Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Forums _ Debate _ Gay Marriage
Posted by: BamBamBoogie Nov 30 2009, 06:53 PM
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.
Posted by: Tomates Nov 30 2009, 06:59 PM
I think gay marriage should be legal.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Nov 30 2009, 07:15 PM
that's not the topic. dude even stated that wasn't the topic and you still answered like that, what the f*ck.
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.
Posted by: Tomates Nov 30 2009, 07:17 PM
K so i read it wrong. No need to act out like that.
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Nov 30 2009, 07:18 PM
wrong...or not at all
i'm not acting out
Posted by: serotonin Nov 30 2009, 07:22 PM
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).
Posted by: HeartOfPandora Nov 30 2009, 11:47 PM
That said...I agree with this:
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Nov 30 2009, 11:51 PM
i hate to break it you, but you're just part of the exception.
Posted by: StrideEmpty Dec 18 2009, 01:35 PM
omg i wish it was really illegal cuz seriously this gay thing is bothering me.
Posted by: Uso Dec 18 2009, 10:44 PM
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
Posted by: buckwild-kingdom Dec 20 2009, 07:05 PM
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
Posted by: doiink Dec 20 2009, 10:50 PM
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!!!
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?
Posted by: Amaranthus Dec 21 2009, 12:08 AM
It should not.
cuz biiches b stoppid
Posted by: fixtatik Dec 21 2009, 10:07 AM
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).
Posted by: brooklyneast05 Dec 21 2009, 10:18 AM
maybe that's when you let the constitution decide
Posted by: fixtatik Dec 21 2009, 11:46 AM
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.
Posted by: mipadi Dec 21 2009, 12:25 PM
JC's pointing out that if the laws are in violation of the Constitution, then they should be removed regardless of the political consequences.
Posted by: fixtatik Dec 21 2009, 01:32 PM
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.
Posted by: ersatz Jan 7 2010, 01:04 PM
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.
Posted by: Uso Jan 7 2010, 07:06 PM
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
Posted by: Columbiancoke Jun 10 2010, 09:31 AM
iim a lesbians..and i think it should be legalized!
Posted by: emberfly Jun 10 2010, 05:53 PM
no.
FAIL. it's WE lesbians rule.