Online Now 1760

The Barnyard

The place for Gamecock football and recruiting talk, plus off-topic subjects.

On this Board 76
Record: 486 (2/17/2013)

Online now 2067
Record: 9625 (10/8/2011)

Boards ▾

Palmetto Proving Grounds

The place for Gamecock talk, news and information

The Barnyard

The place for Gamecock football and recruiting talk, plus off-topic subjects.

The McGuire Room

The place for Gamecock basketball talk, news and information

The Sarge

The ultimate online destination for the latest scoop on Carolina's national power baseball program.

GCI Archives

Everything from Gamecock Insider Tony Morrell, in case you missed it.

Spurnotes Archives

The place to read all past editions of Spurnotes

Video Archive

Hall of Fame

The best of the best

Ticket Exchange

Buy and sell your Gamecock tickets here.

Test Forum

Feedback for TBS and 247Sports.

Reply

I hate to bring up an old topic, but

  • I saw this picture today, and was honestly quite shocked.

    The amendment that passed yesterday IMO was quite disturbing. Not only does it deny gay marriages, but also even relatively toothless civil unions or partnerships.

    Doesn't make sense to me. Absolutely no legitimate reason to deny these rights other than the fact that some groups aren't comfortable with it. With the social problems in this country we should be encouraging even more families, not less.

    soapbox

    attachment
    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • Not that I agree with either one, but I'm pretty sure the ratio of first cousins getting married compared to gays doesn't even make for a useful argument for either side...Just saying.

    EastTnGamecock4361 ●

  • EastTn.Gamecock said...

    Not that I agree with either one, but I'm pretty sure the ratio of first cousins getting married compared to gays doesn't even make for a useful argument for either side...Just saying.

    I agree, I honestly just put that in there because I found it surprising.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • I've yet to see any argument against gay marriage that makes me see it as anything but blatant discrimination.

    EarthyTechnoPop

  • EarthyTechnoPop said...

    I've yet to see any argument against gay marriage that makes me see it as anything but blatant discrimination.

    agreed.

    signature image

    follow me on twitter and instagram @palmettozia **** I'm not an insider, I just live here ****

    3pt0 ●

  • All I can tell you is that it's amazing how much more my wife and I love each other now that some gay people we never met can't get married.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw

  • joetheogre said...

    I saw this picture today, and was honestly quite shocked.

    The amendment that passed yesterday IMO was quite disturbing. Not only does it deny gay marriages, but also even relatively toothless civil unions or partnerships.

    Doesn't make sense to me. Absolutely no legitimate reason to deny these rights other than the fact that some groups aren't comfortable with it. With the social problems in this country we should be encouraging even more families, not less.

    soapbox

    Interesting that in a thread a few weeks ago, Maxcy, in railing against those in favor of marriage equality stated something to the effect that he and those of his point of view had nothing against civil unions, they just didn't want gay marriage shoved down their throats.

    Every single one of those states' constitutional amendments banning gay marriage also ban civil unions.

    The truth may set you free, but it sure complicates things for some people.

    signature image

    81 Alumnus

  • 81 Alumnus said...

    ...The truth may set you free, but it sure complicates things for some people.

    bush 2 inherited a recession from clinton.

    signature image signature image

    "Crito, I owe a cock to Asclepius; will you remember to pay the debt?"

    dutch30805

  • dutch30805 said...

    bush 2 inherited a recession from clinton.

    we all understand your position. Just so I know in the future, how many months must go by before the fault goes from one president to the next. I have no problem with the position, i just want to make sure we are consistent. Is it 2 months, 4 months, or some other number?

    and just to be clear, I am against putting fault for such large issues at the feet of any president; I blame Congress much more than the executive.

    This post was edited by CockAtLaw on 5/9/2012 at 4:40 PM

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw

  • 81 Alumnus said...

    marriage equality

    Currently we all have the same rights when it comes to marriage. That's the definition of marriage equality.
    What some want, however, is an additional right that currently they aren't afforded, namely marrying someone of the same sex.

    signature image signature image signature image

    augustacarguy

  • augustacarguy said...

    Currently we all have the same rights when it comes to marriage. That's the definition of marriage equality. What some want, however, is an additional right that currently they aren't afforded, namely marrying someone of the same sex.

    By your definition, women seeking the right to vote, and slaves seeking freedom would have been looking for "additional rights," not equal rights.

    The world doesn't really work like they tell you on "Fox and Friends."

    signature image

    81 Alumnus

  • augustacarguy said...

    Currently we all have the same rights when it comes to marriage. That's the definition of marriage equality. What some want, however, is an additional right that currently they aren't afforded, namely marrying someone of the same sex.

    That is not the definition of marriage equality. The definition of marriage equality is the right to choose which ____________ is legally regarded as your spouse.

    The argument is over whether that blank line says "person" or "person of the opposite sex." If you want to have a legitimate debate on the merits of each position (not with me though, because I have already shown my bias in this thread), the least you can do is start by recognizing the basic position of the opposing side and not phrasing it in a way that shows you want no such debate...that is of course if you want to have a thoughtful, intelligent debate in the first place, maybe you don't.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw

  • 81 Alumnus said...

    By your definition, women seeking the right to vote, and slaves seeking freedom would have been looking for "additional rights," not equal rights.

    The world doesn't really work like they tell you on "Fox and Friends."

    Every citizen of the US currently has the same marriage rights, no difference for gay, straight, bi. You have your opinion, I have mine and neither has anything to do with Fox News.

    Being called homophobic, racist, sexist, etc has become an easy out for those who do not know how to have calm, considered, informed conversation.

    I believe that homosexuality is a sin because I believe that the Bible is the Word of God. I believe that America is the greatest nation in the history of the world because we have protected the weak, defended right, and taken nothing from those who we protected. I believe that neither Repubs or Dems are always right or always wrong but both sets of politicians are out for themselves.

    We can agree to disagree but that does not make you right and me wrong.

    dodgerblue42312

  • No. A woman desiring to vote is seeking the same right as a man. She wants to do the same thing as a man. Not something additional. Not the same argument. If she wanted two votes, that's an additional right.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by augustacarguy on 5/9/2012 at 5:11 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    augustacarguy

  • CockAtLaw said...

    we all understand your position. Just so I know in the future, how many months must go by before the fault goes from one president to the next. I have no problem with the position, i just want to make sure we are consistent. Is it 2 months, 4 months, or some other number?

    and just to be clear, I am against putting fault for such large issues at the feet of any president; I blame Congress much more than the executive.

    if a recession is underway less than 2 months after your presidency the recession on you.

    obviously. and thanks for asking.

    signature image signature image

    "Crito, I owe a cock to Asclepius; will you remember to pay the debt?"

    dutch30805

  • dutch30805 said...

    if a recession is underway less than 2 months after your presidency the recession on you.

    obviously. and thanks for asking.

    So, is it 2 months? What if the 2001 recession started in April instead of March? I'm inquiring about a consistent, broadly applicable test. Thanks.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw

  • CockAtLaw said...

    ... I have no problem with the position, ...

    i only know ofone person who has a problem with the position. And he's desparate.

    signature image signature image

    "Crito, I owe a cock to Asclepius; will you remember to pay the debt?"

    dutch30805

  • CockAtLaw said...

    That is not the definition of marriage equality. The definition of marriage equality is the right to choose which ____________ is legally regarded as your spouse.

    The argument is over whether that blank line says "person" or "person of the opposite sex." If you want to have a legitimate debate on the merits of each position (not with me though, because I have already shown my bias in this thread), the least you can do is start by recognizing the basic position of the opposing side and not phrasing it in a way that shows you want no such debate...that is of course if you want to have a thoughtful, intelligent debate in the first place, maybe you don't.

    If we all have the same right, that's equal. It's really pretty simple.

    signature image signature image signature image

    augustacarguy

  • augustacarguy said...

    No. A woman desiring to vote is seeking the same right as a man. She wants to do the same thing as a man. Not something additional. Not the same argument.

    It's exactly the same. I told you, this isn't "Fox and Friends." You and Gretchen Carlson saying it is doesn't make it so.

    Another example, as recently as the 1950's, the majority of US States defined marriage as a union only between two people of the same race. By your way of thinking(and I use that term loosely), people of different races who wished to be married were asking for a new extra right. Adults already had the right to marry people of the same race.

    Just as today adults have the right to marry someone of the opposite gender.

    By the way, I bet you're the type who thinks government oughta stay out of people's private lives too. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

    signature image

    81 Alumnus

  • augustacarguy said...

    If we all have the same right, that's equal. It's really pretty simple.

    So if there was a law that said you could vote for any man you wanted, and only men were placed on all ballots, that would not be a liberty issue because we all have the same legal right to vote for any man we want?

    It seems to me that the argument over liberty/freedom is over the restriction placed on the permitted class of individuals. If your argument is based entirely on the semantic use of the word "equality" by completely dismissing the issue as everyone understands it to be, then it is clear you aren't interested in a legitimate debate.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw

  • I had the right to marry the consenting adult that I wanted to marry. I'm thankful that I prefer the opposite gender. If not, I would not have been able to do so.

    EarthyTechnoPop

  • dodgerblue-42 said...

    Every citizen of the US currently has the same marriage rights, no difference for gay, straight, bi. You have your opinion, I have mine and neither has anything to do with Fox News.

    Being called homophobic, racist, sexist, etc has become an easy out for those who do not know how to have calm, considered, informed conversation.

    I believe that homosexuality is a sin because I believe that the Bible is the Word of God. I believe that America is the greatest nation in the history of the world because we have protected the weak, defended right, and taken nothing from those who we protected. I believe that neither Repubs or Dems are always right or always wrong but both sets of politicians are out for themselves.

    We can agree to disagree but that does not make you right and me wrong.

    The Holy Bible says very clearly that if a man lays with another man as man does with a woman, he should be killed. It says not a single,solitary word about lesbians.

    if you follow the Holy Bible word for word, you must advocate the death of gay men, and leave lesbians alone.

    Otherwise, you are twisting the Holy Bible to justify your own non-Bible based opinions. Aren't you a little, tiny bit afraid that you might have to answer for that some day.

    Just a little.

    signature image

    81 Alumnus

  • 81 Alumnus said...

    The Holy Bible says very clearly that if a man lays with another man as man does with a woman, he should be killed. It says not a single,solitary word about lesbians.

    if you follow the Holy Bible word for word, you must advocate the death of gay men, and leave lesbians alone.

    Otherwise, you are twisting the Holy Bible to justify your own non-Bible based opinions. Aren't you a little, tiny bit afraid that you might have to answer for that some day.

    Just a little.

    Nope, I'm all for lesbians, as long as they're hot and I get to watch.

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw

  • Neither would I. Equal means the same.

    signature image signature image signature image

    augustacarguy

  • augustacarguy said...

    Neither would I. Equal means the same.

    So you agree you are going to argue about the meaning of the word "equal" and nothing else? Got it

    signature image

    You may run like Hayes, but you hit like $*!#

    CockAtLaw

South Carolina
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports