Gone Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Ok, so nothing from a reliable, non-partisan source. It is a sampling of just over 1000 people. And the way the question was worded (and possible responses) leaves much to be interpreted. How can one "somewhat support" something. You either do or don't. That leaves nearly 30% of the people "somewhat" supporting or opposing this issue. There's no way 50% of the US supports this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAHAWK Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 No, he was surprised to find god-belief was a requirement. The BSA hasn't always been kicking out atheists (I was a cub scout and my mother was a den mother, and we were both atheists at the time). The term "reverent" does not require god-belief. You want us to believe he was surprised You, of all people, should not be asking us to take things on faith. I believe the child was surprised, as claimed in Trib. He was set up by his dad who knew perfectly well about the B.S.A. position. Have there been atheists in Scouting? Darn tottin' And gays as well. The ones who want to make a public point about it were after something other than membership. And so are you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 And according to the "poll" there are no figures indicating the size of the sampling researched. It does not necessarily reflect any actual credibility. 100 people in North Dakota aren't going to give the same poll numbers as 100 people in San Francisco. Just because it's in the newspaper does not mean there is any thing connecting it to what is really going on. News media is in the business of selling information, and they will use whatever information sells the best. Out of the many times I've been in situations where the media reported on it, 100% of the time the information they printed was incorrect and biased. Put it to a vote and quit relying on inaccurate media polls. Stosh 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwazse Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 My bad. I forgot the turn this one took. Can't say I actively support gay or straight marriage. Just something to be tolerated. After 20 years this September some days my tolerance level is better than others. Seems to me that our sex's tolerance level doesn't weigh much into the equation. Queen DD's, on the other hand ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlyn_LeRoy Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 You want us to believe he was surprised You, of all people, should not be asking us to take things on faith. I believe the child was surprised, as claimed in Trib. He was set up by his dad who knew perfectly well about the B.S.A. position. Have there been atheists in Scouting? Darn tottin' And gays as well. The ones who want to make a public point about it were after something other than membership. And so are you. Except for all the ones thrown out even when their own units didn't want to throw them out, like Dale. Oh, but the BSA must remain totally blameless for any of this mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Ding Dong Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Ok' date=' so nothing from a reliable, non-partisan source. It is a sampling of just over 1000 people. And the way the question was worded (and possible responses) leaves much to be interpreted. How can one "somewhat support" something. You either do or don't. That leaves nearly 30% of the people "somewhat" supporting or opposing this issue. There's no way 50% of the US supports this.[/quote'] Touché. "Fair and Balanced" says it is 47-47. Meanwhile, Romney still leading by 8-12% a landslide is assured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Touché. "Fair and Balanced" says it is 47-47. Meanwhile' date=' Romney still leading by 8-12% a landslide is assured. [/quote'] Well being cute doesn't add any weight to your argument. It's still a skewed argument and poll designed to get the desired answer. Even with all that they could only get 59% which should show you where the truth is...and it isn't 50%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Ding Dong Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Well being cute doesn't add any weight to your argument. It's still a skewed argument and poll designed to get the desired answer. Even with all that they could only get 59% which should show you where the truth is...and it isn't 50%. Ok what is the pulse of the nation then ? You say it not 50%. What evidence do you base that on ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Pulse of the nation? Well if you poll the tyrant with executive powers, it will always be 100% in favor of whatever they want it to be. If you poll the 12 on the Supreme Court who feel it necessary to legislate from the bench, you're going to get different numbers. If you poll the 500+ in Congress you will get the pulse of whatever party is in the majority but of course they speak for all the people. If you poll the nation through a national referrendum, you will get yet another number depending on how well people are able to vote multiple times. If you want to get an honest poll in today's society, spit into the wind and see how well it works out for you. Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Ding Dong Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 If you poll the nation through a national referrendum' date=' you will get yet another number depending on how well people are able to vote multiple times. AND Put it to a vote and quit relying on inaccurate media polls. Stosh [/quote'] good grief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Ding Dong Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Jblake, who are these three Phantom Supreme Court Judges and what do they do if there is a tie ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gone Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Ok what is the pulse of the nation then ? You say it not 50%. What evidence do you base that on ? By looking at both sides of the debate, taking their best and worst-case numbers, and applying observation and common sense. The statistical samplings using larger pools have shown roughly a third support it, a third against it and a third undecided. I suspect the final third feel the NIMBY syndrome. They are likely in favor of it if it were a friend or relative but against it if it affected their kids. But this last part is just an educated guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Ding Dong Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 "Gay Marriage is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stosh Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Homosexual marriage is not the issue. It's basically the issue of using the word Marriage in the discussion. There is nothing to say that homosexuals can't have a legal contract which can be set up to be a "marriage" in effective reality. Each person gives power of attorney to each other. They put down beneficiaries in each other's names, they set up a living will declaring each other as the "next of kin", etc. Most businesses set up significant others as beneficiaries in terms of medical insurance, and of course beneficiaries once again, name each other. After all a marriage license between two heterosexuals is nothing more than just that, a legal contract. But for those who wish to make a political or religious statement out of it they insist that the terminology be the same. We don't fight over the reality of the situation, we only fight over the definition of the reality. Two bachelor brothers work the same family farm. They give each other power of attorney to each other, they put down beneficiaries in each other's name, etc. Is that an incest relationship? Should they be arrested? As long as they don't declare themselves or wishing to force society to accept it as a marriage, who really cares? When such couples insist society accept them on their terms, they have to be ready to accept the answer NO. After all it is a proper answer to any yes or no question. I am "married" by legal definition. There was no justice of the peace, judge or clergy officiant present at our "ceremony". I signed the license in the blank asking who officiated at the ceremony. I had two witnesses which are required by law. The state did not care who "officiated" they are not in the business of religion, only the civil concerns of a state legal marriage. When I asked the clerk of court who could sign in that spot, they said it didn't matter. It's a legal issue, not a religious issue. Basically if one were to read the document carefully, the person who signs in the "officiant" spot is legally bound to turn the license into the courts, nothing more, nothing less. Any two people can have a civil contract, but some seem to want more than that, they want the religious world to accept them as well. Sorry, to some, that will never happen even if the government says it is so. After all there is a separation of church and state in this country. The state can do whatever it wants, and the church can do the same. Stosh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sentinel947 Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 "Gay Marriage is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face." What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now