How big of an issue is same sex marriage to you?

By the same logic, debating anything on an political forum should be considered wasted time, and you just wasted time with this op.

And yeah, I suppose I could be doing better things with my time than debating gay marriage, or anything here - I could be learning French on Rosetta Stone. But w/e.

 

That was my point. He clearly cannot be objective.

 

Nope, what you wear and how you behave carry with it no expectations that other people have to except either your style of dress or your behavior as equal to their own.

 

It always works..

 

Oh ok.

 

I'm clueless as to why gay marriages are banned to begin with. Wouldn't it be good to allow the happy marriages too?

On a serious note, I'm totally unaffected and I don't care wheter it's legal or not. Totally apathetic.

 

By the time I became an adult I had ceased to concern myself with what other consenting adults did with their private bits.

 

perhaps I should have said it doesn't directly affect me

 

Then you shouldn't worry about wether or not gay marriage is legalized across the US. . .since discrimination against anyone due to sexual orientation is ALREADY not legally allowed!

Do you realize that you are a few years too late for your own whining and pretending that you are being victimized by gay people because they are asking for EQUAL RIGHTS under the law. . .which is a RIGHT under our Constitution?

 

My only interest in the debate is legal parity. It really comes down to the role of government in a nation of free men. We should not allow our government to legislate or adjudicate based on popular opinion or notions of propriety. That is nothing but mob rule. My position is now, has always been, and will always be, the defense of liberty and the preservation of the rights of my fellow citizens--whether I like them or not.

 

You are the one whining. There is no right to marry under the constitution and the 14th Amendment does not mention gay people last time I read it....here let me check again....yep no gays in the Constitution. Just because some places have added gays to their non-discrimination policies, does not mean that everyone has.

 

It's not really an issue, the culture has moved, and same sex marriage in 50 states is a foregone conclusion.
The question is "how long is it acceptable to deny people their rights?"

Whatever it takes to get same sex marriage in a state, should be the waiting period for a firearm permit in that state.....because they've already kind of agreed that waiting that long to exercise a right is OK....

 

Who cares for the constitution? The thing most constitutions have with each other is that they are filled with outdated crap.

 

I am all for throwing it out and starting over. Egypt has a new one they are working on. Maybe we can cut and paste it from their website.

 

Ah yes, that's the spirit! The "let's get rid of all this old oppressive bull(*)(*)(*)(*), and start anew!" kind of spirit. Interesting fact: that's the same spirit they had during the french and russian revolution.

 

Ok. But Egypt's? The country with legal necrophilia?

 

It's the spirit they had during the American Revolution, cough cough French proxy war. They made a new constitution from scratch. Obviously today it's outdated.

 

Indeed, but not to the same extent. They didn't, unlike the russians and french, try to get rid of religion and "other old opressive stuff".

Are you familiar with rule of law? The thing is that your approach of just redoing everything from scratch whenever we're moody tends to generate results as those from the two revolutions above. The constitution might be outdated, so be it. But it's to be changed gradually. no revolutions here, no, no.

 

Yes, I admit my approach is abandoning everything. I'm an Anarchist. And don't use your scare quotes on me, you are the one who said that phrase in the first place.

 

It really doesn't matter to me. I think it's one of the least important issues of our time and that both sides wasted insane amounts of time and energy fixating on it. State-sanctioned marriages, homosexual or heterosexual, are a farcical institution with no moral importance or legitimacy and should be abolished altogether, not expanded to more and more arbitrary classes.

 

But they're not scaring you are they? That was kind of my point. very well, let's get back to marriage..

 

Revolutions scare me, I'm not insane. But I prefer revolution to the indefinite continuation of capitalism. And honestly, if you look at the history of revolutions there were many which were more peaceful than we picture when imagining the word. But yeah, back to marriage.

 

It's an issue of equality before the law.

It's a pretty big (*)(*)(*)(*)ing deal.

 

If two people of the same sex wish to engage in a physical and/or emotional relationship I am completely indifferent. My issue is the state being involved in marriages of any kind

 

If you think the Constituition hasto specifically reference "gay" in order for the gays to have rights then you don't have a clue about how the Constitution works and why we even have one...