InvisionFree - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums

Learn More · Register for Free
Welcome to Cyber Nations Forums. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Name:   Password:

THIS FORUM IS NOW A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE.
PLEASE GO TO http://forums.cybernations.net FOR THE CURRENT CYBER NATIONS FORUM.

Pages: (9) [1] 2 3 ... Last » ( Go to first unread post )

:. Question to liberals, Regarding gay marriage...yeah, yeah
Mely Ranen
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:16 PM


Intelligence Chief, Vast RightWing Conspiracy
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,607
Member No.: 4,968
Joined: 9-June 06



You ask conservatives "Who are you to define marriage?", yet most liberals are opposed to polygamy, marrying relatives, minors, or animals. I don't understand. Who are you to define marriage as between two consenting people?

Conservatives want to define marriage has been tradition for thousands of years and as the vast majority of Americans see it - between a man and a woman. Liberals want to extend marriage to any two consenting adults. Both groups want to define and limit marriage.

However, the common argument is "refusing to allow gays is discriminatory". I would like to hear from the liberals who are for gay marriage, but against people being allowed to marry animals, minors, relatives, or perhaps 30 other people. If you think just because Americans are discriminating because we follow the traditional marriage, then who are you to define marriage to EXCLUDE the marriage of relatives, minors, animals, or more than one other person?

The first things I'm going to hear are:

1. Animals can't consent
2. Minors can't consent

Well who says they can't? Aren't laws preventing a person from marrying a minor or animal that they love discriminatory? I mean come on, how does it affect your marriage? How does it affect you if I married 50 other people and we loved each other? And who are you to say that my animal can't consent?

This will get interesting


--------------------

QUOTE (High King Nick)
I will not be satisfied until NPO DoW's on NpO, NPO wins, and Admin declares war on NPO, and the NPO wins.
Top
timewarp
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:18 PM


‮(_).ti ekorb I
*

Group: Members
Posts: 455
Member No.: 13,060
Joined: 9-October 06



How about the government just gets the hell out of marriage all together. Remove all incentives for a legal marriage, and just leave it to the public. That would solve everything, wouldn't it?


--------------------
dry.gif wub.gif angry.gif happy.gif content.gif mad.gif demon.gif ouch.gif xptdr.gif blumen.gif clap.gif lol.gif nooooo.gif ehm.gif
Top
Z'ha'dum
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:19 PM


Major General
Group Icon

Group: NPO
Posts: 6,576
Member No.: 1,332
Joined: 23-March 06



We had this debate once before Mel; animals cannot consent because biology says their minds are not advanced enough to understand the concept, the same is true of children. I have no problem with polygamy.

The idea marriage has been the same for thousands and thousands of years is a lie. Even limiting our findings to Christian traditions, you find polygamy, marriage with children, bans on marriage between races, and so forth. Every time one of these things changed, so too did the definition of marriage.



--------------------
QUOTE (Lord Extelleron)
We did not "spy" on you. That is the usual propoganda by the NPO.  We planted a member in your organization to find out if anyone from the NPO was spying on us.
- Lord Extelleron/His Majesty proving "(he) didn't spy on us.
[IMG]http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/3257/bannerfinal2qf5.jpg[/IMG]
Top
Deniz Baykal
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:19 PM


Warrior against Tyranny! Warrior of Attaturk!
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4,120
Member No.: 22,276
Joined: 13-January 07



I don't care if you married 1000 people, but marrying an animal is clearly not the same, polygamy I do not care if you do it, Minors can easily be influenced and made to think that if they marry someone that it will be good... that would be why those are illegal... but as I said before I have no problem with Polygamy at all, I would have it legal to marry multiple wives/husbands/both. Of course I am not a Liberal so...


--------------------
Deniz Baykal, leader of the Republican People's Party, Turkiye.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Pe...ty_%28Turkey%29

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -6.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

[IMG]http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/8766/turkflagrn3.gif[/IMG]
Top
Mely Ranen
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:20 PM


Intelligence Chief, Vast RightWing Conspiracy
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,607
Member No.: 4,968
Joined: 9-June 06



QUOTE (timewarp @ Aug 31 2007, 08:18 PM)
How about the government just gets the hell out of marriage all together. Remove all incentives for a legal marriage, and just leave it to the public. That would solve everything, wouldn't it?

I completely agree, but that's not happening any time soon. Government will always insist that it has it's hand in marriage for the sake of equality.


--------------------

QUOTE (High King Nick)
I will not be satisfied until NPO DoW's on NpO, NPO wins, and Admin declares war on NPO, and the NPO wins.
Top
Rynka
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:20 PM


State of Love and Trust
*

Group: Members
Posts: 892
Member No.: 12,876
Joined: 5-October 06



An animal can't raise a human child. A gay/lesbian can.


--------------------
~Lord High Envoy of the Mushroom Kingdom~
"If she says we partied, Then I'm pretty sure we partied. I really don't remember. I remember we departed from our bodies." ~ The Hold Steady
BP Amoco is ruining Lake Michigan. They continue to deposit their waste in OUR Great Lakes! Don't go to BP Amoco, get your petroleum elsewhere!
Hey nananana, hey that's somethin'.
Top
Deniz Baykal
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:20 PM


Warrior against Tyranny! Warrior of Attaturk!
*

Group: Members
Posts: 4,120
Member No.: 22,276
Joined: 13-January 07



QUOTE (timewarp @ Aug 31 2007, 07:18 PM)
How about the government just gets the hell out of marriage all together. Remove all incentives for a legal marriage, and just leave it to the public. That would solve everything, wouldn't it?

Sounds like the Libertarian view. :J


--------------------
Deniz Baykal, leader of the Republican People's Party, Turkiye.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Pe...ty_%28Turkey%29

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -6.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23

[IMG]http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/8766/turkflagrn3.gif[/IMG]
Top
Esau of Isaac
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:21 PM


Breviloquent Spectacle
*

Group: Members
Posts: 10,499
Member No.: 5,252
Joined: 14-June 06



Mel, you were already defeated in this debate. Are you going to state pages of logical fallacies again?

An animal cannot understand marriage.


--------------------
The Dragon Reborn of GATO

Esau of Isaac vs. Deep Blue! A battle for the ages! Who'll win?

To know, is to know you know nothing; That is the meaning of true knowledge.

By three methods may we learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; And third by experience, which is the bitterest.

Want a good alliance? Try GATO, you'll be among the best.

Top
Joules
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:21 PM


IRON's Real Tiger Chick
Group Icon

Group: IRON
Posts: 938
Member No.: 5,324
Joined: 15-June 06



What a horrible assumption that only liberals support same-sex marriage rights.

Minors and animals are not afforded free will in our society. Adults are.

There is no good argument against polygamy.

This post has been edited by Joules on Aug 31 2007, 07:22 PM


--------------------
user posted image
"Live free or die. Death is not the worst of evils."
-General John Stark, 1809
Top
Opethian
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:21 PM


Founder of the Prism Protection Front
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5,433
Member No.: 4,578
Joined: 1-June 06



As a libertarian-leaning individual I would count myself as socially liberal. I have no issues with polygamy. Hell, I'd pay a lot of money to transport Rush Limbaugh to an alternate universe where polygamous gay marriage is legal just to see him finally keel over from the "big one".



--------------------
QUOTE (Deepthinker @ Aug 9 2007 @ 11:07 PM)
So I find the debate to be rather unlogical.

QUOTE (Branimir @ Apr 19 2007, 04:58 PM)
%@#* you all annoy me.
Call it what you wish if your to dumb to write Initiative.
Top
timewarp
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:23 PM


‮(_).ti ekorb I
*

Group: Members
Posts: 455
Member No.: 13,060
Joined: 9-October 06



QUOTE (Deniz Baykal @ Aug 31 2007, 09:20 PM)
Sounds like the Libertarian view. :J

Well, I am a libertarian, go figure, huh? :v:


--------------------
dry.gif wub.gif angry.gif happy.gif content.gif mad.gif demon.gif ouch.gif xptdr.gif blumen.gif clap.gif lol.gif nooooo.gif ehm.gif
Top
Mely Ranen
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:23 PM


Intelligence Chief, Vast RightWing Conspiracy
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,607
Member No.: 4,968
Joined: 9-June 06



QUOTE (Z'ha'dum @ Aug 31 2007, 08:19 PM)
We had this debate once before Mel; animals cannot consent because biology says their minds are not advanced enough to understand the concept, the same is true of children. I have no problem with polygamy.

The idea marriage has been the same for thousands and thousands of years is a lie. Even limiting our findings to Christian traditions, you find polygamy, marriage with children, bans on marriage between races, and so forth. Every time one of these things changed, so too did the definition of marriage.

First, there's no biological proof that someone can't communicate with their animal just like there's no biological proof someone is born homosexual. According to most liberal arguments, I'm surprised they don't have a more open mind for those people who believe with all their hearts they can communicate with their animals. Where's your open mind?

Second, if a child loves an adult man why shouldn't they be allowed to marry? They love each other and how does it affect your marriage? The law says it's illegal, but shouldn't the law therefore be changed to stop the discrimination? Just answer this: If the law can be changed to allow gays to marry, then why can't the law be changed to make the consenting age 16? Or 5?

Third, do you think relatives should be allowed to marry?


--------------------

QUOTE (High King Nick)
I will not be satisfied until NPO DoW's on NpO, NPO wins, and Admin declares war on NPO, and the NPO wins.
Top
Mely Ranen
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:24 PM


Intelligence Chief, Vast RightWing Conspiracy
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,607
Member No.: 4,968
Joined: 9-June 06



QUOTE (Esau of Isaac @ Aug 31 2007, 08:21 PM)

An animal cannot understand marriage.

Who are you to decide who can understand what is going inside an animal's head over someone else? Where's your open mind?


--------------------

QUOTE (High King Nick)
I will not be satisfied until NPO DoW's on NpO, NPO wins, and Admin declares war on NPO, and the NPO wins.
Top
The Dreamer
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:26 PM


Oneironaut
*

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Member No.: 38,070
Joined: 29-August 07



QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 07:24 PM)
QUOTE (Esau of Isaac @ Aug 31 2007, 08:21 PM)

An animal cannot understand marriage.

Who are you to decide who can understand what is going inside an animal's head over someone else? Where's your open mind?

Uh, yeah. Nice rhetoric, but not scientific.


--------------------
In somnis veritas
Top
indoslavokia
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:27 PM


ME Racing. Proud troll killer.
*

Group: Members
Posts: 94
Member No.: 34,135
Joined: 7-June 07



QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 07:16 PM)
You ask conservatives "Who are you to define marriage?", yet most liberals are opposed to polygamy, marrying relatives, minors, or animals. I don't understand. Who are you to define marriage as between two consenting people?

Conservatives want to define marriage has been tradition for thousands of years and as the vast majority of Americans see it - between a man and a woman. Liberals want to extend marriage to any two consenting adults. Both groups want to define and limit marriage.

However, the common argument is "refusing to allow gays is discriminatory". I would like to hear from the liberals who are for gay marriage, but against people being allowed to marry animals, minors, relatives, or perhaps 30 other people. If you think just because Americans are discriminating because we follow the traditional marriage, then who are you to define marriage to EXCLUDE the marriage of relatives, minors, animals, or more than one other person?

The first things I'm going to hear are:

1. Animals can't consent
2. Minors can't consent

Well who says they can't? Aren't laws preventing a person from marrying a minor or animal that they love discriminatory? I mean come on, how does it affect your marriage? How does it affect you if I married 50 other people and we loved each other? And who are you to say that my animal can't consent?

This will get interesting

True true, however, doesn't Islam allow you to have more then one wife XD


--------------------
Uhhhhh, no man!

(I slaughtered this name) WIll Farrel owns!

Anyone think they can prove evolution?

Here is a $250k reward to whoever can prove it. That is not a false site either.

StarCraft Abuser Until the Day I die!!!
Top
Opethian
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:27 PM


Founder of the Prism Protection Front
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5,433
Member No.: 4,578
Joined: 1-June 06



QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 09:16 PM)


1. Animals can't consent
2. Minors can't consent


You'll hear those things because they're true.


--------------------
QUOTE (Deepthinker @ Aug 9 2007 @ 11:07 PM)
So I find the debate to be rather unlogical.

QUOTE (Branimir @ Apr 19 2007, 04:58 PM)
%@#* you all annoy me.
Call it what you wish if your to dumb to write Initiative.
Top
Mely Ranen
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:27 PM


Intelligence Chief, Vast RightWing Conspiracy
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,607
Member No.: 4,968
Joined: 9-June 06



QUOTE (The Dreamer @ Aug 31 2007, 08:26 PM)
QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 07:24 PM)
QUOTE (Esau of Isaac @ Aug 31 2007, 08:21 PM)

An animal cannot understand marriage.

Who are you to decide who can understand what is going inside an animal's head over someone else? Where's your open mind?

Uh, yeah. Nice rhetoric, but not scientific.

So only scientific approved marriages should be lawful?


--------------------

QUOTE (High King Nick)
I will not be satisfied until NPO DoW's on NpO, NPO wins, and Admin declares war on NPO, and the NPO wins.
Top
Shinigami
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:28 PM


Advanced Member
*

Group: Members
Posts: 52
Member No.: 35,453
Joined: 25-June 07



Relatives shouldn't be allowed to marry because inbreeding causes deformed children. A normal person wouldn't have to even ask about marrying animals, and children can marry, with the consent of their parent/legal guardian


--------------------
WARN LVL 20% W00T
Top
The Dreamer
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:28 PM


Oneironaut
*

Group: Members
Posts: 171
Member No.: 38,070
Joined: 29-August 07



QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 07:27 PM)
QUOTE (The Dreamer @ Aug 31 2007, 08:26 PM)
QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 07:24 PM)
QUOTE (Esau of Isaac @ Aug 31 2007, 08:21 PM)

An animal cannot understand marriage.

Who are you to decide who can understand what is going inside an animal's head over someone else? Where's your open mind?

Uh, yeah. Nice rhetoric, but not scientific.

So only scientific approved marriages should be lawful?

Is that what I said?


--------------------
In somnis veritas
Top
Mely Ranen
Posted: Aug 31 2007, 07:29 PM


Intelligence Chief, Vast RightWing Conspiracy
*

Group: Members
Posts: 1,607
Member No.: 4,968
Joined: 9-June 06



QUOTE (The Dreamer @ Aug 31 2007, 08:28 PM)
QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 07:27 PM)
QUOTE (The Dreamer @ Aug 31 2007, 08:26 PM)
QUOTE (Mely Ranen @ Aug 31 2007, 07:24 PM)
QUOTE (Esau of Isaac @ Aug 31 2007, 08:21 PM)

An animal cannot understand marriage.

Who are you to decide who can understand what is going inside an animal's head over someone else? Where's your open mind?

Uh, yeah. Nice rhetoric, but not scientific.

So only scientific approved marriages should be lawful?

Is that what I said?

Well scientifically, a 17 1/2 year old can consent to marriage knowing full well what it entails. Only the law is stopping him/her.


--------------------

QUOTE (High King Nick)
I will not be satisfied until NPO DoW's on NpO, NPO wins, and Admin declares war on NPO, and the NPO wins.
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you

Topic OptionsPages: (9) [1] 2 3 ... Last »



Hosted for free by InvisionFree* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.0698 seconds | Archive