Gay Marriage |
Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.
Gay Marriage |
Nov 30 2009, 06:53 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 164 Joined: Dec 2006 Member No: 484,926 |
Should the legalization of gay marriage be determined by public referendum?
Please Note: This topic isnt about whether or not gay marriage is good or bad, or if it should be legalized. The topic is about the method of deciding if it should be legal. |
|
|
Nov 30 2009, 06:59 PM
Post
#2
|
|
poison Group: Official Member Posts: 4,806 Joined: Mar 2008 Member No: 629,020 |
I think gay marriage should be legal.
|
|
|
Nov 30 2009, 07:15 PM
Post
#3
|
|
I'm Jc Group: Mentor Posts: 13,619 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 437,556 |
I think gay marriage should be legal. that's not the topic. dude even stated that wasn't the topic and you still answered like that, what the f*ck. Don't we already have a topic on this somewhere? Should the legalization of gay marriage be determined by public referendum? Should the legalization of gay marriage be determined by public referendum? Should the legalization of gay marriage be determined by public referendum? and my opinion, i think, is no, it shouldn't be. this is an issue of equality and civil rights. that's like saying the public should vote on whether or not blacks should be treated equal. it shouldn't be up to the public to decide the fate of a minority. although like the other debates, this is going to come down to whether homosexuality is a choice. |
|
|
Nov 30 2009, 07:17 PM
Post
#4
|
|
poison Group: Official Member Posts: 4,806 Joined: Mar 2008 Member No: 629,020 |
|
|
|
Nov 30 2009, 07:18 PM
Post
#5
|
|
I'm Jc Group: Mentor Posts: 13,619 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 437,556 |
wrong...or not at all
i'm not acting out |
|
|
Nov 30 2009, 07:22 PM
Post
#6
|
|
Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,019 Joined: May 2008 Member No: 653,768 |
wrong...or not at all i'm not acting out don't blame her shanaynay's pubes were in the way Also, I think no. I pretty much agree with what you said JC. This isn't up to an opinionated society to decide. Then again, you could say the same thing about the top politicians. We should be able to get a group of politicians who let people live their lives the way they want to, with a few restrictions and interjections of course (necessary laws, infrastructure, taxation, etc). |
|
|
Nov 30 2009, 11:47 PM
Post
#7
|
|
i like boobies, yes I do. I like boobies - how 'bout you? Group: Member Posts: 620 Joined: Jun 2008 Member No: 662,457 |
K so i read it wrong. No need to act out like that. No worries mate, it's not you; he's a bitch to everybody.That said...I agree with this: QUOTE and my opinion, i think, is no, it shouldn't be. this is an issue of equality and civil rights. that's like saying the public should vote on whether or not blacks should be treated equal. it shouldn't be up to the public to decide the fate of a minority.
|
|
|
Nov 30 2009, 11:51 PM
Post
#8
|
|
I'm Jc Group: Mentor Posts: 13,619 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 437,556 |
i hate to break it you, but you're just part of the exception.
|
|
|
Dec 18 2009, 01:35 PM
Post
#9
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 56 Joined: Nov 2009 Member No: 753,213 |
omg i wish it was really illegal cuz seriously this gay thing is bothering me.
|
|
|
Dec 18 2009, 10:44 PM
Post
#10
|
|
Senior Member Group: Official Member Posts: 1,938 Joined: Jul 2008 Member No: 667,832 |
Yes and No
Everyone has their own opinion This method of deciding sounds good, but if you look at the cons of it, the people saying No are basically trying to boss around someone's love life and who they choose to love If that makes sense Like 1 no is basically someones idea and THEIR opinion keep two people you truly love each other from being together legally idk i'm trying to keep on topic |
|
|
Dec 20 2009, 07:05 PM
Post
#11
|
|
Senior Member Group: Official Member Posts: 706 Joined: Sep 2009 Member No: 745,302 |
Yes and No Everyone has their own opinion This method of deciding sounds good, but if you look at the cons of it, the people saying No are basically trying to boss around someone's love life and who they choose to love If that makes sense Like 1 no is basically someones idea and THEIR opinion keep two people you truly love each other from being together legally someone is hitting that reefer a little too much, sike method? what method? last sentence has like 3 sentences randomly inserted into eachother |
|
|
Dec 20 2009, 10:50 PM
Post
#12
|
|
isketchaholic Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 2,977 Joined: Apr 2007 Member No: 516,154 |
Since there isn't much value in determining anything as right or wrong, ethical or unethical simply because the majority dictates it as such, relying on the public to make these sorts of decisions doesn't make much sense. Unfortunately, we have yet to come up with a better way in trying to force our opinions on others.
Oh hey maybe we should just refrain from doing that all together!!! QUOTE This isn't up to an opinionated society to decide. Then again, you could say the same thing about the top politicians. We should be able to get a group of politicians who let people live their lives the way they want to, with a few restrictions and interjections of course (necessary laws, infrastructure, taxation, etc). Agreed. But who's to say where the line should be drawn when it comes to allowing people their personal freedoms if it "could potentially" impede the existence of an ideal society (as considered by some people)? or vice versa? |
|
|
Dec 21 2009, 12:08 AM
Post
#13
|
|
Fellatio. Group: Official Member Posts: 2,122 Joined: Mar 2007 Member No: 511,775 |
It should not.
cuz biiches b stoppid |
|
|
Dec 21 2009, 10:07 AM
Post
#14
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 1,237 Joined: May 2008 Member No: 648,123 |
It's a Catch-22 unless we go in the past. If the public stops deciding, we're left with those states that don't allow gay marriage still not allowing it. If they allowed it after the public stops deciding, that means either politicians changed the law (whom should have no say in the love affairs of others) or the public did it (whom also should have no say).
|
|
|
Dec 21 2009, 10:18 AM
Post
#15
|
|
I'm Jc Group: Mentor Posts: 13,619 Joined: Jul 2006 Member No: 437,556 |
It's a Catch-22 unless we go in the past. If the public stops deciding, we're left with those states that don't allow gay marriage still not allowing it. If they allowed it after the public stops deciding, that means either politicians changed the law (whom should have no say in the love affairs of others) or the public did it (whom also should have no say). maybe that's when you let the constitution decide |
|
|
Dec 21 2009, 11:46 AM
Post
#16
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 1,237 Joined: May 2008 Member No: 648,123 |
I'm saying that the laws are already in place to make it illegal, so to remove them without allowing the people to decide is a Catch-22.
|
|
|
Dec 21 2009, 12:25 PM
Post
#17
|
|
Senior Member Group: Administrator Posts: 2,648 Joined: Apr 2008 Member No: 639,265 |
I'm saying that the laws are already in place to make it illegal, so to remove them without allowing the people to decide is a Catch-22. JC's pointing out that if the laws are in violation of the Constitution, then they should be removed regardless of the political consequences. |
|
|
Dec 21 2009, 01:32 PM
Post
#18
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 1,237 Joined: May 2008 Member No: 648,123 |
Ah, okay. But therein lies the problem of the Constitution itself. It doesn't define marriage and there aren't any Amendments defining it (which is good), but it gives the power to Congress to make Amendments like that. So even if laws that forbid same-sex marriage were abolished to concede with the Constitution, Congress could reinstate those laws as Federal laws, still acting in accordance with the Constitution.
|
|
|
Jan 7 2010, 01:04 PM
Post
#19
|
|
Ms. Granger Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 735 Joined: Jul 2005 Member No: 165,238 |
we have a representative democracy for this very purpose (and i suppose it was more important when "education" wasn't readily available), but when the general public is not educated and does not have the intellectual capacity to correctly decide certain issues, our educated elected public officials must make that decision. civil rights is a matter for elected public officials. whether or not we have elected the correct officials is another issue, but it is up to them, not us.
|
|
|
Jan 7 2010, 07:06 PM
Post
#20
|
|
Senior Member Group: Official Member Posts: 1,938 Joined: Jul 2008 Member No: 667,832 |
someone is hitting that reefer a little too much, sike method? what method? last sentence has like 3 sentences randomly inserted into eachother I know im sorry, like i know i have a good point to this, i just honestly cant explain is clearly and exactly how i want it to be |
|
|
Jun 10 2010, 09:31 AM
Post
#21
|
|
Newbie Group: Member Posts: 5 Joined: Jun 2010 Member No: 758,166 |
iim a lesbians..and i think it should be legalized!
|
|
|
Jun 10 2010, 05:53 PM
Post
#22
|
|
kthxbai Group: Official Designer Posts: 2,832 Joined: Feb 2008 Member No: 621,203 |
QUOTE Should the legalization of gay marriage be determined by public referendum? no. QUOTE("lesbian") us L E S B I A N S RULE! FAIL. it's WE lesbians rule. |
|
|