Growing support for same sex marriages from all religions. (bar evangelicals)

[ding]

People give the politically correct answers to pollsters a lot.

Agreed. They are afraid to answer truthfully because society has shamed them for their beliefs.

 

[rightwinger]

Do you really have your head so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine as to not know that gay folks have been, and are in some ways still discriminated against? Or, are you just lying?

I don't believe they have. If you want an example of that you would have to go back to after the civil war when democrats refused to acknowledge that blacks were citizens after the 13th amendment and refused the right to marry. That was discrimination.

What you are describing isn't discrimination because the law was applied equally to all the exact same way.

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

The regulation of LGBT employment discrimination in the United States varies by jurisdiction. Many, but far from all, states and localities prohibit bias in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation, as well as harassment on the basis of one's sexual orientation. Fewer extend those protections to cover sexual identity.
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States - Wikiped…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimina…

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

Sure they can. Just like everyone else. The restriction to marry is the same for all. One man one woman. You can be gay and get married the same as everyone else. That was not true for blacks after the civil war.

That argument was laughed at by the courts

 

[rightwinger]

People give the politically correct answers to pollsters a lot.

Agreed. They are afraid to answer truthfully because society has shamed them for their beliefs.

Can you provide any reason gays should not be allowed to marry?

 

[mdk]

Gay marriage is here to stay. Get over it. Or don't. Either way, gays are going to continue to marry despite all the dramatic predictions and foot-stomping from sanctimonious busybodies.

 

[rightwinger]

Gay marriage is here to stay. Get over it. Or don't. Either way, gays are going to continue to marry despite all the dramatic predictions and foot-stomping from sanctimonious busybodies.

I have met several gay couples
They seem very happy

No big deal

 

[mdk]

Gay marriage is here to stay. Get over it. Or don't. Either way, gays are going to continue to marry despite all the dramatic predictions and foot-stomping from sanctimonious busybodies.

I have met several gay couples
They seem very happy

No big deal

I met my husband just a couple days after my 21st birthday. We’ve been together ever since, that was 17 years ago. Apparently our miraculous love and marriage is the cause of all sorts of couch fainting. Save the diehards, most people don’t give a shit anymore about this issue.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Do you really have your head so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine as to not know that gay folks have been, and are in some ways still discriminated against? Or, are you just lying?

I don't believe they have. If you want an example of that you would have to go back to after the civil war when democrats refused to acknowledge that blacks were citizens after the 13th amendment and refused the right to marry. That was discrimination.

What you are describing isn't discrimination because the law was applied equally to all the exact same way.

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

The regulation of LGBT employment discrimination in the United States varies by jurisdiction. Many, but far from all, states and localities prohibit bias in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation, as well as harassment on the basis of one's sexual orientation. Fewer extend those protections to cover sexual identity.
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States - Wikiped…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimina…

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

Sure they can. Just like everyone else. The restriction to marry is the same for all. One man one woman. You can be gay and get married the same as everyone else. That was not true for blacks after the civil war.

After Obergefell same-sex couples could marry – prior to the ruling, not.

Laws seeking to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law were invalidated because they failed to provide objective, documented evidence in support of why such prohibitions were valid – the only motive for such laws and measures was an unwarranted animus toward gay Americans, a clear violation of the 14th Amendment.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I don't believe they have. If you want an example of that you would have to go back to after the civil war when democrats refused to acknowledge that blacks were citizens after the 13th amendment and refused the right to marry. That was discrimination.

What you are describing isn't discrimination because the law was applied equally to all the exact same way.

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

The regulation of LGBT employment discrimination in the United States varies by jurisdiction. Many, but far from all, states and localities prohibit bias in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation, as well as harassment on the basis of one's sexual orientation. Fewer extend those protections to cover sexual identity.
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States - Wikiped…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimina…

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

You can't be serious Sparky. Did you not check the date on the article? It's pre Obergefell! Gays can in fact marry in every state. Could you possibly be that in attentive to detail? Or, did you think that it would really be that easy to bullshit people ?

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

Wrong.

States with measures prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law would deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples, although same-sex couples were eligible to enter into a marriage contract; absent a license, same-sex couples could not marry.

 

[G.T.]

I don't believe they have. If you want an example of that you would have to go back to after the civil war when democrats refused to acknowledge that blacks were citizens after the 13th amendment and refused the right to marry. That was discrimination.

What you are describing isn't discrimination because the law was applied equally to all the exact same way.

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

The regulation of LGBT employment discrimination in the United States varies by jurisdiction. Many, but far from all, states and localities prohibit bias in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation, as well as harassment on the basis of one's sexual orientation. Fewer extend those protections to cover sexual identity.
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States - Wikiped…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimina…

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

You can't be serious Sparky. Did you not check the date on the article? It's pre Obergefell! Gays can in fact marry in every state. Could you possibly be that in attentive to detail? Or, did you think that it would really be that easy to bullshit people ?

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

This kind of herrrpppdeeederrrr idiocy, purposefully missing the point to be an obtuse, degenerate twat...is why your intellectual superiors are overtaking your poorly laid out, lazy as fuck views.

 

[ding]

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

You can't be serious Sparky. Did you not check the date on the article? It's pre Obergefell! Gays can in fact marry in every state. Could you possibly be that in attentive to detail? Or, did you think that it would really be that easy to bullshit people ?

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

This kind of herrrpppdeeederrrr idiocy, purposefully missing the point to be an obtuse, degenerate twat...is why your intellectual superiors are overtaking your poorly laid out, lazy as fuck views.

No. I believe it is exactly on point. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

 

[ding]

You might as well being arguing for polygamy which is also a preference without a class of people.

 

[G.T.]

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

You can't be serious Sparky. Did you not check the date on the article? It's pre Obergefell! Gays can in fact marry in every state. Could you possibly be that in attentive to detail? Or, did you think that it would really be that easy to bullshit people ?

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

This kind of herrrpppdeeederrrr idiocy, purposefully missing the point to be an obtuse, degenerate twat...is why your intellectual superiors are overtaking your poorly laid out, lazy as fuck views.

No. I believe it is exactly on point. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

Cool opinion, it's arrogant and backward. Wanna know what the law thinks of your cool opinion on this matter? It told it to go fuck itself, and gays can marry freely. Hopefully that doesnt sit well, but my kids are in an improved Country in that regard.

 

[ding]

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

You can't be serious Sparky. Did you not check the date on the article? It's pre Obergefell! Gays can in fact marry in every state. Could you possibly be that in attentive to detail? Or, did you think that it would really be that easy to bullshit people ?

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

Wrong.

States with measures prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law would deny marriage licenses to same-sex couples, although same-sex couples were eligible to enter into a marriage contract; absent a license, same-sex couples could not marry.

So you are saying a man who has preference for having sex with the same gender could not marry a woman?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Do you really have your head so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine as to not know that gay folks have been, and are in some ways still discriminated against? Or, are you just lying?

I don't believe they have. If you want an example of that you would have to go back to after the civil war when democrats refused to acknowledge that blacks were citizens after the 13th amendment and refused the right to marry. That was discrimination.

What you are describing isn't discrimination because the law was applied equally to all the exact same way.

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

The regulation of LGBT employment discrimination in the United States varies by jurisdiction. Many, but far from all, states and localities prohibit bias in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation, as well as harassment on the basis of one's sexual orientation. Fewer extend those protections to cover sexual identity.
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States - Wikiped…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimina…

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Jesus fucking Christ! Can you really be that god damned obtuse!! They were denied the right to marry the person of their choice who they are sexually and romantically attracted to!

The restriction is applied equally. That's all that is legally required for equality.

Just because you have a sexual preference that does not negate the equality of the law.

At least you’re consistent at being wrong.

Same-sex couples are eligible to enter into marriage contracts, they meet the same requirements as opposite-sex couples.

But some states sought to deny gay Americans access to marriage law for no other reason than being gay.

The issue had nothing to do with ‘restrictions’ or ‘sexual preference’ – it had to do with residents of a state being denied equal protection of (access to) the law absent a rational basis and documented evidence in support of doing so.

 

[ding]

Gays are still not allowed to marry in some places. I bet one of them is where you live.

The 13 states that still ban same-sex marriage - CNN

You can't be serious Sparky. Did you not check the date on the article? It's pre Obergefell! Gays can in fact marry in every state. Could you possibly be that in attentive to detail? Or, did you think that it would really be that easy to bullshit people ?

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

This kind of herrrpppdeeederrrr idiocy, purposefully missing the point to be an obtuse, degenerate twat...is why your intellectual superiors are overtaking your poorly laid out, lazy as fuck views.

No. I believe it is exactly on point. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

Cool opinion, it's arrogant and backward. Wanna know what the law thinks of your cool opinion on this matter? It told it to go fuck itself, and gays can marry freely. Hopefully that doesnt sit well, but my kids are in an improved Country in that regard.

Again, no one is saying a man who prefers to have sex with the same gender is being barred from marrying a woman. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

You might as well being arguing for polygamy which is also a preference without a class of people.

 

[ding]

I don't believe they have. If you want an example of that you would have to go back to after the civil war when democrats refused to acknowledge that blacks were citizens after the 13th amendment and refused the right to marry. That was discrimination.

What you are describing isn't discrimination because the law was applied equally to all the exact same way.

Thank you for acknowledging that your head is so far up that smelly place where the sun don't shine

The regulation of LGBT employment discrimination in the United States varies by jurisdiction. Many, but far from all, states and localities prohibit bias in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation, as well as harassment on the basis of one's sexual orientation. Fewer extend those protections to cover sexual identity.
LGBT employment discrimination in the United States - Wikiped…

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_employment_discrimina…

And then you think that you can get away with interjecting a red herring fallacy about southern democrats and blacks during the Jim Crow era? Just another logical fallacy. Besides being a red herring its a false equivalence fallacy. I'm not taking the bait.

False equivalence? That's what you are doing.

Blacks were denied marriage period. People who prefer to have sex with the same gender were not denied the right to marriage.

Jesus fucking Christ! Can you really be that god damned obtuse!! They were denied the right to marry the person of their choice who they are sexually and romantically attracted to!

The restriction is applied equally. That's all that is legally required for equality.

Just because you have a sexual preference that does not negate the equality of the law.

At least you’re consistent at being wrong.

Same-sex couples are eligible to enter into marriage contracts, they meet the same requirements as opposite-sex couples.

But some states sought to deny gay Americans access to marriage law for no other reason than being gay.

The issue had nothing to do with ‘restrictions’ or ‘sexual preference’ – it had to do with residents of a state being denied equal protection of (access to) the law absent a rational basis and documented evidence in support of doing so.

No one has denied a person who prefers to have sex with the same gender from marrying someone from the opposite gender.

Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

You might as well being arguing for polygamy which is also a preference without a class of people.

 

[G.T.]

You can't be serious Sparky. Did you not check the date on the article? It's pre Obergefell! Gays can in fact marry in every state. Could you possibly be that in attentive to detail? Or, did you think that it would really be that easy to bullshit people ?

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

This kind of herrrpppdeeederrrr idiocy, purposefully missing the point to be an obtuse, degenerate twat...is why your intellectual superiors are overtaking your poorly laid out, lazy as fuck views.

No. I believe it is exactly on point. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

Cool opinion, it's arrogant and backward. Wanna know what the law thinks of your cool opinion on this matter? It told it to go fuck itself, and gays can marry freely. Hopefully that doesnt sit well, but my kids are in an improved Country in that regard.

Again, no one is saying a man who prefers to have sex with the same gender is being barred from marrying a woman. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

You might as well being arguing for polygamy which is also a preference without a class of people.

You dont have to repeat yourself, dingerred. The law rendered your view irrelevant. If you have such a wahh wahh about the skeery gays getting married, grow a pair of balls and go be an activist. p.s., youre sucha fag

 

[ding]

The reality of the situation is that governments should not legislate marriage at all.

 

[ding]

They could always have gotten married in every state. Just like everyone else.

This kind of herrrpppdeeederrrr idiocy, purposefully missing the point to be an obtuse, degenerate twat...is why your intellectual superiors are overtaking your poorly laid out, lazy as fuck views.

No. I believe it is exactly on point. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

Cool opinion, it's arrogant and backward. Wanna know what the law thinks of your cool opinion on this matter? It told it to go fuck itself, and gays can marry freely. Hopefully that doesnt sit well, but my kids are in an improved Country in that regard.

Again, no one is saying a man who prefers to have sex with the same gender is being barred from marrying a woman. Laws applied equally do not discriminate. There is no test for being gay. Being gay is not a class of people. Being gay is a sexual preference for people of the same sex.

You might as well being arguing for polygamy which is also a preference without a class of people.

You dont have to repeat yourself, dingerred. The law rendered your view irrelevant. If you have such a wahh wahh about the skeery gays getting married, grow a pair of balls and go be an activist. p.s., youre sucha fag

Winning arguments get repeated until you make an argument which defeats it. Deal with it.

Which is why you want to make this about something it is not.

I don't have any thing against gay people at all. I have friends that are gay.

You need to make it personal because you have no logical response.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You might as well being arguing for polygamy which is also a preference without a class of people.

You should win a prize for being so consistently wrong.

This fails as a red herring fallacy.

No state has a marriage law that accommodates three or more persons.

All the states have marriage law that accommodates two consenting adult partners not related to each other in a contract recognized by the state – same- or opposite-sex; the Constitutional violation occurred when states sought to deny same-sex couples access to that marriage law.