Laymen's Closing Arguments on Gay Marriage

[Skylar]

Quite the wall of text there Skylar. Let me know when you want to discuss how all children in gay homes are missing either a father or a mother; and why should the state incentivize that situation?

Once again, marriage has nothing at all to do with children, not a bloody thing.

A vast and overwhelming majority of the world disagrees with you Paint. Probably like around 95% of the world completely disagrees with you. So that's like 5.9 billion people vs Paint's ilk.

Public opinion matters to you now, huh? Try this slice on for size:

Record-High 60 of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Support for gay marriage now outpaces opposition by 23 points.

 

[TemplarKormac]

85 Think Christian Photographer Has Right to Turn Down Same-Sex Wedding Job - Rasmussen Reports

 

[TemplarKormac]

Quite the wall of text there Skylar. Let me know when you want to discuss how all children in gay homes are missing either a father or a mother; and why should the state incentivize that situation?

Once again, marriage has nothing at all to do with children, not a bloody thing.

A vast and overwhelming majority of the world disagrees with you Paint. Probably like around 95% of the world completely disagrees with you. So that's like 5.9 billion people vs Paint's ilk.

Public opinion matters to you now, huh? Try this slice on for size:

Record-High 60 of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Support for gay marriage now outpaces opposition by 23 points.

Lets try to be honest here, Skylar.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — While finding that Americans narrowly favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry, a new Associated Press-GfK poll also shows most believe wedding-related businesses should be allowed to deny service to same-sex couples for religious reasons.

Roughly half the country also thinks local officials and judges with religious objections ought to be exempt from any requirement that they issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, according to the poll.

That view of the same-sex marriage issue echoes that of the Mormon church. Last week, the church called on state legislatures to pass new laws that protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination but also to protect the rights of those who assert their religious beliefs.

David Kenney, a self-employed Catholic from Novi, Michigan, said he’s fine with same-sex marriage being legal. He’s among the 57 percent of Americans who said wedding-related businesses — such as florists — should be allowed to refuse service if they have an objection rooted in their religion.

AP-GfK Poll Support of gay marriage comes with caveats Associated Press GfK Poll


Explanation of the poll, from Hot Air.com:

According to that AP/GfK poll, conducted from January 29 to February 2 of 1,045 adults, 57 percent of the public believes that Americans offering wedding-related services should be legally allowed to refuse service to gay couples if it would violate their religious convictions.

Poll Support for gay marriage rights doesn t mean support for trampling on religious convictions Hot Air

 

[Skylar]

Quite the wall of text there Skylar. Let me know when you want to discuss how all children in gay homes are missing either a father or a mother; and why should the state incentivize that situation?

Once again, marriage has nothing at all to do with children, not a bloody thing.

A vast and overwhelming majority of the world disagrees with you Paint. Probably like around 95% of the world completely disagrees with you. So that's like 5.9 billion people vs Paint's ilk.

Public opinion matters to you now, huh? Try this slice on for size:

Record-High 60 of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Support for gay marriage now outpaces opposition by 23 points.

Lets try to be honest here, Skylar.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — While finding that Americans narrowly favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry, a new Associated Press-GfK poll also shows most believe wedding-related businesses should be allowed to deny service to same-sex couples for religious reasons.

Roughly half the country also thinks local officials and judges with religious objections ought to be exempt from any requirement that they issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, according to the poll.

That view of the same-sex marriage issue echoes that of the Mormon church. Last week, the church called on state legislatures to pass new laws that protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination but also to protect the rights of those who assert their religious beliefs.

David Kenney, a self-employed Catholic from Novi, Michigan, said he’s fine with same-sex marriage being legal. He’s among the 57 percent of Americans who said wedding-related businesses — such as florists — should be allowed to refuse service if they have an objection rooted in their religion.

AP-GfK Poll Support of gay marriage comes with caveats Associated Press GfK Poll


Explanation of the poll, from Hot Air.com:

According to that AP/GfK poll, conducted from January 29 to February 2 of 1,045 adults, 57 percent of the public believes that Americans offering wedding-related services should be legally allowed to refuse service to gay couples if it would violate their religious convictions.

Poll Support for gay marriage rights doesn t mean support for trampling on religious convictions Hot Air

And how was my post not 'honest'? What part of my post do you dispute or consider misleading?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

“Record-High 60 of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage”

“85 Think Christian Photographer Has Right to Turn Down Same-Sex Wedding Job”

Illustrating the wisdom of the Framers to create a Constitutional Republic, whose citizens are subject solely to the rule of law, not a democracy where citizens' civil liberties are jeopardized by the capricious whims of 'majority rule.'

 

[there4eyeM]

Please remind me what percentage of the population would be engaging in 'marriage' with their own sex?

 

[World Savior]

Let me see if I understand the religious objections argument: Suppose if a religious person says that it's OK to marry 13 year old girls as per his religious books, would RFRA allow such marriages in the US?

Now when it comes to religious objections to gay weddings, do atheists have the same rights? If an atheist photographer thinks it's a bad idea to provide services to Christian marriages, would that be legal?

Would boycott of Christian weddings by a large group of Non Christians be acceptable? Jews could boycott Muslims and every other religion could boycott some other religion and we would all be boycotting others. Is this the America that RFRA fathers envisioned?

 

[there4eyeM]

Some people are confusing 'society' with communal effort towards a goal of harmony and peace.

...uh, but that's what it is, isn't it?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Quite the wall of text there Skylar. Let me know when you want to discuss how all children in gay homes are missing either a father or a mother; and why should the state incentivize that situation?

Once again, marriage has nothing at all to do with children, not a bloody thing.

A vast and overwhelming majority of the world disagrees with you Paint. Probably like around 95% of the world completely disagrees with you. So that's like 5.9 billion people vs Paint's ilk.

Public opinion matters to you now, huh? Try this slice on for size:

Record-High 60 of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Support for gay marriage now outpaces opposition by 23 points.

Lets try to be honest here, Skylar.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — While finding that Americans narrowly favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry, a new Associated Press-GfK poll also shows most believe wedding-related businesses should be allowed to deny service to same-sex couples for religious reasons.

Roughly half the country also thinks local officials and judges with religious objections ought to be exempt from any requirement that they issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, according to the poll.

That view of the same-sex marriage issue echoes that of the Mormon church. Last week, the church called on state legislatures to pass new laws that protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination but also to protect the rights of those who assert their religious beliefs.

David Kenney, a self-employed Catholic from Novi, Michigan, said he’s fine with same-sex marriage being legal. He’s among the 57 percent of Americans who said wedding-related businesses — such as florists — should be allowed to refuse service if they have an objection rooted in their religion.

AP-GfK Poll Support of gay marriage comes with caveats Associated Press GfK Poll


Explanation of the poll, from Hot Air.com:

According to that AP/GfK poll, conducted from January 29 to February 2 of 1,045 adults, 57 percent of the public believes that Americans offering wedding-related services should be legally allowed to refuse service to gay couples if it would violate their religious convictions.

Poll Support for gay marriage rights doesn t mean support for trampling on religious convictions Hot Air

And how was my post not 'honest'? What part of my post do you dispute or consider misleading?

You insist that the support of gay marriage is concrete and unyielding. That somehow with such an endorsement it means they will not even allow for a store owner to discriminate against a gay couple for religious reasons. But I insist that isn't the case. You are a highly intelligent debater, so I would assume you know of the same poll I cited. Supporting gay marriage does not mean supporting the ability of gay couples to trample on the livelihoods of unwitting store owners.

When you say the majority of Americans support gay marriage (they do, clearly), this endorsement does not serve for gays or gay activists to use it as a "do whatever I want and get away with it" badge.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Suppose if a religious person says that it's OK to marry 13 year old girls as per his religious books, would RFRA allow such marriages in the US?

Do you even know what an RFRA does?

 

[World Savior]

You asked: Do you even know what an RFRA does?

I answer: Please answer my questions and stop asking me counter questions.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You asked: Do you even know what an RFRA does?

I answer: Please answer my questions and stop asking me counter questions.

No. You don't seem to understand what an RFRA does. Where in an RFRA does it address marriage?

You amateur.

 

[World Savior]

Once again, marriage has nothing at all to do with children, not a bloody thing.

A vast and overwhelming majority of the world disagrees with you Paint. Probably like around 95% of the world completely disagrees with you. So that's like 5.9 billion people vs Paint's ilk.

Public opinion matters to you now, huh? Try this slice on for size:

Record-High 60 of Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage

Support for gay marriage now outpaces opposition by 23 points.

Lets try to be honest here, Skylar.

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — While finding that Americans narrowly favor allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry, a new Associated Press-GfK poll also shows most believe wedding-related businesses should be allowed to deny service to same-sex couples for religious reasons.

Roughly half the country also thinks local officials and judges with religious objections ought to be exempt from any requirement that they issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples, according to the poll.

That view of the same-sex marriage issue echoes that of the Mormon church. Last week, the church called on state legislatures to pass new laws that protect gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination but also to protect the rights of those who assert their religious beliefs.

David Kenney, a self-employed Catholic from Novi, Michigan, said he’s fine with same-sex marriage being legal. He’s among the 57 percent of Americans who said wedding-related businesses — such as florists — should be allowed to refuse service if they have an objection rooted in their religion.

AP-GfK Poll Support of gay marriage comes with caveats Associated Press GfK Poll


Explanation of the poll, from Hot Air.com:

According to that AP/GfK poll, conducted from January 29 to February 2 of 1,045 adults, 57 percent of the public believes that Americans offering wedding-related services should be legally allowed to refuse service to gay couples if it would violate their religious convictions.

Poll Support for gay marriage rights doesn t mean support for trampling on religious convictions Hot Air

And how was my post not 'honest'? What part of my post do you dispute or consider misleading?

You insist that the support of gay marriage is concrete and unyielding. That somehow with such an endorsement it means they will not even allow for a store owner to discriminate against a gay couple for religious reasons. But I insist that isn't the case. You are a highly intelligent debater, so I would assume you know of the same poll I cited. Supporting gay marriage does not mean supporting the ability of gay couples to trample on the livelihoods of unwitting store owners.

When you say the majority of Americans support gay marriage (they do, clearly), this endorsement does not serve for gays or gay activists to use it as a "do whatever I want and get away with it" badge.

We do not allow discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The RFRA as applied to gay weddings is discriminatory on the basis of sexual orientation. Thus it's unconstitutional.

That said, I would never order any products from a homophobe. He might piss in my food if he's catering at my wedding. He might give me inferior quality service. Plus I think gays have it wrong. They should boycott the homophobe business owner. So I don't understand why the gays can't take the activist approach and boycott the shit out of the businesses who discriminate against gays. Instead they're demanding they be served by the homophobes.

It's a self defeating proposition for the homophobes. You want more customers not fewer customers. And once you know who the homophobes are you can go on facebook and smear the homophobe business. So gays should boycott the homophobes, smear the business on social media and drive them out of business. Insisting that they be served by the homophobes is the wrong approach.

 

[World Savior]

You asked: Do you even know what an RFRA does?

I answer: Please answer my questions and stop asking me counter questions.

No. You don't seem to understand what an RFRA does. Where in an RFRA does it address marriage?

You amateur.

No sir, you are wrong. RFRA does not have to address each and every situation. The law does not have to address every act of violation. Law is a rule, a general rule. "You can't discriminate" is the law. It doesn't say "You cant discriminate at weddings, employment, college admissions" and a million other things. Non-discrimination is the principle we follow. RFRA does not allow you to violate one's civil rights.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The RFRA as applied to gay weddings is discriminatory on the basis of sexual orientation.

Wow. How does an RFRA allow for marriages in the first place? RFRAs have nothing to do with marriages.

 

[World Savior]

The RFRA as applied to gay weddings is discriminatory on the basis of sexual orientation.

Wow. How does an RFRA allow for marriages in the first place? RFRAs have nothing to do with marriages.

OK I think you should consult a lawyer on this issue now. You are asking legal questions and need some serious consultation by attorneys. Go for it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

That said, I would never order any products from a homophobe. He might piss in my food if he's catering at my wedding. He might give me inferior quality service. Plus I think gays have it wrong. They should boycott the homophobe business owner. So I don't understand why the gays can't take the activist approach and boycott the shit out of the businesses who discriminate against gays. Instead they're demanding they be served by the homophobes.

To the first half, that's your right.

To the second half yes, thats where it should stop. No need to put the owner on the street for refusing to cater a gay wedding on religious grounds.

 

[World Savior]

That said, I would never order any products from a homophobe. He might piss in my food if he's catering at my wedding. He might give me inferior quality service. Plus I think gays have it wrong. They should boycott the homophobe business owner. So I don't understand why the gays can't take the activist approach and boycott the shit out of the businesses who discriminate against gays. Instead they're demanding they be served by the homophobes.

To the first half, that's your right.

To the second half yes, thats where it should stop. No need to put the owner on the street for refusing to cater a gay wedding on religious grounds.

Why not? I would do everything within my power to put the business owner out of business until they realize that it's a lose-lose proposition for them. If a business owner refused to serve blacks, would you patronize such a business? I believe the RFRA will be held unconstitutional if brought to SCOTUS. In the mean time we can boycott the business. Notice, the gays and the other 90% of the people will boycott that business. It's not just gays, but also those non-gays who care for civil rights of gays will boycott such businesses.

It's very simple: If homophobes win the SCOTUS case (if ever brought to SCOTUS), then the market forces will and should drive them out of business. This is a loser proposition for business owners in the long run.

 

[JoeB131]

Quite the wall of text there Skylar. Let me know when you want to discuss how all children in gay homes are missing either a father or a mother; and why should the state incentivize that situation?

50% of straight marriages end in divorce. Seems like that causes more homes with a missing parent than gays having children through means like adoption, artificial insemination or surrogacy.

Yet we don't hear you ranting about that in dozens of threads.

 

[JoeB131]

You insist that the support of gay marriage is concrete and unyielding. That somehow with such an endorsement it means they will not even allow for a store owner to discriminate against a gay couple for religious reasons. But I insist that isn't the case. You are a highly intelligent debater, so I would assume you know of the same poll I cited. Supporting gay marriage does not mean supporting the ability of gay couples to trample on the livelihoods of unwitting store owners.

When you say the majority of Americans support gay marriage (they do, clearly), this endorsement does not serve for gays or gay activists to use it as a "do whatever I want and get away with it" badge.

Oh, Chief Sits on Couch, why not let a store owner discriminate against blacks or Jews on the same logic. And, yes, they can find a bible verse to back up that position.