60 Percent Of Americans Soon Will Live In States With Marriage Equality

[Redfish]

civil rights are ESTABLISHED BY THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE-------A MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE.

Only the Bill of Rights weren't.

You use the same arguments, you ignore the reality in all of them, even when you're been told how bad they are and how illogical they are.

yes it was, the bill of rights was made law by a majority vote. Every one of our laws was passed by a majority vote. it you don't understand that, you have no place in this debate.

 

[Redfish]

The gay agenda is not about equality or rights. It is a move to force societal acceptance, by government edict, of a lifestyle that a majority of human beings find abnormal and aberant.

Most people recognize that gays don't have a choice in their sexual preferences, but most people also recognize that homosexuality is not a normal human condition.

The gay agenda wants government to mandate that everyone change their beliefs on the normality or homosexuality. The gay marriage debate is a smoke screen to cover the true agenda.

seawytch knows that, even thought she will not openly admit it.

So was the Civil Rights movement right? Forcing black people on white people and all that. Same arguments, different debate, different era, NOTHING CHANGES.

not the same at all. race and sexual preference are not analogous.

 

[Redfish]

why does it matter when it was? The people have spoken in many states.

Sure, if they all spoke in 1776 and you're using this as contemporary it would make a massive difference.

But seeing how you only like those things that support your argument to be considered, I'll have no doubt you'll set a timeline for when things are valid and when they're not to make it look like the majority of people support it.

You've been shown that ALL referenda from 2013 onwards and quite a few polls have shown people are in favor of gay marriage and equality and the bill of rights and the declaration of independence.

If a majority of the american society votes to allow gay marriage, I will accept that as the will of the people. If they vote against it will you accept the will of the people?

 

[Silhouette]

If a majority of the american society votes to allow gay marriage, I will accept that as the will of the people. If they vote against it will you accept the will of the people?

I'll answer for him/her....."no". And this is why they fight so hard...because they know a majority of the American people do not support gay marriage. It is repugnant to the majority. And it is behavioral.

BTW, few realize this fact: Right now in this "legal limbo", any sexual behavior may marry. Dead laws do not prevent any applicant like polygamists or incest pairings from applying and receiving marriage licenses in affected states. "Marriage equality is marriage equality and none shall be denied".

 

[Redfish]

If a majority of the american society votes to allow gay marriage, I will accept that as the will of the people. If they vote against it will you accept the will of the people?

I'll answer for him/her....."no". And this is why they fight so hard...because they know a majority of the American people do not support gay marriage. It is repugnant to the majority. And it is behavioral.

BTW, few realize this fact: Right now in this "legal limbo", any sexual behavior may marry. Dead laws do not prevent any applicant like polygamists or incest pairings from applying and receiving marriage licenses in affected states. "Marriage equality is marriage equality and none shall be denied".

exactly, nice summary

 

[frigidweirdo]

yes it was, the bill of rights was made law by a majority vote. Every one of our laws was passed by a majority vote. it you don't understand that, you have no place in this debate.

Again, and do we have to do this every time? You're claiming on the one hand majority of the people, when people point out things that aren't majority of the people you turn to majority vote, you're always doing this and it's ridiculous.

 

[Skylar]

I'll answer for him/her....."no". And this is why they fight so hard...because they know a majority of the American people do not support gay marriage. It is repugnant to the majority. And it is behavioral.

BTW, few realize this fact: Right now in this "legal limbo", any sexual behavior may marry. Dead laws do not prevent any applicant like polygamists or incest pairings from applying and receiving marriage licenses in affected states. "Marriage equality is marriage equality and none shall be denied".

The majority of people do support gay marriage. The last 3 referendums on gay marriage were to pass it. ANd virtually every poll to look at the topic has come to the same conclusion: that gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry. Gallup, Pew, PPP, Rasmussen, AP, Reuters, and others all show support for gay marriage outpacing opposition by a margin of about 12 to 19 points.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If a majority of the american society votes to allow gay marriage, I will accept that as the will of the people. If they vote against it will you accept the will of the people?

Of course you will, you won't have a choice.

However you know that it will probably be put in force by judges in certain cases, and you'll complain FOREVER that it was never put in place by the majority.

then you claim the BoRs was put in place by a majority. Well, the BoR and 14A, passed by a majority as all laws are, according to you, say that gay marriage should be legal.

You've dug a hole, you'll do what you always do and look for some stupid childish way out of this. Come on, squirm a a bit, wriggle around in your hole a bit and see what rubbish you can come up with this time to avoid saying you don't like gay marriage.

 

[frigidweirdo]

If a majority of the american society votes to allow gay marriage, I will accept that as the will of the people. If they vote against it will you accept the will of the people?

I'll answer for him/her....."no". And this is why they fight so hard...because they know a majority of the American people do not support gay marriage. It is repugnant to the majority. And it is behavioral.

BTW, few realize this fact: Right now in this "legal limbo", any sexual behavior may marry. Dead laws do not prevent any applicant like polygamists or incest pairings from applying and receiving marriage licenses in affected states. "Marriage equality is marriage equality and none shall be denied".

exactly, nice summary

A nice summary? Why should I go against the US Constitution?

The question is, will you be in favor of the US Constitution or not? At the moment you're clearly against the US Constitution.

 

[Redfish]

If a majority of the american society votes to allow gay marriage, I will accept that as the will of the people. If they vote against it will you accept the will of the people?

I'll answer for him/her....."no". And this is why they fight so hard...because they know a majority of the American people do not support gay marriage. It is repugnant to the majority. And it is behavioral.

BTW, few realize this fact: Right now in this "legal limbo", any sexual behavior may marry. Dead laws do not prevent any applicant like polygamists or incest pairings from applying and receiving marriage licenses in affected states. "Marriage equality is marriage equality and none shall be denied".

exactly, nice summary

A nice summary? Why should I go against the US Constitution?

The question is, will you be in favor of the US Constitution or not? At the moment you're clearly against the US Constitution.

Sorry, dude. But its your interpretation of the constitution that I take issue with, the document is clear. Homosexuality is mentioned nowhere in the constitution. For that matter, neither is marriage of any kind.

But lets try again. I said that if a majority of americans vote to allow gay marriage, I will abide by that vote. If a majority vote against it, will you abide by that vote? Yes or No.

 

[Redfish]

If a majority of the american society votes to allow gay marriage, I will accept that as the will of the people. If they vote against it will you accept the will of the people?

Of course you will, you won't have a choice.

However you know that it will probably be put in force by judges in certain cases, and you'll complain FOREVER that it was never put in place by the majority.

then you claim the BoRs was put in place by a majority. Well, the BoR and 14A, passed by a majority as all laws are, according to you, say that gay marriage should be legal.

You've dug a hole, you'll do what you always do and look for some stupid childish way out of this. Come on, squirm a a bit, wriggle around in your hole a bit and see what rubbish you can come up with this time to avoid saying you don't like gay marriage.

Nope, you dug the hole and are scrambling to dig your way out of it.

I have made no secret of the fact that I personally believe that gay marriage is wrong and the homosexuality is a human abnormality. But, unlike you, I am willing to abide by the will of the people----------if and when all of the people are allowed to cast their votes.

 

[Redfish]

I'll answer for him/her....."no". And this is why they fight so hard...because they know a majority of the American people do not support gay marriage. It is repugnant to the majority. And it is behavioral.

BTW, few realize this fact: Right now in this "legal limbo", any sexual behavior may marry. Dead laws do not prevent any applicant like polygamists or incest pairings from applying and receiving marriage licenses in affected states. "Marriage equality is marriage equality and none shall be denied".

The majority of people do support gay marriage. The last 3 referendums on gay marriage were to pass it. ANd virtually every poll to look at the topic has come to the same conclusion: that gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry. Gallup, Pew, PPP, Rasmussen, AP, Reuters, and others all show support for gay marriage outpacing opposition by a margin of about 12 to 19 points.

then lets put it to a referendum in every state and settle it once and for all. OK?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Sorry, dude. But its your interpretation of the constitution that I take issue with, the document is clear. Homosexuality is mentioned nowhere in the constitution. For that matter, neither is marriage of any kind.

But lets try again. I said that if a majority of americans vote to allow gay marriage, I will abide by that vote. If a majority vote against it, will you abide by that vote? Yes or No.

Oh come on, this isn't the US Constitution for primary school kids. Either understand how it works, or go back to school.

So, why is it that it has to be a majority of Americans voting for gay marriage, but only a majority of people voting for the Bill of Rights?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Nope, you dug the hole and are scrambling to dig your way out of it.

I have made no secret of the fact that I personally believe that gay marriage is wrong and the homosexuality is a human abnormality. But, unlike you, I am willing to abide by the will of the people----------if and when all of the people are allowed to cast their votes.

Balls are you. Every time you speak you change the goalposts to suit your own needs. You said, as I quote below, that you'd accept it if a majority of Americans were in favor and you dropped that pretty smart. You don't care whether a majority are in favor, you will be against it, just keep pretending you'd be in favor if something that won't happen happens.

Why aren't you in favor of the Bill of Rights? Because it wasn't passed by a majority of Americans?

 

[Redfish]

Sorry, dude. But its your interpretation of the constitution that I take issue with, the document is clear. Homosexuality is mentioned nowhere in the constitution. For that matter, neither is marriage of any kind.

But lets try again. I said that if a majority of americans vote to allow gay marriage, I will abide by that vote. If a majority vote against it, will you abide by that vote? Yes or No.

Oh come on, this isn't the US Constitution for primary school kids. Either understand how it works, or go back to school.

So, why is it that it has to be a majority of Americans voting for gay marriage, but only a majority of people voting for the Bill of Rights?

A majority of both houses of congress could probably do it with a bill. Thats how we got the terrible ACA law.

As to the constitution, I understand it better than you or obozo can ever hope to.

Look, I am sick of the gay agenda and its bullshit. Put the issue to bed one way or the other. If you gays win then you can add a sexual preference course to the common core curriculum. Tell 3rd graders that they can choose to be straight or gay as soon as they reach puberty. Tell the multi partner marriage advocates to line up for marriage licenses. Forget morallity and just say anything goes as long as it feels good at the time.

and while you are at it, lets do away with all drug laws and put coke and crack on the shelves of every Walgreens and CVS. After all, why discriminate against those with a drug addiction?

A society with no morals will die, maybe that would be the best thing for this one. Scrap it and start over.

 

[Katzndogz]

Sorry, dude. But its your interpretation of the constitution that I take issue with, the document is clear. Homosexuality is mentioned nowhere in the constitution. For that matter, neither is marriage of any kind.

But lets try again. I said that if a majority of americans vote to allow gay marriage, I will abide by that vote. If a majority vote against it, will you abide by that vote? Yes or No.

Oh come on, this isn't the US Constitution for primary school kids. Either understand how it works, or go back to school.

So, why is it that it has to be a majority of Americans voting for gay marriage, but only a majority of people voting for the Bill of Rights?

A majority of both houses of congress could probably do it with a bill. Thats how we got the terrible ACA law.

As to the constitution, I understand it better than you or obozo can ever hope to.

Look, I am sick of the gay agenda and its bullshit. Put the issue to bed one way or the other. If you gays win then you can add a sexual preference course to the common core curriculum. Tell 3rd graders that they can choose to be straight or gay as soon as they reach puberty. Tell the multi partner marriage advocates to line up for marriage licenses. Forget morallity and just say anything goes as long as it feels good at the time.

and while you are at it, lets do away with all drug laws and put coke and crack on the shelves of every Walgreens and CVS. After all, why discriminate against those with a drug addiction?

A society with no morals will die, maybe that would be the best thing for this one. Scrap it and start over.

A society with no morals SHOULD die. It's the best thing for all.

 

[Redfish]

Nope, you dug the hole and are scrambling to dig your way out of it.

I have made no secret of the fact that I personally believe that gay marriage is wrong and the homosexuality is a human abnormality. But, unlike you, I am willing to abide by the will of the people----------if and when all of the people are allowed to cast their votes.

Balls are you. Every time you speak you change the goalposts to suit your own needs. You said, as I quote below, that you'd accept it if a majority of Americans were in favor and you dropped that pretty smart. You don't care whether a majority are in favor, you will be against it, just keep pretending you'd be in favor if something that won't happen happens.

Why aren't you in favor of the Bill of Rights? Because it wasn't passed by a majority of Americans?

Yes, I do have balls, too bad about yours.

I said I would abide by the will of the majority, not that I would agree with it.

or are you saying that the government should mandate what we are allowed to think?

 

[Redfish]

Nope, you dug the hole and are scrambling to dig your way out of it.

I have made no secret of the fact that I personally believe that gay marriage is wrong and the homosexuality is a human abnormality. But, unlike you, I am willing to abide by the will of the people----------if and when all of the people are allowed to cast their votes.

Balls are you. Every time you speak you change the goalposts to suit your own needs. You said, as I quote below, that you'd accept it if a majority of Americans were in favor and you dropped that pretty smart. You don't care whether a majority are in favor, you will be against it, just keep pretending you'd be in favor if something that won't happen happens.

Why aren't you in favor of the Bill of Rights? Because it wasn't passed by a majority of Americans?

I am in favor of the bill or rights, please quote the language where gay marriage is mentioned.

 

[frigidweirdo]

As to the constitution, I understand it better than you or obozo can ever hope to.

You know what they say? Actions speak louder than words, and your actions suggest you haven't got a clue.

Anyone who makes that claim that because something isn't explicitly mentioned in the US Constitution is therefore not protected by the Constitution doesn't know anything about the US Constitution or how it works. I'm sorry if you disagree, but you can accept fundamentals or not, your choice.

Let's see. Nothing in the Constitution says you are innocent until proven guilty. It comes from English Common Law which is assumed to exist still in US Law.

There's nothing about a fair trial.

No right to vote.

No right to travel.

No judicial review by the federal courts.

No right to procreate.

No right to privacy.

No separation of church and state.

That s Not in the Constitution Rights Not Spelled Out

"The people who sincerely believe that constitutional rights are limited solely to those spelled out in the text of the Constitution must be able to defend not just the absence of a right to privacy, but also the absence of constitutional rights to travel, a fair trial, marriage, procreation, voting, and more — not every right which people take for granted has been discussed here. I don’t think it can be done."

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Again, similar stuff.

Clearly, there's a lot of stuff that is protected by the constitution that isn't specified by the Constitution.

What you fail to see is what is written in the constitution. 14th Amendment

"nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

No state can deprive someone of liberty.

What is Liberty?

liberty definition of liberty in Oxford dictionary American English US

"The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views:"

Definition of ldquo liberty rdquo Collins English Dictionary

"the power of choosing, thinking, and acting for oneself; freedom from control or restriction"

So, surely the power of choosing for yourself without having the govt choose for you is protected by the Constitution. States cannot prevent you from choosing what you want to do. Clearly those who deny gay marriage are denying consenting adults the right to marry the person of their choice (and no, this doesn't mean they can marry someone who doesn't want to marry them, because this would be taking away their right and no right is higher than rights themselves).

Stopping people from marrying who they choose is stopping people doing what they want when it doesn't harm others, this is an oppressive restriction imposed by authority on their way of life.

So I'm saying firstly stopping gay marriage deprives people of liberty and is therefore unconstitutional to deny them this.

Also it denies then equal protection of the law. There is one law for straight people and something different for gay people. Clearly not equal to anyone other than those who are looking for a way to deny people equal protection of the laws, (like you with the "they can marry someone of the opposite sex so it's fair", clearly not as liberty is about the ability to make your own choices free from govt control as long as it doesn't hurt anyone (At which point you'll make the daft statement that it harms people, when clearly it doesn't harm anyone)).

Look, I am sick of the gay agenda and its bullshit. Put the issue to bed one way or the other. If you gays win then you can add a sexual preference course to the common core curriculum. Tell 3rd graders that they can choose to be straight or gay as soon as they reach puberty. Tell the multi partner marriage advocates to line up for marriage licenses. Forget morallity and just say anything goes as long as it feels good at the time.

and while you are at it, lets do away with all drug laws and put coke and crack on the shelves of every Walgreens and CVS. After all, why discriminate against those with a drug addiction?

A society with no morals will die, maybe that would be the best thing for this one. Scrap it and start over.

It was put to bed in the 14th Amendment. GET OVER IT.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Sorry, dude. But its your interpretation of the constitution that I take issue with, the document is clear. Homosexuality is mentioned nowhere in the constitution. For that matter, neither is marriage of any kind.

But lets try again. I said that if a majority of americans vote to allow gay marriage, I will abide by that vote. If a majority vote against it, will you abide by that vote? Yes or No.

Oh come on, this isn't the US Constitution for primary school kids. Either understand how it works, or go back to school.

So, why is it that it has to be a majority of Americans voting for gay marriage, but only a majority of people voting for the Bill of Rights?

A majority of both houses of congress could probably do it with a bill. Thats how we got the terrible ACA law.

As to the constitution, I understand it better than you or obozo can ever hope to.

Look, I am sick of the gay agenda and its bullshit. Put the issue to bed one way or the other. If you gays win then you can add a sexual preference course to the common core curriculum. Tell 3rd graders that they can choose to be straight or gay as soon as they reach puberty. Tell the multi partner marriage advocates to line up for marriage licenses. Forget morallity and just say anything goes as long as it feels good at the time.

and while you are at it, lets do away with all drug laws and put coke and crack on the shelves of every Walgreens and CVS. After all, why discriminate against those with a drug addiction?

A society with no morals will die, maybe that would be the best thing for this one. Scrap it and start over.

A society with no morals SHOULD die. It's the best thing for all.

A society with no rights should also die.