Jay-Z, Gay Marriage: Obama's New Stance Is 'The Right Thing To Do' (VIDEO)

[timcity2000]

Originally Posted by ILL LEGAL OPERATION

...when the cards are laid on the table and it's agreed that homosexuals should enjoy the same rights as heterosexual married couples, but the rebuttal is a nonnegotiable desire upon using the term "marriage"...

What's in a name?

unfortunately, in this country, it's not yet agreed that homosexuals should enjoy the same rights as heterosexual married couples.  that's all i'm concerned about at this point.  when that happens, i personally won't care what terminology is used... as long as it is used evenly and consistently across the board (on a federal level).  i even said so in my post above.  in that way, i think you and i are probably on the same side here.
having said that, i think you're right to ask "what's in a name?"  when governments create "civil unions" for same-sex couples and reserve "marriages" for opposite-sex couples, they effectively create a second class.  because of the societal and cultural status afforded the term "marriage", i don't think this is insignificant.  it sounds like a reluctant compromise; a "giving in".  simply put... if there's no difference, why risk making them different?  again, this part of the argument is much less important to me personally, but i think it's worth considering.  let's work on getting equal rights first.

 

[rko2004]

Originally Posted by ScarsOrScabs

Originally Posted by shoefreakbaby

You know what's crazy as far as churches so many couples who are not ordained by God get married all the time.
Couples who don't even go to church or are practicing in their beliefs yet come to church and get married. What is the difference between that and marrying gays in churches
Lol just noticed that

The idea that marriage is a covenant before God is such %@%$%$@*, it's just a cop out and another weak justification to discriminate against gays.  I know multiple people who are not religious and were married in a church, others who lied to a priest during pre-cana, lived in sin prior to marriage, etc.
I've made the same point as you before and nobody seems to have an answer.  Why aren't/weren't Christians up in arms over those who are non-believers getting married rather than a civil union?  Crickets.

If it means anything, I believe marriage should have stayed in the church. But since it was allowed to be done outside the church, its kinda open for anyone. Shoefreakinternetwifey kinda touched on it. I'll always know the intent of it in it's original sense. But hey we have to share the globe for now right? So we need some middle ground. Makes it easier to get along. We get no Where fighting. Going forward, its a lot easier to coexist when we aren't slamming each others beliefs.

 

[True Blues]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by cartune

I just wish black Americans had the convenience of "hiding" their skin while letting gay Americans go through centuries of hell and let them die by thousands fighting for civil liberties for all. And then black people "came out" of hiding when it was safer after the country had soften up a bit because images of hundreds of gay people being hung and being sprayed with hoses has softened Americans hearts. Now its ok for blacks to come prancing out demanding stuff and comparing fighting for one civil luxury to almost a thousand years discrimination & murder. Most of you are white so I can sorta understand the passion because this is the first a white man has been denied a luxury in this country. Welcome to the party

So please tell me this, is it more offensive to draw comparisons between the two struggles as many activists do, or is it more offensive for you to use your ancestor's struggles to belittle, denigrate, and mock someone else's struggles?  You constantly feign being offended by a group  making these comparisons because they were never lynched or sprayed by hoses. Yet here you are co-opting past struggles, struggles that you yourself have never endured, to make a point against a group just wanting equality! If homosexuals were granted the same rights that you have, would you somehow be offended that they didn't have to go through lynchings and being sprayed by hoses to attain those rights?  Would those rights be less valid and less reason to celebrate because, as you see it, they didn't go through the same hells to be seen as equal? You use examples of atrocities you haven't ever endured to say someone's struggles were so superior that comparisons can't be made! $$@+%+#, please, dude!

Homosexuals aren't trying to take away from the struggles of African Americans.  Nope, they just want the same kind of equality that your ancestors wanted.  They want to be accepted despite the obvious differences.  If you fail to see the similarities you are more clueless than I previously thought, which is saying a whole hell of a lot.


Oh and since when did homosexuals all become white?  Obviously you haven't ever heard of the stereotypes that surrounded AIDS originally...

Thank you.

 

[quik1987]

Manny Pacquiao called out Obama for his support of gay marriage

Obama about to lose the Filipino vote

and Filipinos about to stop claiming him

jay-z too

 

[rko2004]

Originally Posted by quik1987

Manny Pacquiao called out Obama for his support of gay marriage

Obama about to lose the Filipino vote

and Filipinos about to stop claiming him

jay-z too

So will Money May support gay marriage in turn?

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRedStorm

I can't believe some people still think being gay is a choice. It's a chemical imbalance/chromosome issue that leads to homosexuality.

People need to stop. So is Schizophrenia and Bi-polar disorder. Treat it if that's the case.

Does any one even know what causes a chemical imbalance?? A lot of people just believe something just because they heard it somewhere else with no actual knowledge of the topic.  How creditable is their research? We can go on and on on why this is irrelevant.


Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?



Oh and

and the Roc references in the thread. Had me dying at first.

 

[timcity2000]

Originally Posted by YG716

Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?


you've just ruled out infertile opposite-sex couples as well....

 

[stackjaxx]

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by JohnnyRedStorm

I can't believe some people still think being gay is a choice. It's a chemical imbalance/chromosome issue that leads to homosexuality.

People need to stop. So is Schizophrenia and Bi-polar disorder. Treat it if that's the case.

Does any one even know what causes a chemical imbalance?? A lot of people just believe something just because they heard it somewhere else with no actual knowledge of the topic.  How creditable is their research? We can go on and on on why this is irrelevant.


Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?



Oh and

and the Roc references in the thread. Had me dying at first.

This isn't even the slippery slope argument, this is the nose dive off the cliff argument.
so if we let gay people marry, we all turn gay therefore turning the human gene pool into a barren wasteland?

 

[ill legal operation]

Originally Posted by TimCity2000

Originally Posted by ILL LEGAL OPERATION

...when the cards are laid on the table and it's agreed that homosexuals should enjoy the same rights as heterosexual married couples, but the rebuttal is a nonnegotiable desire upon using the term "marriage"...

What's in a name?

unfortunately, in this country, it's not yet agreed that homosexuals should enjoy the same rights as heterosexual married couples.  that's all i'm concerned about at this point.  when that happens, i personally won't care what terminology is used... as long as it is used evenly and consistently across the board (on a federal level).  i even said so in my post above.  in that way, i think you and i are probably on the same side here.
having said that, i think you're right to ask "what's in a name?"  when governments create "civil unions" for same-sex couples and reserve "marriages" for opposite-sex couples, they effectively create a second class.  because of the societal and cultural status afforded the term "marriage", i don't think this is insignificant.  it sounds like a reluctant compromise; a "giving in".  simply put... if there's no difference, why risk making them different?  again, this part of the argument is much less important to me personally, but i think it's worth considering.  let's work on getting equal rights first.

Good point...
...that's definitely something I overlooked - in the grand scheme of everything "human" (ignoring all constitutional standards of review for certain classifications), it wasn't my intentions to make it seem as though homosexuals should be placed on a lower level or "second class" as you put it - obviously I should have phrased that a little better.

Continuing with the theme of humanity - for a second let's remove the concept of "civil rights" and look at a homosexual couple's desire to have their union recognized by the state and sovereign as a human right. In that hypothetical world, the civil unions granted to homosexuals wouldn't be the compromise because a basic human right isn't something that should have to be negotiated or bargained for - the compromise would be homosexuals allowing heterosexuals to maintain possession (for lack of a better word three beers deep over here) of the title "marriage"...

...this being a Jay-Z thread, I'll use Jay as an example:

Don't know how familiar you are with his career, but when his label Rocafella records broke up he couldn't have possibly cared less as to who got to keep the name of the label, the label's property, or the various trademarks...

...his main concern was maintaining ownership of the master recordings to his debut album "Reasonable Doubt".

He couldn't totally exclude his two former business partners from everything "Rocafella" because they had just as much right to the name and trademarks as he did - he fought to keep possession of the master recordings to his debut album "Reasonable Doubt" because that album was near and dear to him - it was more that just a collection of songs...

...for many in this country, the term "marriage" is no different that "Reasonable Doubt" - yeah many people can suck their teeth, roll their eyes, and scoff, but that takes absolutely nothing away from how near and dear that term is in the hearts of many...

...the "reluctant compromise" wasn't relinquishing the name of the record label, the label's property, or its trademarks - the "reluctant compromise" would have been his partners acknowledging his emotional attachment to his album, and allowing him to keep it.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by JohnnyRedStorm

I can't believe some people still think being gay is a choice. It's a chemical imbalance/chromosome issue that leads to homosexuality.

People need to stop. So is Schizophrenia and Bi-polar disorder. Treat it if that's the case.

Does any one even know what causes a chemical imbalance?? A lot of people just believe something just because they heard it somewhere else with no actual knowledge of the topic.  How creditable is their research? We can go on and on on why this is irrelevant.


Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?

Jesus, so much ignorance in this post...
Just an example...

Scientists at the Karolinska Institute studied brain scans of 90 gay and straight men and women, and found that the size of the two symmetrical halves of the brains of gay men more closely resembled those of straight women than they did straight men. In heterosexual women, the two halves of the brain are more or less the same size. In heterosexual men, the right hemisphere is slightly larger. Scans of the brains of gay men in the study, however, showed that their hemispheres were relatively symmetrical, like those of straight women, while the brains of homosexual women were asymmetrical like those of straight men. The number of nerves connecting the two sides of the brains of gay men were also more like the number in heterosexual women than in straight men.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html#ixzz1v0IQx7qd



Yes, because as we all know, once you allow gay marriage everyone will all of a sudden drop their current sexual orientations.  It will be like the rapture only instead of everyone disappearing, they will know listen solely to The Petshop Boys and The Indigo Girls.  Guys will no longer be trolling for vagina.  Everyone you know will now be gay because gay marriage is allowed.  Those who crave parenthood inside of a marriage will now crave penis inside of their rectum.  This makes total sense.

I have read a lot of stupid things on NT, but this is up there with the best.

 

[dipsetgeneral]

Originally Posted by RetroBaller

Can we get freeways opinion on this as well?

*DEAD*
+

I have no problem wit' Gay Marriage. It doesn't affect me so, let everyone live their lives. However, I don't "support" it. Persay

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by TimCity2000

Originally Posted by YG716

Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?

you've just ruled out infertile opposite-sex couples as well....

They are not a standard like gay couples are trying to set. They are the exception. You wouldn't see infertile opposite-sex couples getting tax exempts for kids or something because they figure they spent a ton of money on treatment and meds to be fertile to have kids. Is that discrimination? They are the way they are too

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by DipsetGeneral

Originally Posted by RetroBaller

Can we get freeways opinion on this as well?

*DEAD*
+

I have no problem wit' Gay Marriage. It doesn't affect me so, let everyone live their lives. However, I don't "support" it. Persay

Are you in support of correct spelling?

 

[vatech733]

Originally Posted by StackJaxx

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by JohnnyRedStorm

I can't believe some people still think being gay is a choice. It's a chemical imbalance/chromosome issue that leads to homosexuality.

People need to stop. So is Schizophrenia and Bi-polar disorder. Treat it if that's the case.

Does any one even know what causes a chemical imbalance?? A lot of people just believe something just because they heard it somewhere else with no actual knowledge of the topic.  How creditable is their research? We can go on and on on why this is irrelevant.


Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?



Oh and

and the Roc references in the thread. Had me dying at first.

This isn't even the slippery slope argument, this is the nose dive off the cliff argument.
so if we let gay people marry, we all turn gay therefore turning the human gene pool into a barren wasteland?

Gay people will ways be the minority towards heterosexual human beings...if they start getting married the only thing that happens is they obtain the benefits of the marriage financially and as long as the church they belong to accepts them, then what is the harm in gays eloping and calling it marriage? Just because it doesn't fit YOUR definition of marriage doesn't mean it is wrong... like it was said earlier, marriage is beyond the religious definition.

If there is anyone to blame for gay people it is the heterosexual people who created them. Now if gay people somehow reproduced with each other and created gay children, yeah it would harm society

 

[big j 33]

The government recognizing same-sex couples as equal under the law will not lead to the eventual removal of all heterosexual people. That is so outrageously absurd.

 

[ill legal operation]

Obviously this is far bigger than hip hop, but it's telling to see how hip hop is being strategically used:

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by JohnnyRedStorm

I can't believe some people still think being gay is a choice. It's a chemical imbalance/chromosome issue that leads to homosexuality.

People need to stop. So is Schizophrenia and Bi-polar disorder. Treat it if that's the case.

Does any one even know what causes a chemical imbalance?? A lot of people just believe something just because they heard it somewhere else with no actual knowledge of the topic.  How creditable is their research? We can go on and on on why this is irrelevant.


Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?

Jesus, so much ignorance in this post...
Just an example...

Scientists at the Karolinska Institute studied brain scans of 90 gay and straight men and women, and found that the size of the two symmetrical halves of the brains of gay men more closely resembled those of straight women than they did straight men. In heterosexual women, the two halves of the brain are more or less the same size. In heterosexual men, the right hemisphere is slightly larger. Scans of the brains of gay men in the study, however, showed that their hemispheres were relatively symmetrical, like those of straight women, while the brains of homosexual women were asymmetrical like those of straight men. The number of nerves connecting the two sides of the brains of gay men were also more like the number in heterosexual women than in straight men.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html#ixzz1v0IQx7qd

Yes, because as we all know, once you allow gay marriage everyone will all of a sudden drop their current sexual orientations.  It will be like the rapture only instead of everyone disappearing, they will know listen solely to The Petshop Boys and The Indigo Girls.  Guys will no longer be trolling for vagina.  Everyone you know will now be gay because gay marriage is allowed.  Those who crave parenthood inside of a marriage will now crave penis inside of their rectum.  This makes total sense.

I have read a lot of stupid things on NT, but this is up there with the best.

You missed the point. Its not about a gene pool its about why it needs to be accepted or recognized by the government. Like what purpose does a gay marriage serve to society?? There is absolutely nothing productive about a gay marriage.The government needs people to exist, needs people to provide labor and needs people to make people so this can continue. Like why do you think marriages even exist in the 1st place???? For moral reasons???? The government acknowledges a marriage because it wants to make people happy and recognize their union? ...Ok


No one said it will effect heterosexuals at all. Im stating reasons why the government has no reason to accept or acknowledge a gay marriage.

 

[hankmoody]

Hip hop is being used? I thought social activism was hip hop in its very essence.

 

[big j 33]

"Just for the record, I'm married to a woman" I yell laughed at that

He was so casual with it, but had to throw it out there

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Originally Posted by YG716

People need to stop. So is Schizophrenia and Bi-polar disorder. Treat it if that's the case.

Does any one even know what causes a chemical imbalance?? A lot of people just believe something just because they heard it somewhere else with no actual knowledge of the topic.  How creditable is their research? We can go on and on on why this is irrelevant.


Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?

Jesus, so much ignorance in this post...
Just an example...

Scientists at the Karolinska Institute studied brain scans of 90 gay and straight men and women, and found that the size of the two symmetrical halves of the brains of gay men more closely resembled those of straight women than they did straight men. In heterosexual women, the two halves of the brain are more or less the same size. In heterosexual men, the right hemisphere is slightly larger. Scans of the brains of gay men in the study, however, showed that their hemispheres were relatively symmetrical, like those of straight women, while the brains of homosexual women were asymmetrical like those of straight men. The number of nerves connecting the two sides of the brains of gay men were also more like the number in heterosexual women than in straight men.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1815538,00.html#ixzz1v0IQx7qd

Yes, because as we all know, once you allow gay marriage everyone will all of a sudden drop their current sexual orientations.  It will be like the rapture only instead of everyone disappearing, they will know listen solely to The Petshop Boys and The Indigo Girls.  Guys will no longer be trolling for vagina.  Everyone you know will now be gay because gay marriage is allowed.  Those who crave parenthood inside of a marriage will now crave penis inside of their rectum.  This makes total sense.

I have read a lot of stupid things on NT, but this is up there with the best.

You missed the point. Its not about a gene pool its about why it needs to be accepted or recognized by the government. Like what purpose does a gay marriage serve to society?? There is absolutely nothing productive about a gay marriage.The government needs people to exist, needs people to provide labor and needs people to make people so this can continue. Like why do you think marriages even exist in the 1st place???? For moral reasons???? The government acknowledges a marriage because it wants to make people happy and recognize their union? ...Ok

Again, every married couple that decides not to have children makes your argument invalid. Also, you don't have to be married to have children. Marriage's purpose isn't to serve society.  Have you ever listened to a couple recite their vows?  I've never heard anyone say I, Debra, take you Glen, to be my husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, and to serve society and to provide labor; from this day forward until death do us part.

You don't need to search anywhere other than their vows to find what marriage is about.

 

[scientific method]

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by TimCity2000

Originally Posted by YG716

Bottom line is this, society can not live on in a gay world. Gay couples can not reproduce. Why should gay marriage be promoted or "acknowledged" by the government when it is counterproductive to the very existence and purpose of the government (the people) if nothing else?

you've just ruled out infertile opposite-sex couples as well....

They are not a standard like gay couples are trying to set. They are the exception. You wouldn't see infertile opposite-sex couples getting tax exempts for kids or
something because they figure they spent a ton of money on treatment and
meds to be fertile to have kids. Is that discrimination? They are the way they are too




What a stupid argument.

 

[ill legal operation]

Originally Posted by HankMoody

Hip hop is being used? I thought social activism was hip hop in its very essence.

Social activism at its very essence is marching, boycotting, voting, etc...
...hip hop is social awareness.

Hip hop can be used as a tool to make society aware of issues that would usually fall to the back burner, or be overlooked in their entirety...

...in this immediate scenario, hip hop appears to be being used a tool to swing the young and popular demographic back in line with the "progressive" agenda that the demographic may have been deterred from if their parents strongly dissented with Obama's recent stance.

 

[naturalylight]

Originally Posted by fraij da 5 11

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Nothing like a good ol 'whose had it worse' pissing match. It always strikes me weird that African Americans are trying to monopolize civil rights movements. Get over yourself! DOES ANYONE EVER DISAGREE THAT AFRICAN AMERICANS WERE PERSECUTED WORSE? Has anyone ever denied that? The irrelevancy astounds me. Jesus @$%@*!% christ, it seems to me that those who have been persecuted would be the first to empathize with someone receiving false judgments! There is no prize to the 'We had it worse' argument. The prize is in equality. It sickens me that gets overlooked due to groups not wanting to detract from their own past struggles. WE GET IT! You had it worse, now look inside yourself to at least recognize the similarities.

this is legit as !%+% 

 

[ninjahood]

obama and da left are under estimating how opposed da black community is on gay marriage......

 

[lobotomybeats]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

obama and da left are under estimating how opposed da black community is on gay marriage......

And you are underestimating how opposed to voting for Romney the black community is....