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

[yg716]

Originally Posted by culturecarnage

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by culturecarnage


you're making assumptions that i didn't read them and saying that you made valid points doesn't mean you did. its bigotry cut and dried, this idea that marriage is to be protected is out and out ridiculous as if the people who get married now somehow hold it in such high regard. quite frankly who gives a *$#% about what someone does that doesn't affect you in any way what so ever. 
same goes for abortion, the only person who gets a right to say what i do with my vagina is me. point blank period. this ###!%#%@ of trying to legislate and determine moral behavior has got to stop. in telling me what i get to do with my vagina you're staking out some ownership of women as a whole an their reproductive rights. in denying gay marriage you're staking out ownership of sexuality. society is made p of people and people have no rights over other people. jay-z's parallel of gay mariage as a civil rights issue is hauntingly accurate.

Missing the point. Make your argument else where I have done too much typing to explain again. reread it if you already read it. I already said to point out a reason that is not emotionally driven on why gay marriage needs to be legalized. Staking out ownership of sexuality??? Who does that serve besides yourself? In what way will the majority benefit from that??

Your vag is your vag and rightfully so and as you are a human being amongst a community of others you are more than welcome to do as you please with it . However this is legislation. Legislation is not made for self serving purposes, especially amongst a minority group. Ownership of sexuality? That why the government recognizes marriages and provides benefits to married couples? You cant be serious. Marriage is not about that to the government. I already explained this.

 Legislation for gay marriage cannot be justified for any other reason than self serving purposes. What legislation gets passed that serves no point but to make a minority group happy especially when it takes a majority to pass it?? There's no discrimination here. Its fact that gay couples can not put people into this world. They offer nothing to anyone but themselves. Nobody's being unjust and oppressing anyone here. Legislation is set forth for the majority and has a beneficial purpose to the majority. That's why it gets passed. That's is why its called politics. Politics is whats popular amongst a majority.

you seem to forget the fundamental part of majority rule is that they must protect minority rights. we dont live in a populist society. women's suffrage, abortion rights, civil right for african americans were all staked out to protect minority rights under majority rule. you are under the impression that law exists in some sort of vacuum outside of social conventions and that laws' purpose is to dictate some kind of agreed upon social good. laws are a reflection of society's social conventions to create a standard of both liberty and equality. to make gay marriage legal would only be to update the law to what the majority of the population already agrees upon and protect the rights and equality of a minority.
your arguments tell me you know nothing about how society, law, legislature, and politics actually work. turn the tv off and open a book. read some legal history and social theory. i assure you, you'll be all the better for it. 

lastly, for you to say that its an emotional argument is ridiculous as if in courtrooms and legislatures across the country if not the world don't make emotional arguments and as if somehow emotional arguments cannot be rational. it's absolutely ridiculous.

You are absolutely right. However you left out the fact that entails equality. Surely your point is made on the fact that "All men are created equal" therefore protect their rights of minorities as they are equal men as well. (I'll leave out the part about god to help your argument)  but how can you call it equal? They are two different things. No matter how much a gay couple love each other, it could be 100x more than any heterosexual couple, they just cannot do for society what a heterosexual couple can. Why do they deserve the same benefits? Thats like saying the manager of a company is suppose to be paid the same as regular employees cause they are a person just like you. They are a person just like you BUT you don't have the experience or degree or required skills for that position like that person does. When you do then you will be equal and deserve to be a manager too whether you are a minority or not. Same thing. When gay people can make productive memebers of society  like heterosexual couples they can get the same rights.

Lastly your point about emotion driven arguments in the court of law is ridiculous. You think people proving ANY type of case on an emotional point? Emotions/moral reason etc cant prove anything its takes evidence and facts to back up your emotional point. Stop watching tv


And to finally put to rest the Civil Rights comparisons this is the fundamental difference between the two. Black people want to know why they dont have the same rights when they no different from eveybody else. They were capable of doing everything whites could in all aspects but were being denied the same rights. I can have a degree the required skills and everything but you wont give me a job because Im black?? Gay couples cannot do the same as heterosexual couples. No discrimination no injustice here. I rest my case.

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by malikdagoat

What really irritates me about this whole gay marriage movement is the fact the supporters of the movement are so damn argumentative with those who don't support. As soon as somebody says they don't support gay marriage there's a bucket of hate and insults being thrown at them, like damn I ain't allowed to have my own opinion.

Serious question, if we're going to change the definition of marriage to allow two ppl of the same sex to get married, why can't a man have multiple wives?..or a woman have multiple husbands?... or allow people to marry their cousins, brothers..sisters, uncles, etc

If we're going to get rid of the constraints on the definition of marriage we have to do it for EVERYBODY. But I bet the same people yelling and flaming others for not supporting gay marriage wouldn't be nearly as supportive of the types of marriages I mentioned.

FTW


 

 

[culturecarnage]

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by culturecarnage

Originally Posted by YG716

Missing the point. Make your argument else where I have done too much typing to explain again. reread it if you already read it. I already said to point out a reason that is not emotionally driven on why gay marriage needs to be legalized. Staking out ownership of sexuality??? Who does that serve besides yourself? In what way will the majority benefit from that??

Your vag is your vag and rightfully so and as you are a human being amongst a community of others you are more than welcome to do as you please with it . However this is legislation. Legislation is not made for self serving purposes, especially amongst a minority group. Ownership of sexuality? That why the government recognizes marriages and provides benefits to married couples? You cant be serious. Marriage is not about that to the government. I already explained this.

 Legislation for gay marriage cannot be justified for any other reason than self serving purposes. What legislation gets passed that serves no point but to make a minority group happy especially when it takes a majority to pass it?? There's no discrimination here. Its fact that gay couples can not put people into this world. They offer nothing to anyone but themselves. Nobody's being unjust and oppressing anyone here. Legislation is set forth for the majority and has a beneficial purpose to the majority. That's why it gets passed. That's is why its called politics. Politics is whats popular amongst a majority.

you seem to forget the fundamental part of majority rule is that they must protect minority rights. we dont live in a populist society. women's suffrage, abortion rights, civil right for african americans were all staked out to protect minority rights under majority rule. you are under the impression that law exists in some sort of vacuum outside of social conventions and that laws' purpose is to dictate some kind of agreed upon social good. laws are a reflection of society's social conventions to create a standard of both liberty and equality. to make gay marriage legal would only be to update the law to what the majority of the population already agrees upon and protect the rights and equality of a minority.
your arguments tell me you know nothing about how society, law, legislature, and politics actually work. turn the tv off and open a book. read some legal history and social theory. i assure you, you'll be all the better for it. 

lastly, for you to say that its an emotional argument is ridiculous as if in courtrooms and legislatures across the country if not the world don't make emotional arguments and as if somehow emotional arguments cannot be rational. it's absolutely ridiculous.

You are absolutely right. However you left out the fact that entails equality. Surely your point is made on the fact that "All men are created equal" therefore protect their rights of minorities as they are equal men as well. (I'll leave out the part about god to help your argument)  but how can you call it equal? They are two different things. No matter how much a gay couple love each other, it could be 100x more than any heterosexual couple, they just cannot do for society what a heterosexual couple can. Why do they deserve the same benefits? Thats like saying the manager of a company is suppose to be paid the same as regular employees cause they are a person just like you. They are a person just like you BUT you don't have the experience or degree or required skills for that position like that person does. When you do then you will be equal and deserve to be a manager too whether you are a minority or not. Same thing. When gay people can make productive memebers of society  like heterosexual couples they can get the same rights.

Lastly your point about emotion driven arguments in the court of law is ridiculous. You think people proving ANY type of case on an emotional point? Emotions/moral reason etc cant prove anything its takes evidence and facts to back up your emotional point. Stop watching tv


And to finally put to rest the Civil Rights comparisons this is the fundamental difference between the two. Black people want to know why they dont have the same rights when they no different from eveybody else. They were capable of doing everything whites could in all aspects but were being denied the same rights. I can have a degree the required skills and everything but you wont give me a job because Im black?? Gay couples cannot do the same as heterosexual couples. No discrimination no injustice here. I rest my case.

are you serious? i dont watch television outside of mad men, true story and you still havent made a case. all you have said is that gay people arent equal which is just  parroting the bigoted remarks you said before.
btw brown v. board of education was won by playing on the emotions of the supreme court using flawed but moving social science to say segregation "created a feeling of inferiority"

but please go ahead...

 

[ninjahood]

Originally Posted by culturecarnage

Originally Posted by Wr

Originally Posted by culturecarnage

oh so you want to play the who suffered more game, the one where everyone loses? no thanks. what am i supposed to say? i'll take black gay woman for $2000? FOH


and yes i do i think all oppression based on socially constructed ideals is out and out wrong, i don't rank them.

But I specifically asked you to point out a time where gays have been claimed as sub human legally and your answer was "now?" based on the fact gay people can't get married. Those two things def do not hold the same weight. I said it wasn't because that's not true. Gay people can still own property, go to school, look you in the eye etc....Hence me saying you are wrong, they are not equal. You then go back to the good old suffering game analogy.�

you don't know gay history to say that they haven't. gays have been persecuted violently and still are.

welp...there goes da gay culture...cuz if they can pick and choose attributes, what makes having gay genes feasible for survival if thats it can be deleted with technology?

and wait a minute...i HOPE you aren't comparing da civil rights of gays from that of blacks.....

being gay used to be poppin with those ancient greeks....

it was NEVER poppin to have darker skin in history...

 

[cap1229]

if it wasn't messy before its about to get messy now. Being gay and being a person of color are not the same so we can just end that before it starts.

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by culturecarnage

Originally Posted by YG716

Originally Posted by culturecarnage

you seem to forget the fundamental part of majority rule is that they must protect minority rights. we dont live in a populist society. women's suffrage, abortion rights, civil right for african americans were all staked out to protect minority rights under majority rule. you are under the impression that law exists in some sort of vacuum outside of social conventions and that laws' purpose is to dictate some kind of agreed upon social good. laws are a reflection of society's social conventions to create a standard of both liberty and equality. to make gay marriage legal would only be to update the law to what the majority of the population already agrees upon and protect the rights and equality of a minority.
your arguments tell me you know nothing about how society, law, legislature, and politics actually work. turn the tv off and open a book. read some legal history and social theory. i assure you, you'll be all the better for it. 

lastly, for you to say that its an emotional argument is ridiculous as if in courtrooms and legislatures across the country if not the world don't make emotional arguments and as if somehow emotional arguments cannot be rational. it's absolutely ridiculous.

You are absolutely right. However you left out the fact that entails equality. Surely your point is made on the fact that "All men are created equal" therefore protect their rights of minorities as they are equal men as well. (I'll leave out the part about god to help your argument)  but how can you call it equal? They are two different things. No matter how much a gay couple love each other, it could be 100x more than any heterosexual couple, they just cannot do for society what a heterosexual couple can. Why do they deserve the same benefits? Thats like saying the manager of a company is suppose to be paid the same as regular employees cause they are a person just like you. They are a person just like you BUT you don't have the experience or degree or required skills for that position like that person does. When you do then you will be equal and deserve to be a manager too whether you are a minority or not. Same thing. When gay people can make productive memebers of society  like heterosexual couples they can get the same rights.

Lastly your point about emotion driven arguments in the court of law is ridiculous. You think people proving ANY type of case on an emotional point? Emotions/moral reason etc cant prove anything its takes evidence and facts to back up your emotional point. Stop watching tv


And to finally put to rest the Civil Rights comparisons this is the fundamental difference between the two. Black people want to know why they dont have the same rights when they no different from eveybody else. They were capable of doing everything whites could in all aspects but were being denied the same rights. I can have a degree the required skills and everything but you wont give me a job because Im black?? Gay couples cannot do the same as heterosexual couples. No discrimination no injustice here. I rest my case.

are you serious? i dont watch television outside of mad men, true story and you still havent made a case. all you have said is that gay people arent equal which is just  parroting the bigoted remarks you said before.
btw brown v. board of education was won by playing on the emotions of the supreme court using flawed but moving social science to say segregation "created a feeling of inferiority"

but please go ahead...

Thats all you have to say? Its bigoted remarks you say but wont explain how?

I dont know about brown vs board of education but i do know that to suggest a case was won off creating  inferior feelings its suggesting that it was equal and not being treated as such. So you prove my point for me.


btw Mad Men            

                 

 

[tony goalie]

it was NEVER poppin to have darker skin in history...

 

[tennhouse2]

Malikdagoat and yg716- the problem with letting people marry there brother, sister, cousin, etc is that it harms someone who had nothing to do with the decision (the baby), and in that same vain allowing people to have multiple wives and husbands, it would lead to a giant chain of marriges (u have 3 wives and each of ur wives have 3 husbands) which again would lead to alot of unintentional crossbreading since it would be hard to tell whos whos dad and whos who mom (it wouldnt be like other countrys were only the husbands can have multiple spouses, we have equal rights here).............none of thoes problems are dealt with in same sex marriges, so no its not the same

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by cap1229

if it wasn't messy before its about to get messy now. Being gay and being a person of color are not the same so we can just end that before it starts.

Word. It's not discrimination because gay people don't have the right to marry. If we can't agree on anything else let's agree on this.

 

[scientific method]

Slippery slope fallacy. I'm seeing some of the dumbest arguments ever in here.

 

[an dee 51o]

Originally Posted by cap1229

Being gay and being a person of color are not the same so we can just end that before it starts.

No one said that. Do you read before replying or just type whatever comes to mind?

What people are saying is that it is a civil rights issue. Every civil rights movement has influences, and it's ironic that some black people think that theirs was the original civil rights struggle.

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by TennHouse2

Malikdagoat and yg716- the problem with letting people marry there brother, sister, cousin, etc is that it harms someone who had nothing to do with the decision (the baby), and in that same vain allowing people to have multiple wives and husbands, it would lead to a giant chain of marriges (u have 3 wives and each of ur wives have 3 husbands) which again would lead to alot of unintentional crossbreading since it would be hard to tell whos whos dad and whos who mom (it wouldnt be like other countrys were only the husbands can have multiple spouses, we have equal rights here).............none of thoes problems are dealt with in same sex marriges, so no its not the same

That's justifiable. Point taken. At the same time though if it is all about making laws cause a parallel can be made to something that is not the same  (gay couples love each other just like heterosexuals but cant do for society as heterosexuals) then Malikdagoat has a point. But yea I can agree with you. You came with legit facts. You make a valid reasonable argument.

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by an dee 51o

Originally Posted by cap1229

Being gay and being a person of color are not the same so we can just end that before it starts.

No one said that. Do you read before replying or just type whatever comes to mind?

What people are saying is that it is a civil rights issue. Every civil rights movement has influences, and it's ironic that some black people think that theirs was the original civil rights struggle.

It's not about it being original or more important or any of that. Its simply that its not the same. Gays can't say they being denied inequality for something thats not the same.

 

[cap1229]

Originally Posted by an dee 51o

Originally Posted by cap1229

Being gay and being a person of color are not the same so we can just end that before it starts.

No one said that. Do you read before replying or just type whatever comes to mind?

What people are saying is that it is a civil rights issue. Every civil rights movement has influences, and it's ironic that some black people think that theirs was the original civil rights struggle.

No it was hinted that it was going in that direction and I was addressing it and shutting it down. I don't have a problem with gay marriage. I think they should have this right and it has nothing to do with my race or my religion. If you can't read between the lines of where this thread was headed then I'm sorry for you.

 

[regis]

Would black people feel less offended if we started comparing the gay marriage issue to womens civil rights movement?

Someone pls respond.

 

[kramer]

Would you say the holocaust is similar/equal to slavery in America? They didn't choose to be jewish and suffered horribly

 

[regis]

I thought the holocaust was just fanta sea.

 

[yg716]

Originally Posted by Regis

Would black people feel less offended if we started comparing the gay marriage issue to womens civil rights movement?

Someone pls respond.

Lol

No. Its not about stepping on toes. Its about it not being the same other than they a group of people wanting rights. You want to draw a parallel think of a law that exists for no reason. Women actual have legit reasons they deserve their rights. Things that can be proven as to why they deserve equal treatment. Gay marriage cannot. A civil union is suitable. They exist based on two completely different things and can be recognized as such

 

[crystal springs]

This will probably be viewed as a dumb question. If gay people live in a state that bans gay marriage, should they be taxed the same as straight people?
If the state government says that your rights aren't the same as a heterosexual person, why should you be taxed like a heterosexual person?

 

[monstar1]

 stop comparing suffering and human rights. each case is different

 

[teamjordan79]

Originally Posted by Scientific Method

Slippery slope fallacy. I'm seeing some of the dumbest arguments ever in here.

thats the reason this topic keeps getting pushed by the media: more important issues get overlooked, societal divisions become more rigid  

 

[untouchable jc]

it was more or less accepted or ar least not frowned upon in Ancient Greece and Rome

 

[deuce king]

Originally Posted by SunDOOBIE

Deuce King wrote:

Why did the actions of a few individuals that were apart of the cause deter you from continuing to support them if that's what you truly believed and voted for??

Truthfully and personally I don't believe in gay marriage.  But who am I to judge?  I knew the issue of gay marriage in CA won't end until a law allows them to marry legally so based of that I voted no on Prop 8.  I vote for the good of society and not just based on my beliefs.
Then the backlash happened and I knew several people and businesses that were bullied by gay right groups for donating to the anti-gay marriage campaign. Those people that donated and voted are free to do what they felt was their right so they shouldn't be harassed for how they voted.  So to me after that, I was done.  I would probably abstain for voting for either side now. 


It's unfortunate that some people you know and businesses were harmed and bullied after the results from the vote came in, truly unfortunate.  However, if that caused you to be less sympathetic to the cause of gay marriage, whether it was truly in your heart or not then to me your just as guilty as other races that judge or base their preception of blacks off of the negative images they see of a certain number of blacks.  We don't want it done to us, so you shouldn't do it to them.  

I said this is the first time a white man has been denied a civil luxury in this country. So of course the passion is more "fierce"

I know plenty of black gay people dude. They could careless about getting married. They are still black at the end of the day. Got bigger problems.

This is a white privileged issue.

Bob's a nice upstanding white american and so is Jake there clean cut Americans. How dare they not be able to get married there white for god's sake.

And if your brains are too clouded to understand my point earlier. Im saying comparing a race of people to a group of people's sexual preference or orientation (becuase its both) is beyond disrespecful. Becuase of the convience a gay person has to hide his or her "gayness"

Why in 2012 when the leader of the free world is black is it such a surge for gay rights? Why now when its "Ok to be gay?" O yea because you can hide being gay.

Blacks tho they couldnt hide being black. You see they were getting there heads blown off just for being dark they wasnt just black when there penises got hard. They werent just black when they were sexually attracted to someone. It was a 24/7 gig. 

And no I havent endured the same atrocities I mentioned. But you know what my Uncle did, My grandma did, My granddad was a veteran and denied a government job cause of his skin while J. Edgar Hoover got to "hide" his tabooness while he was the most powerful man in the country. So no its not the same

Atleast Im understanding enough to realize that most non-blacks would favor fighting for the 1 "right" whites...who happen to be gay dont have. Moreso then to fight for African Americans multiple discriminations.

But just say that so we can move on. Stop acting like you care about civil liberties for all people. Cause you dont

   

born where? 

Worry about Ron Paul champ and his campaign that's going nowhere.

Would black people feel less offended if we started comparing the gay marriage issue to womens civil rights movement?

Someone pls respond.

How about you stop trying to compare gay marriage to anything, and just have it stand on it's on.

 stop comparing suffering and human rights. each case is different

100% Truth.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Pig Love

Ha! Ha! BREAKING NEWS!!

born where? 

I don't even care about the Kenya thing. Business International Corporation is a known CIA Financial analysis group.

 

[lobotomybeats]

Deuce King wrote:

 stop comparing suffering and human rights. each case is different

100% Truth.
No one is saying they are exactly the same.  There are parallels. You can't deny that.