By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - U.S. Supreme Court Votes Gay Marriage Constitutional and Legal

Mr.Playstation said:
Runa216 said:

And as for the whole "Reproduce" and "Natural order" bullshit, well, look at our population.  we could use fewer people breeding, and almost nothing we do is 'natural' anymore, almost by definition.  So yeah, by refusing to support love, you are an affront to progess, part of the problem, and exactly what most forward thinking, progressive, modern, freedom loving people have every reason to despise. 

 

Yeah I'm sorry but this is incorrect. 115 countries/224 countries fail to reach the quota of 2.1 children for every female and therefore the population size is not stable and will not be stable in these countries and therefore in years to come a lower labour force will be available and the average age will increase dramatically which I think that I don't need to explain how damaging that is to society as a whole. If anything we need to have way more people breeding nowadays expecially in first world countries . Of course sme-sex marriage will not change this ferility rate so this decision is definately the step forward but just wanted to debunk your statement that "we could use fewer people breeding."

Global population keeps growing, that's what Runa was talking about. If those countries you speak of truly need extra people all they have to do is to change their immigration policy and save some people from starvation and misery.



Around the Network
JWeinCom said:
It's quite amazing how Christians (and I know it's not all of them and not even most, but a significant portion) view giving people more freedom as an affront to their religious rights.

Your religious rights end at you. You have the right to believe what you like, and do what you like, until that right limits what another can do. If you want to pray 5 times a day facing Mecca, go for it. If you want to force other people to pray five times a day facing Mecca, you can't. If you want to not drive on Saturday, by all means don't. If you want to prevent other people from driving on Saturday, you can't. If you want to hate gay people, then go ahead. If you want to limit their rights, (or stone them to death as the Bible suggests) then you can't.

Your religious freedom does not include the freedom to oppress. And for those harping on about state rights, keep in mind that's the same argument that was used to support slavery. The big bad federal government can't take away my right to oppress people.

Religion is about determining morals and ethics. To tell people what is right and what is wrong. If you don't like that then you should just outlaw all religious practice and give in to the profane. That's exactly what is happening in EU and NA. The profane is becoming a unified anti-religious umbrella of leftist ideologies. The rainbow is its flag. 

I'm listening to wise moslem clerics lecture on homosexuality. What some of them are saying is people generally don't like to be told what they are doing is wrong. This is exactly what happened in Sodom. The profane became culture and the people became obstinate. 

Allahu Akbar!

 

 



Player2 said:
Mr.Playstation said:
Runa216 said:

And as for the whole "Reproduce" and "Natural order" bullshit, well, look at our population.  we could use fewer people breeding, and almost nothing we do is 'natural' anymore, almost by definition.  So yeah, by refusing to support love, you are an affront to progess, part of the problem, and exactly what most forward thinking, progressive, modern, freedom loving people have every reason to despise. 

 

Yeah I'm sorry but this is incorrect. 115 countries/224 countries fail to reach the quota of 2.1 children for every female and therefore the population size is not stable and will not be stable in these countries and therefore in years to come a lower labour force will be available and the average age will increase dramatically which I think that I don't need to explain how damaging that is to society as a whole. If anything we need to have way more people breeding nowadays expecially in first world countries . Of course sme-sex marriage will not change this ferility rate so this decision is definately the step forward but just wanted to debunk your statement that "we could use fewer people breeding."

Global population keeps growing, that's what Runa was talking about. If those countries you speak of truly need extra people all they have to do is to change their immigration policy and save some people from starvation and misery.

Don't worry about that, the world total population will soon start decreasing. With the fertility rate global average only being 2.5 children/woman which include countries such as Niger which have a fertility rate of 7 children/woman, the average is getting dangerously low. As birth control method increase in popularity in third world countries, the average fertility rate may soon drop below the 2.1 threshold.

 

The populatoon in countries such as Andorra may soon go extinct ( It will take a while Obviously ) due to a very low birth rate of ~1.3children/woman coupled with a low population of ~85,000 people.

 

Immigration may be the key, for a short period of time anyways. Unfortunately people soon take up the customs of their current country ( Heavy birth control use/ Not having children ) which would literally in the end change nothing in terms of fertility rate and sustaining a proper population.



Send a Friend Request On PSN :P

This was not done in the right manner. The supreme court is not here to write legislature or to take powers away from the state. this should have remained a state issue, and the way in which it was done leaves it open to be changed or still further fought. Instead of legalizing gay marriage, government should be taken out of the marriage business. No tax breaks for marriages, and leave it up to health insurance companies to decide if they want to cover homosexual spouses (they have no choice but to now, i think the public backlash would be too great not too). But it shouldn't be in government hands. But since it is, it should at least be done appropriately with actual legislation, not over reach by the supreme court.



Ka-pi96 said:
Mr.Playstation said:
Player2 said:

Global population keeps growing, that's what Runa was talking about. If those countries you speak of truly need extra people all they have to do is to change their immigration policy and save some people from starvation and misery.

Don't worry about that, the world total population will soon start decreasing. With the fertility rate global average only being 2.5 children/woman which include countries such as Niger which have a fertility rate of 7 children/woman, the average is getting dangerously low. As birth control method increase in popularity in third world countries, the average fertility rate may soon drop below the 2.1 threshold.

 

The populatoon in countries such as Andorra may soon go extinct ( It will take a while Obviously ) due to a very low birth rate of ~1.3children/woman coupled with a low population of ~85,000 people.

Yet despite that fertility rate the population there still increased in the last couple years and despite a couple of negative years every now and then it has a lot more years where the population increases than decreases.

Although if world population goes down that would be a good thing. Too many people in the world already.

Andorra still has a lower population than they did in 2006 and who knows why they had a population increase, it may be easily be due to immigration. One way or another you still can't have a healthy society when the ferility rate is below the replacement threshold of 2.1. Just because a population is increasing doesn't actually mean that it's increasing in a healthy manner.



Send a Friend Request On PSN :P

Around the Network
Burek said:
reggin_bolas said:


This is exactly why Christianity will soon be de facto outlawed in the US.


Most Christians, just like most people of any other or no religion at all are actually very tolerant and compassionate.

Some are not. But their intolerance, prejudice, narrowmindedness should never be outlawed. Best we can hope for them to be ridiculed and ostracized for it, and use them as an example of how a human being should not behave when we educate our children.


I don't know If I completely agree with you (on the first part of your statement)on this even though the ideal christian should be christlike. Yes, they should. Most christians I've met ...to tell you the truth never really read most of their bible and just go off of what their culture tells them through hearsay. Hell..in the beginning of Christianity let alone the Roman Catholic holiday church, most of the followers could not even read. They were fed whatever propaganda that was given to them by the church. The majority of christians in the world by measure are catholic thanks to war.

 

I agree with your latter paragraph though.



Mr.Playstation said:
 

Andorra still has a lower population than they did in 2006 and who knows why they had a population increase, it may be easily be due to immigration. One way or another you still can't have a healthy society when the ferility rate is below the replacement threshold of 2.1. Just because a population is increasing doesn't actually mean that it's increasing in a healthy manner.

It's just people having their kids in France or Spain. I guess there's a benefit?

Don't worry about Andorra. There's plenty of rich people who want to avoid paying taxes too (even more inmigration)



Many gaming media sites have unfortunately taken side in this unfolding human drama. Notably "Gayspot."

Don't kid yourselves here, the rainbow flag is a political flag, possibly the unifying flag for atheism as well. Gay rights is a political, left-wing ideology. It's not some form of sacrosanct human rights crusade. It's politics blended with pop culture.




reggin_bolas said:
Many gaming media sites have unfortunately taken side in this unfolding human drama. Notably "Gayspot."

Don't kid yourselves here, the rainbow flag is a political flag, possibly the unifying flag for atheism as well. Gay rights is a political, left-wing ideology. It's not some form of sacrosanct human rights crusade. It's politics blended with pop culture.


So what's your point?



reggin_bolas said:
Many gaming media sites have unfortunately taken side in this unfolding human drama. Notably "Gayspot."

Don't kid yourselves here, the rainbow flag is a political flag, possibly the unifying flag for atheism as well. Gay rights is a political, left-wing ideology. It's not some form of sacrosanct human rights crusade. It's politics blended with pop culture.


so what you're saying is that you have a problem with ALL progressive thought?  Alright then, your opinion doesn't matter! 



My Console Library:

PS5, Switch, XSX

PS4, PS3, PS2, PS1, WiiU, Wii, GCN, N64 SNES, XBO, 360

3DS, DS, GBA, Vita, PSP, Android