4/2/2013 6:08 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 5:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 5:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:42:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 5:37:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:34:00 PM (view original):
Interracial relationships are accepted in today's society.    Do you disagree?
Why can't you answer the question?

The answer is, no, they don't have to come up with a good reason to be allowed to marry. The person that wants to stop them has the burden of coming up with a good reason.
Then why isn't SS marriage universally accepted?
The same reason that interracial marriage wasn't universally accepted until 1967. Change happens slowly.
Yes it does.

Why are we a "NOW!!!  I WANT IT NOW!!!!!" nation?

SS marriage will be universally accepted.   If not today, maybe tomorrow.  I think a lot of things that we fight for would happen in due time.  If left alone, the tecs of the world will simply go "Bah.  ******* gays.   Go ahead and get married" over time.  Probably much sooner if there didn't have to be a big debate.
It's been a while, long enough for the case to get to the Surpreme Court. So it looks like that time is now, just like it was when Loving got to the Supreme Court in 1967.
Maybe it is.  Maybe it isn't.   A lot of people still oppose gay marriage.
4/2/2013 6:13 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
If I found information that showed that African American households raised children worse than white households, would you then say African Americans shouldn't be married?
If that were the case, then I would say that they should be given less preference to adopt over white families.
4/2/2013 6:15 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 6:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
If I found information that showed that African American households raised children worse than white households, would you then say African Americans shouldn't be married?
If that were the case, then I would say that they should be given less preference to adopt over white families.
But you wouldn't try to prevent them from marrying.
4/2/2013 6:15 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 3:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 3:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 3:23:00 PM (view original):
Has the American Sociological Association ever backtracked on a finding?  Are they infallible?
I'm sure they have. What's your point? There is evidence showing that children of gay couples are just as well off as children of straight couples.
Swamp's favorite source indicates that gay couple adoption has been legal for less than 20 years. 

How much evidence can there be?
Twenty years worth.

And anyway, we're allowing gay couples to adopt already. Allowing them to marry doesn't change the fact that they are raising children.
Perhaps allowing gay couples to adopt was a mistake to begin with.

As Mike already pointed out, 20 years worth of "evidence" can hardly be a significant sample size.
4/2/2013 6:16 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 6:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 6:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
If I found information that showed that African American households raised children worse than white households, would you then say African Americans shouldn't be married?
If that were the case, then I would say that they should be given less preference to adopt over white families.
But you wouldn't try to prevent them from marrying.
I have no problem with black people marrying members of the opposite sex.
4/2/2013 6:18 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:07:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 5:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 5:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 5:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 5:33:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 5:28:00 PM (view original):
I've already said "I don't care."

I'm just asking for a good reason to allow it.   I've mentioned lots of things that pass your Big Four that isn't allowed.  Those reasons aren't enough for me to join the "Gay Marriage" march.
How about this:

Take a step back and consider this statement: "Two consenting adults love each other and want to get married." What cold-hearted person would want to prevent that?
Why does one have to be cold-hearted?  Couldn't they be religious?  Or tradition-bound?
Mormons don't think it's right to drink beer or coffee. But their religious beliefs doesn't allow them to ban them from others.
OK.  Are you comparing marriage to beverage drinking?

And you're the guy who said I was being disrespectful for talking toaster marriage.
No. I'm explaining that just because your religion believes something, doesn't mean that you have the right to force others to follow your belief.
So you agree that some issues carry more weight than others?

Let's not be disrespectful to gay marriage by comparing it to drinking coffee.  Thanks in advance.
I'm missing your point.

You said that if someone wants to marry someone of the same sex, they should be able to marry a toaster.

I'm explaining that "MY RELIGION SAYS NO" isn't a good reason to keep someone from doing something.
Then I guess you don't understand religion.

If your religion says "This is an affront to my God", it's hard to say "Yeah, go ahead."

I'm not one of those people but I would like a good reason to allow something that hasn't been allowed.
It has been allowed. It is allowed in many places right this minute.


4/2/2013 6:21 PM
It isn't allowed everywhere or we wouldn't be talking about it.

Perhaps we're discussing the places where it isn't.  
4/2/2013 6:23 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 6:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 6:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 6:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 4/2/2013 4:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 2:45:00 PM (view original):
Are children better served being raised in gay-parent households or straight-parent households?
If I found information that showed that African American households raised children worse than white households, would you then say African Americans shouldn't be married?
If that were the case, then I would say that they should be given less preference to adopt over white families.
But you wouldn't try to prevent them from marrying.
I have no problem with black people marrying members of the opposite sex.
But you wouldn't try to prevent black couples from marrying if they are found to be lesser parents. Because that would be ridiculous.

4/2/2013 6:24 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:21:00 PM (view original):
It isn't allowed everywhere or we wouldn't be talking about it.

Perhaps we're discussing the places where it isn't.  
Perry, the SC case, is specific to California. A place where it has been allowed before.
4/2/2013 6:24 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 6:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 3:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 3:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 4/2/2013 3:23:00 PM (view original):
Has the American Sociological Association ever backtracked on a finding?  Are they infallible?
I'm sure they have. What's your point? There is evidence showing that children of gay couples are just as well off as children of straight couples.
Swamp's favorite source indicates that gay couple adoption has been legal for less than 20 years. 

How much evidence can there be?
Twenty years worth.

And anyway, we're allowing gay couples to adopt already. Allowing them to marry doesn't change the fact that they are raising children.
Perhaps allowing gay couples to adopt was a mistake to begin with.

As Mike already pointed out, 20 years worth of "evidence" can hardly be a significant sample size.
I tend to agree with this.

Children can be cruel.  Being "different" can make a child's life a little rough.   Having two dads is different even if it's more mainstream today than it was 10 years ago.
4/2/2013 6:25 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 6:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:21:00 PM (view original):
It isn't allowed everywhere or we wouldn't be talking about it.

Perhaps we're discussing the places where it isn't.  
Perry, the SC case, is specific to California. A place where it has been allowed before.
Didn't realize we were discussing a specific case.
4/2/2013 6:29 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 6:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:21:00 PM (view original):
It isn't allowed everywhere or we wouldn't be talking about it.

Perhaps we're discussing the places where it isn't.  
Perry, the SC case, is specific to California. A place where it has been allowed before.
Didn't realize we were discussing a specific case.
Try to keep up.
4/2/2013 6:29 PM

IMO, maybe gay marriage should have came BEFORE gay adoptions. 

But I'm sure the liberals fought for them in the backwards order because single straight people are allowed to adopt.

4/2/2013 6:30 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 6:29:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 4/2/2013 6:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:21:00 PM (view original):
It isn't allowed everywhere or we wouldn't be talking about it.

Perhaps we're discussing the places where it isn't.  
Perry, the SC case, is specific to California. A place where it has been allowed before.
Didn't realize we were discussing a specific case.
Try to keep up.
So you're saying that we are discussing one, very specific case?

Is Perry black?  Do they have an adopted child?
4/2/2013 6:31 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/2/2013 6:29:00 PM (view original):

IMO, maybe gay marriage should have came BEFORE gay adoptions. 

But I'm sure the liberals fought for them in the backwards order because single straight people are allowed to adopt.

If single people are allowed to adopt, how would you suggest we go about weeding out homosexuals?
of 358

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.