bigotry and it needs to be dealt with. We all should not tolerate it.

[Fiasco]

Matter of fact there are crazy things written about marriage in the bible. Like suggestion if a man dies his wife must conceive a child with his brother.

Please cite this.

[DirtySanchez]

Please cite this.

Will do hold up...got a long list.

[Freedom Kid7]

It's not that simple. The view is a form of prejudge and bigotry and it needs to be dealt with. We all should not tolerate it.
I stand by my point. I don't think it's fair to criticize an organization based on it's viewpoints. If you want to criticize an organization for it's corruption and quality, that's fair. Just because an organization believes in traditionalist marriage and you believe there should be more than that does not make them a terrible, evil organization of bigots. They have a different opinion than you. Personally, I don't give a shit about gay marriage. But an organizations personal beliefs should only affect their standing if it affects their company (say, if Orlando Magic didn;t let a gay guy work with them, than that's not fair)

[DirtySanchez]

Please cite this.

That was Mark 12:18-27....

The bible also is in favor of polygamy
It says marriage should only be between people of the same faith
Also says all marriages should be arranged
Etc

So again....is the bible right and do these so called GOP Christains believe in this? I don't think so. They are just homophobes and ignorant.

[Freedom Kid7]

That was Mark 12:18-27....

The bible also is in favor of polygamy
It says marriage should only be between people of the same faith
Also says all marriages should be arranged
Etc

So again....is the bible right and do these so called GOP Christains believe in this? I don't think so. They are just homophobes and ignorant.
Now you're just stereotyping, which is what the evil GOP does according to you.

[DirtySanchez]

I stand by my point. I don't think it's fair to criticize an organization based on it's viewpoints. If you want to criticize an organization for it's corruption and quality, that's fair. Just because an organization believes in traditionalist marriage and you believe there should be more than that does not make them a terrible, evil organization of bigots. They have a different opinion than you. Personally, I don't give a shit about gay marriage. But an organizations personal beliefs should only affect their standing if it affects their company (say, if Orlando Magic didn;t let a gay guy work with them, than that's not fair)

Traditional according to who? Who set that standard?
Bro...this promotes hate of a certain group of people by denying them basic rights.

I have no problem I'd somebody has a point of view on taxing the the rich...drilling off shore...but when it comes down to basic human rights they deserved to be called out for that. The Nazis had different views as well u know.

[DirtySanchez]

Now you're just stereotyping, which is what the evil GOP does according to you.
Stereotyping??? Follow the money and tell me if that's just stereotyping. Right wing GOP Christains. The Tea Party...it is on their agenda.

[Freedom Kid7]

Traditional according to who? Who set that standard?
Believe it or not, marriage is a religious ceremony.

Bro...this promotes hate of a certain group of people by denying them basic rights.
I won't argue with this. I get that. I personally think there should be a legal ceremony that allows a gay couple to be married without calling it marriage (yes, I believe marriage is between a man and a woman).

I have no problem I'd somebody has a point of view on taxing the the rich...drilling off shore...but when it comes down to basic human rights they deserved to be called out for that.
Understandable and fair.

The Nazis had different views as well u know.
The Nazi party became a huge part of the German government. I believe in a small government with little involvement. If the Nazis weren't oppressing fools things would have been way different. It's not fair at all to compare them to a sports team and a restaraunt, both which leave a minimal impact on national government