• Santorum Draws Boos From College Crowd for Opposing Gay Marriage
    64 replies, posted
[QUOTE=KingKombat;34090187]it does matter when this guy wants to not only be president [B]but actually has a chance of becoming so[/B][/QUOTE] Hey man all the better, I am for man and woman marriage.
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090132]I don't find anything wrong with him not supporting gays. It's his opinion and not all of us get off on a bunch of guys marrying each other.[/QUOTE] Yeah but you see, what kind of a society reminds you of a single leader and only his opinions matter, not the people he is representing?
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090132]I don't find anything wrong with him not supporting gays. It's his opinion and not all of us get off on a bunch of guys marrying each other.[/QUOTE] Get out.
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090205]Hey man all the better, I am for man and woman marriage.[/QUOTE] wow fag
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090205]Hey man all the better, I am for man and woman marriage.[/QUOTE] are you from a third-world country
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090132]I don't find anything wrong with him not supporting gays. It's his opinion and not all of us get off on a bunch of guys marrying each other.[/QUOTE] There's a difference between not supporting gays and vowing to strip them of rights. Someone should ask him what he thinks of the 1966 Supreme Court decision that removed race from the "traditional" definition of marriage. There you go, federal government's redefined marriage before and lo and behold, it didn't lead to people marrying their fucking pets.
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090132]I don't find anything wrong with him not supporting gays. It's his opinion and not all of us get off on a bunch of guys marrying each other.[/QUOTE] there's quite a lot wrong with someone not supporting HUMAN BEINGS simply because they have a different sexual orientation than them. it's a retarded opinion and you and him are both morons for having it. [editline]7th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090205]Hey man all the better, I am for man and woman marriage.[/QUOTE] when you find someone you love and want to spend the rest of your life with i hope you remember that you want to deny that to others.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;34090644]there's quite a lot wrong with someone not supporting HUMAN BEINGS simply because they have a different sexual orientation than them. it's a retarded opinion and you and him are both morons for having it.[/QUOTE] Gays are gay because they have had traumatizing experiences as children.
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090653]Gays are gay because they have had traumatizing experiences as children.[/QUOTE] oh, nevermind. i guess the 'all the better' about santorum having a chance to get elected should have given it away
Guys, I think Matt [I]just might[/I] be a troll.
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090205]Hey man all the better, I am for man and woman marriage.[/QUOTE] So I should not be allowed to marry anyone then? Also rating people rainbows shows maturity mate. [QUOTE=Cone;34090658]Guys, I think Matt [I]just might[/I] be a troll.[/QUOTE] Good chance of him not being one though.
[QUOTE=TheDamnWizards!;34090660]Good chance of him not being one though.[/QUOTE] Is pointing out the logical fallacies of a thick-skulled redneck worth that risk?
[QUOTE=TheDamnWizards!;34090660]So I should not be allowed to marry anyone then? Also rating people rainbows shows maturity mate. Good chance of him not being one though.[/QUOTE] Stop trying to implant your "gay brain waves" into my anus [img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kOGgMhxjR8o/TfcLL5raQrI/AAAAAAAAJzA/wExzXU0704I/s400/flag.jpg[/img] [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Trolling" - Starpluck))[/highlight]
On the polygamy topic going on here, my opinion is that it could skew one's views of equality. In the majority of cases of polygamy it is one man marrying multiple women. Marriage between two people of any gender shows an easy to prove equality between the two. For simplicity's sake, let's take the example of a marriage between a man and a woman. Here we have 1 man = 1 woman. Two people devoting (some of) their lives to each other. Now, throw in another woman and see what we get. We now have one man to two women. This example could send a message to other men that they should be deserving of two women as well, and vice versa as well, why can't a woman have 2 husbands? In the end, we are left with a paradox where 1 man > 1 woman and 1 woman > 1 man. Santorum seems to be arguing that if same-sex marriage is allowed that polygamy will be fine, which would make sense, given the above perspective. However, the root problem is still there. If legal polygamy retains the equality distortion that I argue comes with it, then by mere principle it cannot exist for heterosexuals or homosexual. Given the stated paradox a union between 3 men would be less than or greater than a union between 3 women. An impossibility any math teacher can see. With 2 people, no matter which gender, marriage makes sense.
[QUOTE=-Matt-94;34090680]Stop trying to implant your "gay brain waves" into my anus [img]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kOGgMhxjR8o/TfcLL5raQrI/AAAAAAAAJzA/wExzXU0704I/s400/flag.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I'm not. You're just a troll, well done.
[QUOTE=Strike 86;34073900]Read title as: [B]Santorum Draws Boobs For College Crowd for Opposing Gay Marriage[/B][/QUOTE] Same here. It made surprising amount of sense in my head.
I have a small feeling that Santorum won't win the election. I sure as hell hope so.
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;34090050] The thing is he's actually kind of right. To allow gay marriage but not polygamy you do have to differentiate them. However, I'm using that argument in a different way; I support making polygamy legal as long as all people are consensual and are aware of the relationship they are in.[/QUOTE] They are already differentiated. 2 does not equal >2.
If any republican is chosen within the next 50 years and unless the republicans drastically change, something is seriously going wrong.
I think marriage is bullshit. I actually think he raises a good point. If homosexuals should be allowed to marry, then why not polygamy? The problem is that he doesn't say why any of them are wrong. His reasons against gay marriage are religious, right? And since marriage is a legal and official thing, religion should have nothing to do with it, so that argument becomes null. But then what about polygamy? I think I'm for both homosexual marriage and polygamy, we just need to fully seperate religion from marriage, so that religious arguments won't have any weight.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;34092836] I actually think he raises a good point. If homosexuals should be allowed to marry, then why not polygamy?[/QUOTE] Because the issue here is about [b]2[/b] consenting adults being able to get the same rights/benefits as another 2 consenting adults. It doesn't follow that just because we give 2 consenting homosexual adults the right to marry, then suddenly we need to give the same rights to groups of 3, 4, 5, or give people the right to marry animals, etc. The issue was always about two consenting adults having the right to marry.
[QUOTE=Noble;34093452]Because the issue here is about [b]2[/b] consenting adults being able to get the same rights/benefits as another 2 consenting adults. It doesn't follow that just because we give 2 consenting homosexual adults the right to marry, then suddenly we need to give the same rights to groups of 3, 4, 5, or give people the right to marry animals, etc. The issue was always about two consenting adults having the right to marry.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but [I]why[/I] not three or four consenting adults? He did indeed use it to totally derail the topic, as they're two different subjects. But couldn't you say that as long as it involves consenting adults, nothing else should matter, even if they are 3 or more people?
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;34092836]I think marriage is bullshit. I actually think he raises a good point. If homosexuals should be allowed to marry, then why not polygamy? The problem is that he doesn't say why any of them are wrong. His reasons against gay marriage are religious, right? And since marriage is a legal and official thing, religion should have nothing to do with it, so that argument becomes null. But then what about polygamy? I think I'm for both homosexual marriage and polygamy, we just need to fully seperate religion from marriage, so that religious arguments won't have any weight.[/QUOTE] I'll put it in the same sense my English sub did. "WE HAVE LAWS AGAINST POLYGAMY TO SAVE THE WOMEN FROM OPPRESSION BY THE MALE SECTOR!"
[QUOTE=The Baconator;34073820][url]http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-01-06/santorum-draws-boos-from-college-crowd-for-opposing-gay-marriage.html[/url][/QUOTE] I think we need to use something like this on Santorum: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/mXg0K.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Forumaster;34096256]I think we need to use something like this on Santorum: [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/mXg0K.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] The US needs to start research on the Gay Bomb again!
Rick mix-of-lube-and-fecal-matter-after-anal fails again.
[QUOTE=TheDamnWizards!;34093688]I'll put it in the same sense my English sub did. "WE HAVE LAWS AGAINST POLYGAMY TO SAVE THE WOMEN FROM OPPRESSION BY THE MALE SECTOR!"[/QUOTE] But if it is consensual, then it isn't oppressive? If it is in some cases, then there is of course a problem in those cases, but isn't there also cases like that in normal marriages with two people?
When the current generation comes into power, the world is going to change, a lot.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;34102816]But if it is consensual, then it isn't oppressive? If it is in some cases, then there is of course a problem in those cases, but isn't there also cases like that in normal marriages with two people?[/QUOTE] Yeah, I asked her "What if all parties consent to it?" to which she replied with basically: "The law has deemed it wrong because it oppresses the women of society!" I think my English teacher's mum is a feminist.
"But Mr. Santorum, how do you plan to help the economy recover?" " [video=youtube;t348e24vDyA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t348e24vDyA[/video] "
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.