Why won't gay people accept democracy ?

Are you telling me that your argument is delicately hinged on the interpretation of ONE WORD? Allow me to rephrase the question.

'Once again, you've failed to answer the question. Try again. On what grounds is gay marriage an issue that should be governed by a popular vote? Perhaps you could give specific examples of where gay marriages are a detriment to the welfare of the general public.'

 

You're dancing with words. I don't have to give you any examples of how Gay marriages hurt society, since the burden of Proof is on gay people to explain WHY they want to join a Heterosexual institution. So my question to you is WHY do gay people want :
1-- Their relationships sanctioned by the government
2-- emulate a heterosexual institution ?

 

Try asking a gay person.

Now, answer the question:
'On what grounds is gay marriage an issue that should be governed by a popular vote?' (Perhaps you could give specific examples of where gay marriages are a detriment to the welfare of the general public.)

 

There is nothing to answer, I'm not the one looking to change the status-quo. I don't need to give reasons for keeping things the way they are. We're just fine without Gay marriage.

 

Right now to get married you have to provide proof you are male or female. A birth certificate usually. A birth certificate is a document a registered doctor signed stating he has physically confirmed the sex of this person.

How do you prove a person is gay?

Any why is it fair only male/female and gays can get married. Why not best friends or family members

 

The fact that you lack an answer doesn't erase the question.

 

Why bother using the quote function? None of what you've said here remotely resembles an answer to the question I've posed.

 

One day you'll wake up to the fact that people who disagree with you are not hating fanatics.
Gays need to make a case, it's not made yet.
I believe in the sanctity of marriage, Sorry, but Gays aren't welcome to the club.
By itself, homosexuality, because of its failure to produce natural offspring is a slow-mo suicidal act. I'm comfortable with them staying on the fringes of society as a marginal genetic singularity (and that's already very generous, nobody has proven as of yet that Homosexuality is NOT a choice, it might be just that, a perversion). They're not being discriminated against, but they're not welcome.

 

I don't recall making that characterization. Would you care to direct me to the specific post in this thread which led you the conclusion that I did?

Interesting.

 

The 13th Amendment to the US Constitution makes slavery illegal. It is an actual Amendment to the Constitution that was ratified by the states.

By contrast, the California state courts had "discovered" an apparently secret right imbedded in the California state constitution that somehow invalidated the traditional and longstanding understanding of marriage. The voters of California responded by approving an amendment to the state constitution to reaffirm the traditional concept of marriage.

In essence, California followed the same path followed in the banning of slavery. An earlier judicial decision was overturned by a constitutional amendment.

Your attempt to link slavery and homosexual marriage fails because the claimed constitutional right to homosexual marriage was based only on judicial edict. The court ruling was transparently political and as a result, was not accepted by the public as legitimate.