If Straight People Are Allowed To Vote On Gay Marriage Then It Seems...

» Home » Politics

If Straight People Are Allowed To Vote On Gay Marriage Then It Seems Only Fair That Gay People Should Be Able To Vote On Straight Marriage.

Now just judging on what has been happening in Maine in recent days and California last year I think gay people should be allowed to vote on straight peoples right to marry. I know in those elections anyone can vote, gay or straight but straights do make up the majority vote share. Now me personally would rather have there be no vote on any marriage but if we're going to be fair then I think the gays should get their turn to shake things up a bit.

kddan

04 Nov 2009 13:24

(What's this?)

Add to Firefox

RSS

The only vote should be whether or not to exile those who vote against the rights of others. I vote yes.

justsumguy

06 Nov 2009 04:38

Add a Comment

You already are able to vote on straight marriage. Just fill out a voter referendum or a Constitutional Amendment and go lobby for it to be on the next election vote. Granted you may not succeed in getting enough signatures/votes but hey that's what democracy is all about - the free marketplace of ideas which sink or swim largely on their own merit.

Grenache

05 Nov 2009 22:08

2 Comments

And somehow I think if it was put to the popular vote it would somehow sink massively. And I don't think even I would support such a referendum. It just makes me so angry that something like this can be voted on even though it isn't my country. The gay rights movement is moving too slowly.

kddan

05 Nov 2009 22:14

Comment

Exactly. I'm bi, and I'm just so pissed off that if I wanted to marry a girl, I couldn't just because straight people said I can't. If gay/lesbian/bi people get decisions made for them by straight people, then we should be making decisions for them.

JediWitch

05 Nov 2009 02:44

1 Comment

Exactly, I don't want to come across as bitter or heterophobic because there is a large number of straights who support most admirably the gay rights cause. But on the otherhand we are the only social group left who has to rely on the votes of others before we get to have our rights. It is utterly unfair, if there was such a vote I think I'd end up going for the bitter option and saying "you voted to take away my marriage rights, I'm going to do the same to you."

kddan

05 Nov 2009 13:24

Comment

Having straights decide whether gays have rights is just the latest repetition of US history:

- whites voted to let blacks vote
- men voted to let women vote
- whites voted to let Chinese become citizens
- christians voted to let jews have rights

Among many others.

What do all these events have in common? Those with power "let" those without rights have what they should have had all along.

Those who denied other having their rights in the first place was the problem, not those who wanted their rights.

Edit:

The dangers of cutting and pasting to save time. 9_9

I meant to say christians, since it was they who at one time prevented jews from voting.

.

04 Nov 2009 14:50

1 Comment

Technical point, the term for a non-jew is a gentile, and seeing almost no jews in the world are non-white your forth example reads a bit odd.

EDIT: OK that's good now, cheers.

Quincel

04 Nov 2009 16:47

Comment

Nope. Homosexuality is a perversion, whereas hetrosexuality is natural.

dlmiller82

04 Nov 2009 14:43

19 Comments

I have argued against the perversion argument before, it has no merit as an argument, it is a ridiculous argument with no scientific backing. I can't be bothered to go through this whole argument again.

kddan

04 Nov 2009 15:21

Comment

To say that two men can love each other like a man and a woman is no less ridiculous than to say that a man and child or a woman and child can love each as a man nad a woman can, and equally or perhaps even even more ridiculous is the concept of a "gay gene".

I accept the fact that there are perverted people who lust after the same sex, but perverse lust is not even remotely the same as love.

What I'm talking about  is a mix of both definitions. If I'm not to be a  judge for what is good or morally right then I guess it's wrong for me to say that pedophilia is wrong even though we both know that it is.

Bear in mind though that the whole reason that I spoke up wasn't an attempt to try to oppress homosexuals or homosexuality but rather to show that I refuse to be browbeaten into calling homosexuality anything other than the perversion that it is. What two consenting perverts do behind closed doors is between them and God, but when people like you and kddan try to browbeat me into calling it "natural" and supporting gay marriage, that's where I draw the line. That is why and how it effects me. I don't care what gays do behind closed doors as long as they're not trying to brainwash me or anyone else into conforming to their liberal gay agenda.

Comment

But the votes in Maine etc weren't only of straight people, so why should we change this fundamental tenant of democracy? To make a silly point you like? Seems a good enough reason...

Quincel

04 Nov 2009 14:31

4 Comments

Ahh I raised this point in my explanation, the gay vote is pretty much an irrelevance compared to the straight vote. The straight population makes up the majority of all voting areas and the straight vote is fundamentally what shapes an election. I'd just like to see things shaken up a bit and see how straights would react to their fundamental rights being voted away.

kddan

04 Nov 2009 15:19

Comment

Sure, but the straights will still win. I mean only 80%,statistic, of the population is straight.

Smito

04 Nov 2009 13:47

2 Comments

I was talking about a ballot where only gay people voted and it would be whether straight marriage should be upheld or whether it should be repealed because of the detrimental effect heterosexual marriage has on society.

kddan

04 Nov 2009 13:52

Comment

Sign In

Sign Up?

Login and Debate!
Username:
Password:
Forgot your Password?

For and Against Recent Activity

Latest Responses

Latest Comments

3 minutes ago

Thats so true just let them go they will find someone else who will replace you so who cares if they let you go or if you... read more...

9 minutes ago

I used to but i dont do it anymore cuz i got braces so it hurt every time i would but yea i miss biting them.. read more...

14 minutes ago

NAACP always blows things out of proportion read more...

19 minutes ago

You're hardly the worst anyway, death threats don't need swear words to be worse than anything you've ever said. read more...

24 minutes ago

I think books are better friends because they wont get mad at you and they dont have feelings.. But books wont walk away... read more...

Related Debates

	The U.S. Is A Socialist Country Now
	US Congress Should Lift The Ban Of Offshore Drilling.
	Western Media Is Not A Free Media
	Lib's Want To Ensure The 'less Fortunate" Have Economic Equality. The Only Method They Have Found Is...
	It Is A Shameful Thing That Each American Family Owes The Government, In The Form Of National Debt, $200,000....
	It Is Good That The American President Can Only Be In Office For A Maximum Of Eight Years.
	It's Immoral That BUSH AND HIS REPUBLICAN CONGRESS Increased Number Of Poor 1,100,000 And Billionaires...
	The Public Will Wake Up In Time To Realize Obama's Leading Our Country Into A Far Left Socialist Black...
	Bias Media Is Bad
	If You Believe In Evolution, Logic Dictates That Their Can Be No Moral Laws Of Any Kind. It's Just Survival...

New Debates

	Is Halloween Better Then Christmas?
	They Should Relax The Language Censor A Bit.
	A Little Bit Of Flooding In England Shouldn't Be Called "flooding Of Biblical Proportions"
	H1N1: A Real Mystery
	Edward (vampire) Is Better Than Jacob (wolf)!! TWILIGHT!!
	There Is Nothing Remotely Attractive About Johnny Depp.
	There Will Never Be World Peace
	Degrassi Is A Good Show!!
	We Should Not Be Required To Learn Spanish In School.
	Islam Is Inherently More Pernicious Than Christianity