@B9XGRLF5mos5MO
THATS ON PERIOD
@B37JHLV1yr1Y
Ew gay wierdo
@TruthHurts1013yrs3Y
Sin is Sin.
@9866BHZ4yrs4Y
Love is love.
@9LKNKHL2yrs2Y
God is fake :)
@9CC3YVT3yrs3Y
Define Sin
@97T3XZT4yrs4Y
Gay rights!!!
Filter by type
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Filter by author
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Expert Pundits
These active users have achieved advanced knowledge of the terminology, history, and legal implications regarding the topic of
Informed Voters
These active users have achieved an understanding of common concepts and the history regarding the topic of
1.8k Replies
@9GMY3DQ 3yrs3Y
Top Agreement
Limiting gay marriage is unconstitutional according to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment: "nor shall any State ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
@9TM9M9G2yrs2Y
It’s not unconstitutional. We promise freedom for all. Refusing to do so for LGBTQIA individuals is going against the very ideals our founding fathers fought for.
@B37JHLV1yr1Y
@B83H5YV8mos8MO
@B3BTBR41yr1Y
@B9N4Q4R5mos5MO
This is the exactly stated in the preamble of the decleration of independence where it states all people are entitled to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"
@B4HPYNB1yr1Y
@ChristianGuidedConstitution 2mos2MO
Just so you are aware, the pursuit of happiness part was referring to taxes and government control. For example, the government would stop letting you pursue happiness when they raise the income tax really high. Or maybe when they seize your property with no explanation.
Also, The Declaration of Independence isn't law, so stop using it as such. All it was doing was separating from the British and explaining why they are.
@B8PC6ZTRepublican 2mos2MO
Informed Gay Marriage #3 Expert Social Issues
If two gay people want to be together, they can pursue happiness without marriage. The entire point of marriage is to serve as a stable family structure consisting of a man, a woman, and their children, and that tenet of marriage is violated by gay marriage. Nobody is saying that gay people shouldn't be allowed to be together if they desire, we're just saying that gay marriage isn't true marriage.
@9ZPVCPVRepublican2yrs2Y
really how about freedom of religion huh founders never supported homosexuals but I believe were all human begins I believe gays lesbians should be educated on what sexual morals are Jesus said a relationship is between 1 man and 1 woman morals we need in society being a homosexual is sad and shameful a life between the opposite gender is a life with morals and kids and happiness I also believe gays and lesbians and trans shouldn't have children or adopt need morals to or be straight or single
Oh wow, we’ve got ourselves a constitutional scholar and a moral philosopher all in one! Truly, what an honor to witness such an eloquent and well-reasoned argument, delivered with all the grace of a drunk guy yelling outside a gas station at 3 AM.
Let’s unpack this masterpiece of logic:
“Freedom of religion, huh?”
Yes, let’s talk about that! See, actual freedom of religion means everyone gets to live according to their own beliefs, not just yours. The Founders didn’t establish a Bible fan club, they created a secular government where religious freedom applies… Read more
@B3YYKT61yr1Y
“Jesus said”
To bring Jesus into politics (something our founding fathers didn't want) is hypocrisy. Muslims don't bring Allah into the conversation, so why is it okay when conservatives bring God into the argument? It's just not fair. To come to a fair solution we can't let belief crowd our better judgment.
@Renaldo-MoonGreen2yrs2Y
@Debater-jr.Progressive2yrs2Y
@RIPCharlieRepublican7mos7MO
@BF6LT5317mins17m
"(broadly) any of the diverse forms of interpersonal union established in
various parts of the world to form a familial bond that is recognized
legally, religiously, or socially, granting the participating partners
mutual conjugal rights and responsibilities." (dictionary.com) Nothing about the two partners sexes, at all.
@9TXX6GSProgressive2yrs2Y
nobody is forcing you to partake in a same-sex marriage. legalizing it simply gives individuals the freedom to choose
@9ZPVCPVRepublican2yrs2Y
jesus didn't die for this love is love no its not true read the Bible or walk away from God he just come back to you its against the creator and his world order yes I believe God supports freedom of other religions but does not support selfness for love but morals back then it was normal now we live in a clown world you why we didn't like homosexuality back then because most religions said it was evil back then Pornograpy lust Homosexality was all illegal and was a more perfect world back then and the people would know religion better and morals back then compared today yell at me but I forgive you like how Jesus forgave sinners I pray for you all God bless you all
Oh boy, this is a beautiful display of word salad. Equal parts religious guilt-tripping, historical revisionism, and barely coherent rambling. A true masterpiece of moral grandstanding, delivered with all the grace of Russian Bot trying to write a sermon.
Let’s break this down, shall we?
“Jesus didn’t die for this.”
Right, because when Jesus was up there on the cross, he was definitely thinking about 21st-century same-sex marriage laws. Not, you know, forgiving sinners, preaching love, and condemning hypocritical religious elites. Nope, he was just sitting there like, &ld… Read more
@B3CS9YH1yr1Y
I believe is Jesus Christ. I’m queer. Jesus died for everybody. He loves everybody. He made me this way and he still loves me.
Galatians 2:20 - “I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave his life for me”
John 13:34-35: “A new commandment i give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have loved one to another.”
not only is denying same-sex marriage unconstitutional, Jesus literally told all his followers to love one another, no matter what.
@B3C3HQL1yr1Y
@Ign3usR3xSocialist1yr1Y
@Aiden-ColonIndependent2yrs2Y
I respectfully disagree with your statement. I know states should have their own power but it is a human right. Same sex marriage should be legalized everywhere as it is a basic human right of equality,
Why can't gays and lesbians accept civil unions as being good enough? Marriage is supposed to be a sacrament that is designated for the union of a man and a woman. Homosexuals do have the legal recognition of being united and do have legal protections with a civil union. So why can't they simply accept that?
@B3C3HQL1yr1Y
Your argument crumbles the second you realize marriage is not exclusively a religious institution. If it were, atheists, interfaith couples, and people getting married at the courthouse wouldn’t exist. Yet, shockingly, they do.
The government doesn’t hand out sacraments, it hands out marriage licenses. You don’t have to pray to the IRS before filing joint taxes, and last I checked, nobody is reciting the Book of Genesis before getting spousal health insurance. Marriage, as recognized by the state, is a legal contract, not a religious ritual. If your church doesn’t want… Read more
@B4VT3PZ1yr1Y
Hmmm this sounds a lot like the "separate but equal". I mean, less extreme, but still lol. No hate, I'm sure you are a lovely person but I do need to tell you why this matters. Imagine you give one of your children a toy, the other child is going to want the same thing. I don't think equality is too much to ask for. Also sorry if this makes no sense I was typing it in my class so I was not able to look down or think about my comparison LOL.
@BBGBQ494mos4MO
@@1876-Elbert2yrs2Y
@Renaldo-MoonGreen 2yrs2Y
@B6K9PKWProgressive10mos10MO
@sylas49 1yr1Y
Engaged Social Issues Engaged Gay Marriage
Whether or not homosexuality is a Biblical sin is not the question at hand here. If you cannot set aside your religious beliefs in favor of participatory policy crafting, your ideals will naturally disenfranchise someone. This has been a pitfall of the United States since its establishment, so please don't contribute to that flaw.
@9V2K3SW2yrs2Y
@B34KR9W1yr1Y
All the people in this thread who argue against legalization are citing religious tenants. That is exactly what the U.S. stands against. We do not abide by law of a singular religion. We should all be free to do as we wish when it comes to sexuality
@RIPCharlieRepublican7mos7MO
“All the people in this thread who argue against legalization are citing religious tenants.”
Here's a more secular argument: marriage exists to promote a stable society. Married couples raise children, those who will enter society. Having children is, in principle impossible for a gay couple, and children not raised by a married mother and father do worse. Because a gay union cannot contribute to society in this way, it should not be considered a marriage. Marriage is a word that means something, and redefining it to "whatever people feel like" cheapens its value.
"marriage exists to promote a stable society."
- Explain to me how getting rid of gay marriage leads to this "stable society" of yours instead of things like the stonewall riots.
"children not raised by a married mother and father do worse."
2. Give me any source that proves being raised by two men or two women results in circumstances such as being raised by two separated parents. Of course divorce leads to worse off children, I don't need that source, but gay couples do not have to have things like custody fights.
"redefining it to 'whatever people feel like' cheapens its value."
3. Explain to me how a lifelong romantical union cheapens the value of marriage.
@B8PC6ZTRepublican 3mos3MO
Informed Gay Marriage #3 Expert Social Issues
- Homosexuality is a psychological disorder, and giving mentally unstable people the same personal freedoms as everyone else obviously leads to instability.
- The comment you replied to never stated anything about gay couples being more likely to divorce.
- Marriage with a foundation of psychological disorder is only an illusion of that mental condition. The value of marriage is cheapened when it is taken out of its purpose to create a stable societal unit of family and reinterpreted as "lifelong romantical union," which blurs the line between marriage and general romantic love.
@ChristianGuidedConstitution 2mos2MO
@wells_vw2mos2MO
This both ignores surrogates, adoption, fostering and other forms of having a child and also creates a toxic mindset that the nuclear home is the only healthy way to raise a child. There have already been countless instances where non-straight couples have children through alternative means and raise them with proper values.
@ChristianGuidedConstitution3mos3MO
“We should all be free to do as we wish when it comes to sexuality”
Don't mean to be inappropriate but is that also saying that I could just walk up to somebody and have sex with them? Especially if my religion tells me to. And to go deeper into that topic, what if my religion tells me I have to murder a person every day? Because if you stop me, you're stopping me from practicing my religion.
@FriendlessFireSocialist 2mos2MO
@ChristianGuidedConstitution 1mo1MO
I would say gay marriage is unconstitutional, however. The Constitution was based off of the Federalist Papers. What they meant when they talked about freedom of religion was the state would not dictate or make a state religion. This also means the state cannot do anything religious wise. Obama when legalizing gay marriage violated that. Him making gay marriage legal violated that because he just interfered with religion.
The Equal Protection Clause argument is valid, but keep in mind that historically, the government has placed limits on certain types of marriages for public policy reasons—like age restrictions or prohibiting incestuous marriages. The state can sometimes argue that marriage laws serve a broader societal interest, like the protection of children or the institution of marriage itself. If the state makes the case that traditional marriage serves a compelling interest, wouldn’t that open the door to justify some restrictions? What would your response be if they claimed it was about preserving societal stability rather than individual rights?
“If the state makes the case that traditional marriage serves a compelling interest, wouldn’t that open the door to justify some restrictions?”
Yes, the government can regulate marriage when there’s a compelling reason tied to actual harm. Age restrictions exist to prevent child exploitation. Incest laws exist to prevent genetic disorders and coercion. These restrictions serve clear protective functions. Where I disagree with you is that using that precedent to justify banning same-sex marriage doesn’t hold up, because there’s no objective harm being prevented. Unlike child marriage or incest, two consenting adults of the same gender do not harm each other, their children, or society.
The "broader societal inter… Read more
@B9SFCWX 5mos5MO
Incredibly well written. I want to recognize your articulate and substantive response. This is what we need to strengthen the conversation.
It seems the common thread in opposition is of the religious basis. Finding resolution with someone arguing from the standpoint of faith seems fruitless.
How do we help people understand why religion is not, and should not be, the framework for rights.
@RIPCharlieRepublican7mos7MO
“-Procreation? Marriage has never required children, and plenty of heterosexual couples can’t or don’t have kids.”
Procreation is, in principle, impossible with a gay couple, and only by chance does not happen in those heterosexual couples. A human is, in principle someone with two legs. A human may be born without them, by chance, but he is still human. An ape, however, is not a human. It is, in principle, not a human, and does not have rights as such.
@BBGBQ494mos4MO
@Renaldo-MoonGreen 2yrs2Y
Here aconter claim on social stability in support of same sex marriage: The Stonewall Riots. The Stonewall riots were a series of riots where LGBTQ+ people fought for their rights in NYC. Now tell me which would you prefer not gay marriage and possible riots or no gay marriage and having some Christians being upset?
@9Y9MYBKRepublican2yrs2Y
Narcissism is characterized by the belief that one's own perspective is the only valid one, and that the source of all of ones issues are other people. It's often accompanied by a lack of empathy and compassion, as well as the delusion that others must conform to their worldview, and if they don’t, something must be “wrong” with them. You are a Narcissist. Insisting that anyone who is LGBTQ+ has a mental illness says more about your own fragile ego and inability to handle different perspectives than it does about reality.
@Renaldo-MoonGreen 2yrs2Y
@BBMQXBW4mos4MO
“Now tell me which would you prefer not gay marriage and possible riots or no gay marriage and having some Christians being upset?”
First of all your stupid. You put no gay marriage twice. Your argument is invalid. Please don't argue with Christians just because you are unintelligent. I'm assuming that you are not Christian, which you should be. This is because it is the only way to get to heaven. However, I have talked to many Christians who argue this same point of stupidity. They are invalid and so are you. The bible states that God created man and woman. Not just men and men or woman and woman.
@BCK6CZ53mos3MO
@BCPKK4RProgressive3mos3MO
@RIPCharlieRepublican7mos7MO
@B2SN8Q41yr1Y
@BC88QFH 3mos3MO
The constitution mandates equal protection for individuals and promotes an inclusive, progressive society. Same sex marriage does no harm and only affects individuals who choose to be affected.
@BCB5Z5M3mos3MO
@BCB33JK3mos3MO
@BCB99JZ3mos3MO
@BCB8RH93mos3MO
@BBXT4R2 4mos4MO
It really shouldn’t matter who someone wants to marry as long as it’s not illegal. Saying people in the LGBTQIA+ community shouldn’t be allowed to get married is mostly based on religious beliefs, and those beliefs shouldn’t decide political laws. It’s honestly crazy that banning gay marriage is even being talked about or seriously considered.
@BBXZVGS 4mos4MO
We are a Nation of God. Our right are endowed by our creator. Our rights, as it says in the declaration of independence, are endowed by our creator. "In god we trust" So we should not be forsake our bond with him via Goverment mandated sin (Liviticus 20:13 thou shall not lay with another man as with another woman)
@BC73PBQ3mos3MO
The bible also says that babies should be beaten against rocks and that fathers should sell their daughters as sex slaves. If you wear more than one type of fabric, you are committing a sin. Why is it okay for you to sin but not okay for people to love who they want? And by the way, something called the separation of church and state exists!
@ChristianGuidedConstitution3mos3MO
"The Bible also says that babies should beaten against rocks"
You took that verse WAY too literally. This verse (If you interpret it correctly) is saying that those who discipline their children are blessed. They would be blessed because the Bible commands parents to love BUT also discipline their children.
"Fathers should sell their daughters as sex slaves"
I'm to going to waste time on that one. Just read all of Exodus 21.
"If your wear more than one type of fabric, you are committing a sin"
God commanded that only as an OT law. It was to show that He set the Israelites apart from the rest of the pagan cultures.
Not quite buddy, we are a nation of separation between church and state, you can dilly-dally in whatever beliefs you want, but an entire country of infinitely different beliefs ain't gonna dilly in the same way you dally yk.
@ChristianGuidedConstitution 1mo1MO
“we are a nation of separation between church and state,”
I've seen this argument a lot. This was actually in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a group of Baptists (I forget what they were officially called). This is cited nowhere in the Constitution nor is it the Federalist Papers which laid the foundation for the Constitution. Also, what Thomas Jefferson and the Founding Fathers meant when they wrote the First Amendement and the letter the Baptists was that, unlike their European counterparts, tjeir would be no state religion.
@BBY4B674mos4MO
@BC44CJ43mos3MO
Everyone follows a religion; everyone is devoted to something, whether it be to a god, to the government, to themselves, etc. Therefore, you'd be hard pressed to find any laws that aren't at least somewhat influenced by religious beliefs. The question is not which laws are influenced by religious beliefs; rather, the question is which laws are objectively and morally wrong. Lots of things feel right, but that doesn't make them so. Marriage is a sacred and holy union of one man and one woman before God, and the government has no right to change definitions or pass laws that interfere with that.
@TBGP8COSSSocialist 1mo1MO
While it may be true that most laws are somehow influenced by religious beliefs, they aren't generally connected to one specific religion. Since not everyone believes in God, you can't use that as evidence that their marriage is "wrong," and since there is separation of church and state the government should also not be able to use this evidence.
@BBXPFMDConstitution4mos4MO
I don't have an issue with other people getting into such a marriage, as long as they don't annoy me about it. Transgenderism, however, goes against both God and science, and I personally think such acts of self-depreciation are terrible things to do to someone. However, like gay marriage, I don't care if other people do it, as long as I'm not constantly annoyed about my position.
@BCWCBTM 2mos2MO
A marriage between two individuals of the same sex is the exact same as a marriage between two people of the opposite sex. It is a ceremony to celebrate a bond between two humans. What aspect of that sounds like something that warrants it being considered a crime? The arguments against it often include things such as it being unnatural or involve the invoking of religious texts such as the bible. But when it comes to the federal law, religion and opinions fueled purely by emotion should not be considered when it comes to the topic of gay marriage. The act of marriage between any two individuals is and should continue to be a right protected under the first and fourteenth amendments no matter what. People should have the right to act freely if those acts do not harm anyone else.
@BCHRJRJ 3mos3MO
If we have no concrete scientific evidence as to a god existing, and Gay/SSM hasn't caused any GENUINE problems, then why do you want people to live miserably? If your favorite flavor of cake was chocolate, and someone told you that loving chocolate cake was 'wrong' or that it was 'only possible to love vanilla, something is wrong with you', would you believe them? You can't help that you love chocolate cake, and it isn't fair for the government to take away your right to eat cake. Love is love, cake is cake. If my lover and I are males, what is it to you? Why do you CARE SO MUCH?
@BCMVTNM3mos3MO
@BCVVF26 2mos2MO
At the end of the day life is about what makes you happy and if you are happy being with someone of the same sex do that life is too short to worry about what people think about you. But I also believe reproducing and having children is our one duty as humans, but I understand that some people think differently and that's okay.
@BlankRepublican 2mos2MO
Life is not about being happy. Life is about taking care of oneself and one's responsibilities. If you are happy being with someone of the same sex, then there is something called "friendship." There is no need to take it all the way to marriage. Also, Gay Marriage conducted through the Christian, Jewish, or Islamic Religion is wrong. As members of those religions, we have the responsibility to follow and uphold their rules. Gay Marriage is unholy and wrong in the view of those religions, and Religious Marriage Officiants should uphold the rules of their religion. I believe the woke have poisoned the church and have wrongly justified their ways into the Christian Religion.
@masn 2mos2MO
In the United States, the Constitution protects both religious freedom and individual rights. Religious groups are free to define marriage according to their beliefs, but the government cannot impose those beliefs on everyone. Civil marriage is a legal institution, and under the Fourteenth Amendment, it must be applied equally to all citizens.
@BCYNGGF2mos2MO
@BCW45542mos2MO
@BCW62WN2mos2MO
I don't believe in gay marriage and I don't think it should be allowed and in the bible it says you shouldn't and there should not be in between genders because there is only 2.
@masn 2mos2MO
In the United States, the Constitution protects both religious freedom and individual rights. Religious groups are free to define marriage according to their beliefs, but the government cannot impose those beliefs on everyone. Civil marriage is a legal institution, and under the Fourteenth Amendment, it must be applied equally to all citizens.
@BDKX2V6 1mo1MO
Its a basic right. The relationship between two people is nobodies business and I think its a basic right.
@9TBGMNC 1mo1MO
@BDL98NM1mo1MO
@BDL8RZZ1mo1MO
Demographics
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
More conversations
Join in on more popular conversations.
