NationStates Jolt Archive

Lets have a good organized debate on the issues that the liberals and the conservatives blast and flame each other over. Only rules are no flames. Just post some issues and find someone that feels the opposite way.

Registers for Conservatives, say so when do we start.

There have been billions of threads that have picked an issue, asked people to debate and said 'no flames' The problem is, most of the people here don't know what the hell they're talking about, and most refuse to bow to relentless logic. If you think you're not one of these people, you probably are.

All you've done is add an extra step before you pick the topic and the shit debate.

lets debate... kittens, and whether its right to set fire to them

We can start as soon as someone comes here to debate you. And please only post on something you know about.

Well actually, I'm a social libertarian and a fiscal conservative who is pro-some of the reforms

Bring IT on!!

http://www.gurpsmaster.de/flamethr2.jpg

Thank you for that introduction Monkeypimp, I will now provide an example(Note, the views below are not actually my views, in fact, they are quite the contrary, this entire thing I am writing now is to demonstrate that at least some people can't be bothered to read an entire post, and will have everything broken into soundbites for them. Just to make sure, right here I am going to admit that none of the arguments outside of this first paragraph have any merit, validity, or even the slightest foundation as truth. For example, at least a few people won't take the time to read the drivel I am typing now, and just see the line below, take it for my beliefs, and be totally wrong, I will then take that person, string them up and parade them around town in their underwear. Anyway, shall we sit back and watch the show begin? Actually, this doesn't seem like quite enough filler, a couple more lines could do it. It's sad, isn't it, when people need things reduced to a single phrase for them to digest it? Just for good measure, I'm going to retard the grammar from this point on.)

i think That Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because it goes against evolution! how can you evolve if u cant reproduce?!? its not natural at all and theere should be a constitutional amendment against it

i think That Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because it goes against evolution! how can you evolve if u cant reproduce?!? its not natural at all and theere should be a constitutional amendment against it

I also believe that civil unions should be banned along with marriage.

lets debate... kittens, and whether its right to set fire to them


NO FLAMES

Thank you for that introduction Monkeypimp, I will now provide an example(Note, the views below are not actually my views, in fact, they are quite the contrary, this entire thing I am writing now is to demonstrate that at least some people can't be bothered to read an entire post, and will have everything broken into soundbites for them. Just to make sure, right here I am going to admit that none of the arguments outside of this first paragraph have any merit, validity, or even the slightest foundation as truth. For example, at least a few people won't take the time to read the drivel I am typing now, and just see the line below, take it for my beliefs, and be totally wrong, I will then take that person, string them up and parade them around town in their underwear. Anyway, shall we sit back and watch the show begin? Actually, this doesn't seem like quite enough filler, a couple more lines could do it. It's sad, isn't it, when people need things reduced to a single phrase for them to digest it? Just for good measure, I'm going to retard the grammar from this point on.)

i think That Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because it goes against evolution! how can you evolve if u cant reproduce?!? its not natural at all and theere should be a constitutional amendment against it


Good call.

note: I read the whole thing because I saw myself mentioned. :D

Thank you for that introduction Monkeypimp, I will now provide an example(Note, the views below are not actually my views, in fact, they are quite the contrary, this entire thing I am writing now is to demonstrate that at least some people can't be bothered to read an entire post, and will have everything broken into soundbites for them. Just to make sure, right here I am going to admit that none of the arguments outside of this first paragraph have any merit, validity, or even the slightest foundation as truth. For example, at least a few people won't take the time to read the drivel I am typing now, and just see the line below, take it for my beliefs, and be totally wrong, I will then take that person, string them up and parade them around town in their underwear. Anyway, shall we sit back and watch the show begin? Actually, this doesn't seem like quite enough filler, a couple more lines could do it. It's sad, isn't it, when people need things reduced to a single phrase for them to digest it? Just for good measure, I'm going to retard the grammar from this point on.)

i think That Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because it goes against evolution! how can you evolve if u cant reproduce?!? its not natural at all and theere should be a constitutional amendment against it
So you believe that gays have the right to marry and that there should be no constitutional ammendment to stop them. :D

NO FLAMES

How was that a flame?

Homosexuality - as of now, it only affects a very small minority of people in the world. I do not believe in it, also, because it prevents humanity from reproducing.

However, as I said that I disagree with it, that does not mean I won't persecute them. This is why I would allow Gay Marriage, because 1) the marriage rate is terrible here 2) I feel like banning it would be descriminatory, and 3) I am strictly against the government regulating marriage or sex.

But this does not mean I won't strike a compromise with conservatives. I actually like the idea of states' rights, so rather than ban it nationwide, simply have the states decide it for themselves with a vote of the people.

(Note, the views below are not actually my views, in fact, they are quite the contrary, this entire thing I am writing now is to demonstrate that at least some people can't be bothered to read an entire post, and will have everything broken into soundbites for them.

i think That Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because it goes against evolution! how can you evolve if u cant reproduce?!? its not natural at all and theere should be a constitutional amendment against it

I also believe that civil unions should be banned along with marriage.
You already have your first customer. You certainly proved your point. :D

I am against Gay Marriage because it goes against five millenia of history. In every culture throughout the world, regardless of faith, marriage has ALWAYS been between a man and a woman. However, I am for civil unions, because it gives gay couples the same legal rights. However, you can't call it marriage.

How was that a flame?

You missed the joke.

You fail.

I am against Gay Marriage because it goes against five millenia of history. In every culture throughout the world, regardless of faith, marriage has ALWAYS been between a man and a woman. However, I am for civil unions, because it gives gay couples the same legal rights. However, you can't call it marriage.

*cough* Greece *cough*

You missed the joke.

You fail.
Yup, But I'm still hungover. I have a right to be stupid

*cough* Greece *cough*

Perhaps, but tell me a culture that flourished and exists to this day that practiced homosexual marriage?

what they should do is make anything regarding the legal and beuracratic side of marrige called a cival unuion, and let any 2 adults apply for it and earn the same legal rights.

let the church keep the token phrase "marrige" and let them be as discriminitory as they please

Perhaps, but tell me a culture that flourished and exists to this day that practiced homosexual marriage?

thats very close minded

todays culture and society will obviously not be around forever

in fact humanity will one day be compleatly extinct in the universe....
*it inspires a feeling of insignifigance*

My opinion of this is simply that there should be either no incentives tax breaks or positive discrimination for 'married' couples make 'marriage' just a word, no longer a tax break. Stop any regulation of it. This causes problems as far as divorce is concerned and in a couple of other ways, but they can be sorted out.

My preferred option is...
That any two adults may choose to enter into a leagally recognised agreement. (That can be recognised in a church registry office or where ever and can be called whatever anyone wants it to be called)

These two then become legal next of Kin. They gain all the current benifits of married couples - Reduced inheritance tax, signatory for opperations 'widows pensions' etc.

These two adults don't have to even live together they could happily be brother and sister just good friends whatever.

lookit that! I'm bloody awesome, how long did that take? We already have quite a few customers!

Well I'm impressed Pyta. I didn't think it would work, but it did.

Well I'm impressed Pyta. I didn't think it would work, but it did.

You have far too much faith in the general intelligence of this forum

I am against Gay Marriage because it goes against five millenia of history. In every culture throughout the world, regardless of faith, marriage has ALWAYS been between a man and a woman. However, I am for civil unions, because it gives gay couples the same legal rights. However, you can't call it marriage.

News flash, as long as there has been humans there has been gay people. People don't choose their sexuality. I mean when did you make the conscience choice to not be gay? See how silly it is? Who cares? Does it effect your life? Probably not. Does it hurt marriage? Of course not. I'm a married woman with two kids who loves her husband more then words can say. Gays getting married will not weaken or hurt my marriage any more then a hetro couple with a bad marriage will hurt my marriage. It does not weaken my marriage or take away from it in any way. Further, if you want to talk about having children, lots of hetro couples don't have children because they can't or they choose not to, should they also not be allowed to marry? It's none of the governments business and I wish people worried about their own lives as much as they appear to worry about others.!

Perhaps, but tell me a culture that flourished and exists to this day that practiced homosexual marriage?

Hello, ever read history? Greece's culture was taken by two main groups; the Arabs and the Latin-Christendom of Rome. Just because new religions came that trumped the tradition does not mean it wouldn't work. Take away Christianity and Islam and we'd still have it today.

News flash, as long as there has been humans there has been gay people. People don't choose their sexuality. I mean when did you make the conscience choice to not be gay? See how silly it is? Who cares? Does it effect your life? Probably not. Does it hurt marriage? Of course not. I'm a married woman with two kids who loves her husband more then words can say. Gays getting married will not weaken or hurt my marriage any more then a hetro couple with a bad marriage will hurt my marriage. It does not weaken my marriage or take away from it in any way. Further, if you want to talk about having children, lots of hetro couples don't have children because they can't or they choose not to, should they also not be allowed to marry? It's none of the governments business and I wish people worried about their own lives as much as they appear to worry about others.!
Thank you for being reasonable. It's quite frankly arrogant and asanine for people to consider a constitutional ban a good or moral thing to do.

Oh Sweet Jesus, what have I done?! I've created a Gay Marrige thread! For everyone's sanity, someone help me Hijack it back to something reasonable!

Mediazation: There's only so much demogaugery that can happen there.

So what does everyone think of the rapid mediazation of everything? Is instant information good or bad? If yes, whats to stop people from slandering and lying in said media? If no, how are people to get any information or make informed decisions?

[Edited to comply with hijack request. :) ]

Isn't it odd that we, as the hetrosexual majority, think we know whats best for homosexual minority? Who gives a damn if it isn't reproductive, the earth is heayily overpopulated that we are going to run into some serious issues very soon. As for marriage always being between men and women, that was simply for reproductive purposes and they feared gays because they were different and "queer". I as a Christian have seen some of the most anti-gay things and yet they are full of error and actually contradict what Jesus believed because he never mentioned homosexuality as a sin nor is it mentioned in the 10 Commandments, It's only ever mentioned by Paul, who was kind of insane to begin with and in Leviticus, in a time when men need to be strong and overpowering women, not been a sissy and like other men. There are other refrences which are just too vague to use as defense. Also, I don't believe that "God created Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve" given the story of Creation is one of the most flawed theories I have EVER seen. It leads man to believe he is just a mini version of God, which is a definate lie. As for the "Bush Ban" on it, well George W. Bush is an idiot and most every law he wishes to pass is stupid and this is no exception. Some Republicans still believe marriage is a back bone of America, well if thats true, America will be paralyzed very soon. Hetrosexual divorce rates are at all time highs and abusive relationships are on the rise. I say, I'm not gay and I'm not close to anyone gay, so it doesn't affect me, so let 'em marry. Oh btw, I am actually a Conservative, just not an ignorant one.

I'm for gay marrige, if just because I have yet to see one single reason why they shouldn't be allowed to be married that hasn't been proven wrong. Two people love each other...so why not let them be married?

Could be good. But promise not to mention Bush or Kerry.

Oh Sweet Jesus, what have I done?! I've created a Gay Marrige thread! For everyone's sanity, someone help me Hijack it back to something reasonable!

Mediazation: There's only so much demogaugery that can happen there.

So what does everyone think of the rapid mediazation of everything? Is instant information good or bad? If yes, whats to stop people from slandering and lying in said media? If no, how are people to get any information or make informed decisions?

I think that while increased access to information is a good thing, that is not what the media is doing. Complicated issues cannot be explained in a 2 minute story, with out of context sound bytes. But the media outlets are commercial organisations, they need to be profitable. So they only show the news that will make people watch, not the news that matters. I think this is dumbing down our society, but I can't see a solution, other than watching the news on our the government run station, which usually offers far more in depth coverage.

I am against Gay Marriage because it goes against five millenia of history. In every culture throughout the world, regardless of faith, marriage has ALWAYS been between a man and a woman. However, I am for civil unions, because it gives gay couples the same legal rights. However, you can't call it marriage.

that's not true. in many pagan cultures, men could marry men and women could marry women and be given the same status in society. in fact, it was happening in christian regions too until the 16th century, when the church discovered that it was a sin...

i think That Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because it goes against evolution! how can you evolve if u cant reproduce?!? its not natural at all and there should be a constitutional amendment against it

Why should you waste time with a constitutional amendment in the first place? If they die without reproducing, then fine. Let them die childless, it doesn't really matter to us. And think about it: If there's a genetic cause to it, then those genes won't carry on to the next generation, because you need kids for that! Besides, if we waste our time writing a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage we'll have less time to make other decisions.

Also, I only seem to see religious people protesting gay marriage (though I'm not so foolish to believe they're everyone against it), and they claim that it's an affront to God. That's imposing one's beliefs on others, and it sickens me.

Oh, and I really hate the church and I'm an atheist. More reasons for me not to like the (radically) religious folk.

So, um... yeah

Oh My dear god! They're like zombies with short attention spans, get me my chainsaw!


Tupping, I assume you are referring to C-Span or something on those lines? I found whats best is to go and read the bills that are going through the legistlature and formulate our own opinions on them, listen to statements made by any figure, and look at their records. Truly, the only way you could have unbiased news is if you were to report it yourself.

Oh My dear god! They're like zombies with short attention spans, get me my chainsaw!


Tupping, I assume you are referring to C-Span or something on those lines? I found whats best is to go and read the bills that are going through the legistlature and formulate our own opinions on them, listen to statements made by any figure, and look at their records. Truly, the only way you could have unbiased news is if you were to report it yourself.
*CanuckHeaven* passes Pyta a chainsaw. Are you going to be performing brain surgery on the lesser lights?

How about we debate Teen sex?

alright, at least teen sex will bring forth demogaugery that hasn't been clubbed far past its death on these forums(well, not as much as those other things that I dare not mention lest they become the subject of the conversation)

Anyway!

Share the love and hand out condoms, it's my philosophy and basically ANTIBUSH.