SlyFox 0
Recommended Posts
Tink1717 2
The argument was: If gays can get married, then why can't brothers and sisters?
They can in West Viginia, Arkansas and certain counties in Kentucky
They can in West Viginia, Arkansas and certain counties in Kentucky
Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off.
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717
JDBoston 0
Ya know what, I don't have a problem with brothers and sisters marrying each other at all.
Think about it: all it means is that the few reprobates out there who would actually WANT to do this will eventually breed themselves out of existence by producing ever-more-fucked up mutant offspring.
What's so wrong about that?
Joe
Think about it: all it means is that the few reprobates out there who would actually WANT to do this will eventually breed themselves out of existence by producing ever-more-fucked up mutant offspring.
What's so wrong about that?
Joe
jaaska 0
QuoteMaybe not, but it can and does lead to AIDS and other nsty things. There is what a doctor called an epidemic in Gay syphillus going on right now, but it is being kept reasonably quiet.
What is next .
Wow... Deep...
And straight people do not have anal sex because ____________.
jaaska 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteSo nobody can actually address my question..?
Siblings having sex may lead to pregnancy with developmental disorders. Gaysex can not.
Sounds like prior restraint to me. What if they don't want children?
Even if they don't want, the possibility is there.
Someone talked about cousins etc. In Finland you may marry your first cousin. (Sure there is the danger of developmental disorders, but due the history and geography of Finland, you may if you wish (or rather, you don't have an alternative).
jaaska 0
Quote
If people want to jump off their houses and call themselves skydivers thats fine with me. If they want to flap their arms, jump and run around their yard chirping they can go ahead and tell people they are an experienced bird man pilot. Whatever, it doesn't affect the fact that I AM a skydiver.
Yes, but everyone would think that you flap your arms, jump and run around the yard chirping, when you tell people that you are a skydiver.
So THAT's it! Are you afraid that by telling someone you are married, that someone might think you are gay... Talking about homophobia...
jaaska 0
QuoteBut the fact that some fathers and mothers fail does not open the door to an inferior system.
Do you know the difference between anecdotal and empirical evidence?
Guess what, your statement is as empty as vacuum.
jaaska 0
I must love my typing since I reply to my own message... 
Seriously though...
Someone mentioned that word marriage should be left for religious (church) purposes only. Well, it's only matter of time before some of the (christian) churches will solemnize a marriage between 2 men / 2 women. So who decides which religious groups can use that term?
Also, someone said that it can not / has not be(en) studied, how gay couples manages to foster their children. Well, I'm actually pretty sure it has been studied and I can even try to find some sociological journals with studies concerning it - of course the results would not necessarily please those opposing gay families...
Seriously though...
Someone mentioned that word marriage should be left for religious (church) purposes only. Well, it's only matter of time before some of the (christian) churches will solemnize a marriage between 2 men / 2 women. So who decides which religious groups can use that term?
Also, someone said that it can not / has not be(en) studied, how gay couples manages to foster their children. Well, I'm actually pretty sure it has been studied and I can even try to find some sociological journals with studies concerning it - of course the results would not necessarily please those opposing gay families...
talk about a FLAMING thread.
huh huh. you said flaming....huh huh..uuhhh huh huh
Thomas
huh huh. you said flaming....huh huh..uuhhh huh huh
Thomas
QuoteQuoteThe first means you're advocating something that goes against your personal beliefs. The latter means you are forcing your personal beliefs on the lives of others.
Don't you think that they are pushing for gay marriage, that they are trying to make our society except it? What two consenting adults do are their business, but what they try to get our culture to except is different.
Your right...acceptance of other people's lifestyles that have no direct effect on you is a horrible thing.
This country is about PERSONAL freedom, not cultural bias.
26 states in the US allow first cousins to marry.
SlyFox 0
QuoteYour right...acceptance of other people's lifestyles that have no direct effect on you is a horrible thing.
How easily it is to twist the words around. As I said what they do together it is their own business. Getting married through our court system does make it our business. Do you honestly believe that they are doing it through the court system just to show their love for one another. There is monetary gain by having the courts recognize them as being married. You even hear that being stated on the news.
To say it doesn't effect everyone is wrong. It is like when a big law suit is won, saying it is only the big company is hurt. Wrong the money comes from somewhere and later it is put into the cost that we all share.
Redefining the word marriage. How is it that the word can be twisted and then try to convince others it means something else.
Why we can't we come up with appropriate term with the benefits that should come with it. Such as if a love one dies the next of kin keeps what the two of them have worked for. Spouses medical benefits from your employer, up to the employer. There has to be some give and take.
*****Why would anyone jump from a perfectly good airplane? Because it isn't much fun if it's broke.****
Ok...please tell me how it would affect you?
SlyFox 0
If they receive benefits through the government then it would be tax dollars that I have paid in. It would not be something that would be easy to see or point out. That is the reason I use the law suits as an example.
What benefits are being seeked by them getting married? Or are they getting married for public recognition?
*****Why would anyone jump from a perfectly good airplane? Because it isn't much fun if it's broke.****
What benefits are being seeked by them getting married? Or are they getting married for public recognition?
*****Why would anyone jump from a perfectly good airplane? Because it isn't much fun if it's broke.****
QuoteIf they receive benefits through the government then it would be tax dollars that I have paid in.
So, it's ok for them to pay tax dollars that would support a married couple, but it's not ok for your tax dollars to support a married couple because of their gender?
the benefits they are seeking:
1. the ability to adopt each other's children, so legally they are both the parents of the child.
2. the ability to make decisions for their partner, both medical and financial, should their partner become incapacitated.
3. the ability to inherit in the case of one partner's death
4. the right to visit their partner in the hospital
all of which have absolutely nothing to do with you.
1. the ability to adopt each other's children, so legally they are both the parents of the child.
2. the ability to make decisions for their partner, both medical and financial, should their partner become incapacitated.
3. the ability to inherit in the case of one partner's death
4. the right to visit their partner in the hospital
all of which have absolutely nothing to do with you.
QuoteIf they receive benefits through the government then it would be tax dollars that I have paid in. It would not be something that would be easy to see or point out. That is the reason I use the law suits as an example.
What benefits are being seeked by them getting married? Or are they getting married for public recognition?
How about the $100billion + for an illegal war? $33 million for an investigation (see Ken Starr). How about believing people are marrying for LOVE and just want equal rights?
Blog Clicky
billvon 2,998
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>As I said what they do together it is their own business. Getting
> married through our court system does make it our business.
Hmm. So if you want to get married, it becomes my business? I have the right to ask you what kind of sex you're going to have, whether you're going to be faithful, and make sure you're going to have kids? Or is marriage more of a personal thing between two people?
> Do you honestly believe that they are doing it through the court
> system just to show their love for one another.
They want to do it for the same reasons heterosexual couples do it. To make a public commitement, so they can support each other legally the same way family members can, so they can make decisions when the other person can't. The financial part is no doubt a factor, as is the legal part and the commitement part, as it is for everyone who gets married.
>To say it doesn't effect everyone is wrong. It is like when a big law
> suit is won, saying it is only the big company is hurt. Wrong the
> money comes from somewhere and later it is put into the cost that
> we all share.
What costs will you, personally, pay if two women get married?
>Redefining the word marriage. How is it that the word can be twisted
> and then try to convince others it means something else.
It is twisted with great regularity. Centuries ago, a wedding meant a ceremony that allowed a man to own a woman. He could beat her if she got out of line and she had to do what he said. Now things are different. In California, it now means that you own everything 50/50, instead of the man owning everything. Vows are different. The laws on how you have to treat your wife are different. You can get divorces and annullments at the drop of a hat. There are drive-through wedding chapels and drive-through divorce lawyers.
So we've been redefining that word for a long, long time. And unless you plan to get married and own your partner, and require her to honor and obey you without question, you are participating in those changes as well.
>Why we can't we come up with appropriate term with the benefits that
> should come with it. Such as if a love one dies the next of kin keeps
> what the two of them have worked for. Spouses medical benefits
> from your employer, up to the employer. There has to be some give
> and take.
I'd support that, actually. Make marriage a purely religious institution, with no civil/legal meaning. Add a civil union, which you get from a town clerk the same way you get a marriage license now, that confers all the legal/civil rights that a marriage used to. Then let people get married or hitched or united or whatever they want to do in church.
But let me ask you this. Let's say we do that, and people continue to get married, and a new church (say, the Church of the Happy Sheperd) starts doing what they call gay marriages. They still get the civil rights of any other married couple, and the priest gives them a marriage certificate and pronounces them married. How is that different from just marrying them? I mean, any cost impact you imagine won't change.
> married through our court system does make it our business.
Hmm. So if you want to get married, it becomes my business? I have the right to ask you what kind of sex you're going to have, whether you're going to be faithful, and make sure you're going to have kids? Or is marriage more of a personal thing between two people?
> Do you honestly believe that they are doing it through the court
> system just to show their love for one another.
They want to do it for the same reasons heterosexual couples do it. To make a public commitement, so they can support each other legally the same way family members can, so they can make decisions when the other person can't. The financial part is no doubt a factor, as is the legal part and the commitement part, as it is for everyone who gets married.
>To say it doesn't effect everyone is wrong. It is like when a big law
> suit is won, saying it is only the big company is hurt. Wrong the
> money comes from somewhere and later it is put into the cost that
> we all share.
What costs will you, personally, pay if two women get married?
>Redefining the word marriage. How is it that the word can be twisted
> and then try to convince others it means something else.
It is twisted with great regularity. Centuries ago, a wedding meant a ceremony that allowed a man to own a woman. He could beat her if she got out of line and she had to do what he said. Now things are different. In California, it now means that you own everything 50/50, instead of the man owning everything. Vows are different. The laws on how you have to treat your wife are different. You can get divorces and annullments at the drop of a hat. There are drive-through wedding chapels and drive-through divorce lawyers.
So we've been redefining that word for a long, long time. And unless you plan to get married and own your partner, and require her to honor and obey you without question, you are participating in those changes as well.
>Why we can't we come up with appropriate term with the benefits that
> should come with it. Such as if a love one dies the next of kin keeps
> what the two of them have worked for. Spouses medical benefits
> from your employer, up to the employer. There has to be some give
> and take.
I'd support that, actually. Make marriage a purely religious institution, with no civil/legal meaning. Add a civil union, which you get from a town clerk the same way you get a marriage license now, that confers all the legal/civil rights that a marriage used to. Then let people get married or hitched or united or whatever they want to do in church.
But let me ask you this. Let's say we do that, and people continue to get married, and a new church (say, the Church of the Happy Sheperd) starts doing what they call gay marriages. They still get the civil rights of any other married couple, and the priest gives them a marriage certificate and pronounces them married. How is that different from just marrying them? I mean, any cost impact you imagine won't change.
AndyMan 7
Here's an article that just hit the AP wire - Rosie O'Donell is heading to San Francisco to marry her girlfriend and long time partner Kelli Carpenter.
http://www.salon.com/ent/wire/2004/02/26/rosie/index.html
Here's what I found really compelling.
Rosie has just been through a really nasty lawsuit over the failure of her magazine "Rosie". Here's quoted from the article:
Imagine being dragged into court, and having your most intimate conversations with your partner dragged into the record. The ability to have private conversations with your spouse is a basic fundamental right of marriage, and I can't imagine what it would be like to not have that protection.
_Am
http://www.salon.com/ent/wire/2004/02/26/rosie/index.html
Here's what I found really compelling.
Rosie has just been through a really nasty lawsuit over the failure of her magazine "Rosie". Here's quoted from the article:
QuoteO'Donnell said she decided to marry Carpenter, a former dancer and marketing director at Nickelodeon, during her recent trial in New York over the now-defunct magazine Rosie.
"We applied for spousal privilege and were denied it by the state. As a result, everything that I said to Kelli, every letter that I wrote her, every e-mail, every correspondence and conversation was entered into the record," O'Donnell said. "After the trial, I am now and will forever be a total proponent of gay marriage."
Imagine being dragged into court, and having your most intimate conversations with your partner dragged into the record. The ability to have private conversations with your spouse is a basic fundamental right of marriage, and I can't imagine what it would be like to not have that protection.
_Am
__
You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.
You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.
Jayruss 0
QuoteIf they receive benefits through the government then it would be tax dollars that I have paid in. It would not be something that would be easy to see or point out. That is the reason I use the law suits as an example.
What benefits are being seeked by them getting married? Or are they getting married for public recognition?
Oh that's right I forgot that the government added the "I'm a big homo" box to W-2, which by checking admonishes one from paying taxes.
I have yet to meet a couple that got married for financial tax reasons, if there are any let me tell you they are in for a surprise.
The issue is equality. I work 300' from the Orange County Recorders office. I could take Yvonne, who sits on my right, over there and be married within 20 minutes. Yet if I wanted to take Brian, who sits on my left, I can't because he's the same sex. That's not an equitable situation.
__________________________________________________
"Beware how you take away hope from another human being."
-Oliver Wendell Holmes
QuoteQuote
If people want to jump off their houses and call themselves skydivers thats fine with me. If they want to flap their arms, jump and run around their yard chirping they can go ahead and tell people they are an experienced bird man pilot. Whatever, it doesn't affect the fact that I AM a skydiver.
Yes, but everyone would think that you flap your arms, jump and run around the yard chirping, when you tell people that you are a skydiver.
So THAT's it! Are you afraid that by telling someone you are married, that someone might think you are gay... Talking about homophobia...
Wrong assumption. You can call me anything you want. I have a pretty thick skin so if you want to call me names if you wish though. It says more about the name caller than me.
never pull low......unless you are
SkyDekker 1,465
QuoteNo, I did not say those who have the tools to raise a child should be forced to. Just that those who don't have the tools should not be encourage to.
A woman who has undergone an hysterectomy no longer has the tools, should she not be allowed to get married?
Don't you think that they are pushing for gay marriage, that they are trying to make our society except it? What two consenting adults do are their business, but what they try to get our culture to except is different.
*****Why would anyone jump from a perfectly good airplane? Because it isn't much fun if it's broke.****
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites