The state of Michigan is being sued over their prohibition on same sex marriage. The state filed a response recently that included this statement:

"One of the paramount purposes of marriage in Michigan — and at least 37 other states that define marriage as a union between a man and a woman — is, and has always been, to regulate sexual relationships between men and women so that the unique procreative capacity of such relationships benefits rather than harms society."

I know many of you righties believe in delegating to the states, so do you think the state should have the ability to regulate sexual relationships between consenting adults? Seems like some elected GOPers think so.

Absolutely. States should discourage sex outside of traditional marriage, for the good of their citizens. We don't need state governments encouraging parenting arrangements that aren't in kids' best interests. Nor should states promote activities that lead to STDs. We do need states encouraging traditional two-parent homes, and encouraging the sanctity of traditional marriage (unlike things like Obamacare which penalizes traditional marriage).

call me crazy but are conservatives the ones calling for govt to butt out of our daily lives?????

#hypocrisy

Poor choice of words. A man and woman relationship is a natural thing, and nature doesn't need regulating.

I think that the procreation argument is the weakest.

(11-18-2013 11:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  call me crazy but are conservatives the ones calling for govt to butt out of our daily lives?????

#hypocrisy

No. Libertarians are calling for that. Conservatives like laws that protect people and uphold standards that are in society's best interests. Things like speed limits, penalties against murder, rape, promoting traditional marriage, etc. They all encourage us to exhibit types of behaviors that are in society's best interest.

The relationship that ensures the continuation of the species (male-female) deserves special recognition ... the exclusive use of the word "marriage".

Gays can get all the civil unions they want, but don't redefine marriage to be politically correct.

(11-18-2013 11:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  call me crazy but are conservatives the ones calling for govt to butt out of our daily lives?????

#hypocrisy

You're right. But are you willing to accept that gay marriage is *DEEPLY* unpopular with the minority voters that overwhelming vote Democrat?

When SC voted to ban gay marriage, it actually had a bigger margin in some areas of James Clyburn's Congressional District than it had in the most conservative pockets of the state ... even the area around Bob Jones University.

The religious black voter may be the voting contingent with the strongest polarity against gay marriage out of any voting block.

(11-19-2013 12:02 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-18-2013 11:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  call me crazy but are conservatives the ones calling for govt to butt out of our daily lives?????

#hypocrisy

You're right. But are you willing to accept that gay marriage is *DEEPLY* unpopular with the minority voters that overwhelming vote Democrat?

When SC voted to ban gay marriage, it actually had a bigger margin in some areas of James Clyburn's Congressional District than it had in the most conservative pockets of the state ... even the area around Bob Jones University.

The religious black voter may be the voting contingent with the strongest polarity against gay marriage out of any voting block.

Actually, a lot of conservatives would disagree with you saying that he's right. The government should support behaviors that are good for society. That involves regulating "the daily lives" of people who aren't willing to do what's right.

Put another way, there's no need for the government to be involved in anyone's life who is a law abiding citizen, and who is promoting standards that are good for society. But there's every reason to regulate activities that are not good for society, and to legislate against them.

Hence, we have laws for things like speed limits, and traditional marriage. You don't need these laws for people who don't want to act in ways that would be against society's best interests. You need them for people who don't care what is in society's best interests.

(11-19-2013 12:16 AM)G-Man Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 12:02 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-18-2013 11:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  call me crazy but are conservatives the ones calling for govt to butt out of our daily lives?????

#hypocrisy

You're right. But are you willing to accept that gay marriage is *DEEPLY* unpopular with the minority voters that overwhelming vote Democrat?

When SC voted to ban gay marriage, it actually had a bigger margin in some areas of James Clyburn's Congressional District than it had in the most conservative pockets of the state ... even the area around Bob Jones University.

The religious black voter may be the voting contingent with the strongest polarity against gay marriage out of any voting block.

Actually, a lot of conservatives would disagree with you saying that he's right. The government should support behaviors that are good for society. That involves regulating "the daily lives" of people who aren't willing to do what's right.

Put another way, there's no need for the government to be involved in anyone's life who is a law abiding citizen, and who is promoting standards that are good for society. But there's every reason to regulate activities that are not good for society, and to legislate against them.

Hence, we have laws for things like speed limits, and traditional marriage. You don't need these laws for people who don't want to act in ways that would be against society's best interests. You need them for people who don't care what is in society's best interests.

Because they're conservatives. I'm not. I'm libertarian. And I agree that it is hypocrisy when a conservative says he wants the government off his back then sics it on somebody engaging in activity that harms no one but that said conservative doesn't agree with.

(Lost on john is the fact that liberals suffer the same hypocrisy ... government stay out of my drug stash and bedroom but please go tax and regulate everything else.)

(11-19-2013 12:02 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-18-2013 11:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  call me crazy but are conservatives the ones calling for govt to butt out of our daily lives?????

#hypocrisy

You're right. But are you willing to accept that gay marriage is *DEEPLY* unpopular with the minority voters that overwhelming vote Democrat?

When SC voted to ban gay marriage, it actually had a bigger margin in some areas of James Clyburn's Congressional District than it had in the most conservative pockets of the state ... even the area around Bob Jones University.

The religious black voter may be the voting contingent with the strongest polarity against gay marriage out of any voting block.

you must not know me very well....

there have been plenty of times where i have stated

1. civil rights issues dont get decided by popular sovereignty

2. it would be crazy for one to 100% agree with his party on every single issue or for a party to have everyone in complete unison in their beliefs

(11-18-2013 11:55 PM)G-Man Wrote:  

(11-18-2013 11:50 PM)john01992 Wrote:  call me crazy but are conservatives the ones calling for govt to butt out of our daily lives?????

#hypocrisy

No. Libertarians are calling for that. Conservatives like laws that protect people and uphold standards that are in society's best interests. Things like speed limits, penalties against murder, rape, promoting traditional marriage, etc. They all encourage us to exhibit types of behaviors that are in society's best interest.

but i thought in general conservatives argue that we have too much govt and the govt interferes in our daily lives too much

(Lost on john is the fact that liberals suffer the same hypocrisy ... government stay out of my drug stash and bedroom but please go tax and regulate everything else.)

^^^^^
oh i would so love to debate this

(11-18-2013 11:32 PM)G-Man Wrote:  Absolutely. States should discourage sex outside of traditional marriage, for the good of their citizens. We don't need state governments encouraging parenting arrangements that aren't in kids' best interests. Nor should states promote activities that lead to STDs. We do need states encouraging traditional two-parent homes, and encouraging the sanctity of traditional marriage (unlike things like Obamacare which penalizes traditional marriage).

The word used wasn't "encourage", it was "regulate". Two different things.

I'm still waiting for someone to constitutionally justify banning gay marriage.

Gays can call it what they want but there's no such thing as gay marriage. That being said their contractually legal relationships should have the same benefits and penalties as straight married couples.

(11-19-2013 07:12 AM)Smaug Wrote:  I'm still waiting for someone to constitutionally justify banning gay marriage.

There is no constitutional rationale for banning polygamy or brother sister relationships.

(11-19-2013 07:24 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Gays can call it what they want but there's no such thing as gay marriage. That being said their contractually legal relationships should have the same benefits and penalties as straight married couples.

So, the issue is semantics?

(11-19-2013 07:26 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 07:12 AM)Smaug Wrote:  I'm still waiting for someone to constitutionally justify banning gay marriage.

There is no constitutional rationale for banning polygamy or brother sister relationships.

Two consenting adults. Just two.

(11-19-2013 07:33 AM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 07:26 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 07:12 AM)Smaug Wrote:  I'm still waiting for someone to constitutionally justify banning gay marriage.

There is no constitutional rationale for banning polygamy or brother sister relationships.

Two consenting adults. Just two.

Where does the constitution back that up? I'm not arguing for either one but a STRICT constitutional answer is....nowhere.