Personally I do not think same sex marriage should be ban.
But I do not think it should be held on religious ground.

I don't see the reason why marriage or civil union cannot be allowed.
It is America anyways, a country that is so called "free".

Just need to turn back some extreme far left progressive policies and just call it a day.

Half of it is mostly stuff republicans wanted anyway

Half of it is a power fantasy. If they somehow actually complete P2025, then there's no reason why the government would need to help Republicans or Democrats. You don't need to be political to believe that humans will help themselves first when they can't be held accountable. Obvious bait and switch for anyone with a brain

P2025 is far right regressive policy
Maga is far right regressive policy

On the political scale, conservative and regressive are different
I don't know why you people keep calling MAGA and P2025 conservative when they're regressive

/E this is why so many people are out in the streets protesting. The current administration wants to roll us back 100 years.

This post was edited by Bruv on Aug 13 2025 09:57am

Basic acceptance is what leads us to the degeneracy we are currently in. You either accept none of it or all of it. What you are considering “extreme far left policies” will be considered the norm in 50 years if not.

Too liberal and progressive without sparing a thought for others and forcing ideology down people's throat is not going to be ruinous for everyone.

If you don't like hardcore evangelists or goat lovers coming at you either convert or die . One might want to think twice about trying to force one's sub group or super sub group's entitlement onto others.

This post was edited by Hamsterbaby on Aug 13 2025 11:48am

This is only true if one uses the ridiculous definition of conservatism as "retaining the current status quo, no matter how much it had been shifted to the left over the previous years".
It is, of course, a very useful and self-serving framing for liberals to call any attempts at rolling back the policy gains they made as "reactionary" or "regressive".

This.


But why should the government be supporting this?

Marriage is sanctioned by the law because normal couples produce children. And country needs to reproduce into another generation. Might as well encourage it by offering tax breaks, formalizing who’s financially responsible for the children, etc. To introduce some order and smoothness to an already needed process. Not from the goodness of the government heart.

What business does the government have to support gay or lesbian sex, essentially?

This post was edited by kayko on Aug 13 2025 04:07pm

Sounds exactly like "Those muslims are taking away my way of life."

Exactly how quickly do you think procreation will go to 0% with the current population percentage of gays? My guess is its never going to happen.

The government has the same business in gay sex as it does for that of straight people. None.

Do women deserve the right to vote?
Should people of color be considered eligible for work over a white person?
People in the current administration don't think so

That's rolling things back minimum 70 years.
That's about as regressive as it gets.

propagating bigotry is bigotry.

Lumping all women into a single category based on their gender is wrong.
Lumping all people who have more melanin into a single category based on their skin color is wrong.

The left consist of a majority of racist and bigoted people.
Because it empowers them to dictate right and wrong, under a guise of virtue.

e- for the record, i'm not dictating to you that lumping people into categories and groups is wrong.
I'm stating it's wrong because it leads to inappropriate and misguided conclusions.
Which often further the spread of false narratives and stereotypes.

This post was edited by Mondain on Aug 13 2025 06:04pm