When was the last time . . .

[turtlespeed 220]

livendive

******>When was the last time . . .our government voted us more freedom and liberty?

June 26 2013. They get it right sometimes. Not often, but sometimes.

Not sure it helped everyone with more freedom. A minority, yes, they have more freedom, the mojority had theirs squashed just a little more.

How so? The majority has every right and freedom they had yesterday.

Blues,
Dave

That all depends on your point of view, doesn't it?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[livendive 8]

turtlespeed

*********>When was the last time . . .our government voted us more freedom and liberty?

June 26 2013. They get it right sometimes. Not often, but sometimes.

Not sure it helped everyone with more freedom. A minority, yes, they have more freedom, the mojority had theirs squashed just a little more.

How so? The majority has every right and freedom they had yesterday.

Blues,
Dave

That all depends on your point of view, doesn't it?

I don't see how it's subjective. I'm straight. I can still do everything today that I could yesterday, as can you. Our do you have some specific restrictions in mind that are suddenly in place that I'm unaware of?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[kallend 2,027]

turtlespeed

***>When was the last time . . .our government voted us more freedom and liberty?

June 26 2013. They get it right sometimes. Not often, but sometimes.

Not sure it helped everyone with more freedom. A minority, yes, they have more freedom, the mojority had theirs squashed just a little more.

What bigoted nonsense.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[GeorgiaDon 362]

Quote

... the mojority had theirs squashed just a little more.

Thinking about married gays squashes your mojo? Hmmm, maybe there's a closet with your name on it?

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[turtlespeed 220]

GeorgiaDon

Quote

... the mojority had theirs squashed just a little more.

Thinking about married gays squashes your mojo? Hmmm, maybe there's a closet with your name on it?

Don

Perhaps how much you covet the decision is more telling than one might think.

I don't know how to explain it so that you would understand.

I just feel that something has been stolen from people that entered into a nuptial agreement with a knowledge of what the definition of that agreement was, and now the government has ruined that for them.

Perhaps look at it like this: You grew up thinking and believing that you were your fathers son, and then, one day, the government decided that you weren't.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[champu 1]

turtlespeed

I don't know how to explain it so that you would understand.

I just feel that something has been stolen from people that entered into a nuptial agreement with a knowledge of what the definition of that agreement was, and now the government has ruined that for them.

Perhaps look at it like this: You grew up thinking and believing that you were your fathers son, and then, one day, the government decided that you weren't.

All existing marriages between a man and a woman will be grandfathered in as non-gay. I'm getting married to a woman next year but who knows... maybe they'll get the form wrong... hopefully we'd be able to get it straightened out.

[mr2mk1g 10]

champu

hopefully we'd be able to get it straightened out.

ba-dum-tish

[Southern_Man 0]

turtlespeed

Perhaps look at it like this: You grew up thinking and believing that you were your fathers son, and then, one day, the government decided that you weren't.

I fail to see how the decision has anything to do with being cuckolded.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[kallend 2,027]

turtlespeed

***

Quote

... the mojority had theirs squashed just a little more.

Thinking about married gays squashes your mojo? Hmmm, maybe there's a closet with your name on it?

Don

Perhaps how much you covet the decision is more telling than one might think.

I don't know how to explain it so that you would understand.

I just feel that something has been stolen from people that entered into a nuptial agreement with a knowledge of what the definition of that agreement was, and now the government has ruined that for them.

Perhaps look at it like this: You grew up thinking and believing that you were your fathers son, and then, one day, the government decided that you weren't.

More bigoted nonsense.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[GeorgiaDon 362]

Quote

Perhaps look at it like this: You grew up thinking and believing that you were your fathers son, and then, one day, the government decided that you weren't.

Perhaps look at it like this: You grew up thinking and believing you were better than a whole lot of other people because you happened to be born a male, and then, one day, the government decided that you weren't. Should women still be refused the vote because some men grew up believing the vote could be entrusted only to men?

Since when do we allow people to exercise their rights only under the condition that no-one else has their feelings of superiority hurt? Would you apply that reasoning to the 2nd amendment, as there is no shortage of people who believe guns lead to violence, and the amendment refers to militias not individual rights. Would you be willing to defer to them, even if they are wrong, so their feelings don't get hurt?

Your marriage is great, or not, solely because of the quality of the relationship you have with your spouse. Whether or not your neighbor has a good marriage, a bad marriage, or no marriage at all has no impact on the quality of your marriage. If you need to feel superior to other people to feel good about your marriage, then you have some serious problems.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[livendive 8]

turtlespeed

I just feel that something has been stolen from people that entered into a nuptial agreement with a knowledge of what the definition of that agreement was, and now the government has ruined that for them.

What was stolen, a sense of superiority? They still have the exact same relationship with their spouse, e.g. my relationship with my bride is entirely unaffected by this ruling. If these people you're referring to allow a ruling on other people's marriages to taint (or ruin) their perception of their own marriage, that's their own fault. Their relationship is no different today than it was two days ago. The only thing that's changed is their perception of it.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[turtlespeed 220]

livendive

If these people you're referring to allow a ruling on other people's marriages to taint (or ruin) their perception of their own marriage civil union, that's their own fault.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

turtlespeed

*** If these people you're referring to allow a ruling on other people's marriages to taint (or ruin) their perception of their own marriage civil union, that's their own fault.

So by allowing gays the right to marry, your own marriage has been "devalued" to a civil union?

Or did you miss the pronoun assignments?

Personally, I think people like Liz Taylor, Larry King, Dennis Rodman, Cher, Britney Spears, Kim Kardashian, and on and on and on have done more to devalue the institution of marriage than allowing committed, loving couples in a long-term monogamous relationship the official recognition they desire.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[turtlespeed 220]

wolfriverjoe

****** If these people you're referring to allow a ruling on other people's marriages to taint (or ruin) their perception of their own marriage civil union, that's their own fault.

So by allowing gays the right to marry, your own marriage has been "devalued" to a civil union?

Or did you miss the pronoun assignments?

Personally, I think people like Liz Taylor, Larry King, Dennis Rodman, Cher, Britney Spears, Kim Kardashian, and on and on and on have done more to devalue the institution of marriage than allowing committed, loving couples in a long-term monogamous relationship the official recognition they desire.

Actually I was giving his own argument back.

I think the government should assign us all different names. The ones that we have now must be redefined.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[livendive 8]

When Hawaii became one of the United States in 1959, did the other 49 states become something less? When a new species is added to the endangered species list, do the ones already on it become something less? Was the sanctity of a same-race marriages reduced by Loving v. Virginia? Or when Alabama overturned its ban on interracial marriage in 2000?

This is not a case of subtraction by addition. The list of federally recognized marriages wasn't reduced in any way, but rather expanded. My marriage is the same today as it was two days ago. If someone else chooses to think less of their marriage today, the fault is their own.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Darius11 12]

livendive

When Hawaii became one of the United States in 1959, did the other 49 states become something less? When a new species is added to the endangered species list, do the ones already on it become something less? Was the sanctity of a same-race marriages reduced by Loving v. Virginia? Or when Alabama overturned its ban on interracial marriage in 2000?

This is not a case of subtraction by addition. The list of federally recognized marriages wasn't reduced in any way, but rather expanded. My marriage is the same today as it was two days ago. If someone else chooses to think less of their marriage today, the fault is their own.

Blues,
Dave

I think what turtle means is this was like a club that only allowed straight members in, and that’s what made this club different Straights ONLY. Now the courts said you have gay members in as well therefore the club no longer is what it used to be because the definition has changed.


Did i kind of get it Turtle?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[turtlespeed 220]

Darius11

***When Hawaii became one of the United States in 1959, did the other 49 states become something less? When a new species is added to the endangered species list, do the ones already on it become something less? Was the sanctity of a same-race marriages reduced by Loving v. Virginia? Or when Alabama overturned its ban on interracial marriage in 2000?

This is not a case of subtraction by addition. The list of federally recognized marriages wasn't reduced in any way, but rather expanded. My marriage is the same today as it was two days ago. If someone else chooses to think less of their marriage today, the fault is their own.

Blues,
Dave

I think what turtle means is this was like a club that only allowed straight members in, and that’s what made this club different Straights ONLY. Now the courts said you have gay members in as well therefore the club no longer is what it used to be because the definition has changed.


Did i kind of get it Turtle?

Its more of a religious ideal.

Do you not agree?

Like I said. I think the government needs to issue us all a new name because the name you have now no longer means what it did before.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kallend 2,027]

turtlespeed

******When Hawaii became one of the United States in 1959, did the other 49 states become something less? When a new species is added to the endangered species list, do the ones already on it become something less? Was the sanctity of a same-race marriages reduced by Loving v. Virginia? Or when Alabama overturned its ban on interracial marriage in 2000?

This is not a case of subtraction by addition. The list of federally recognized marriages wasn't reduced in any way, but rather expanded. My marriage is the same today as it was two days ago. If someone else chooses to think less of their marriage today, the fault is their own.

Blues,
Dave

I think what turtle means is this was like a club that only allowed straight members in, and that’s what made this club different Straights ONLY. Now the courts said you have gay members in as well therefore the club no longer is what it used to be because the definition has changed.


Did i kind of get it Turtle?

Its more of a religious ideal.

Do you not agree?

Like I said. I think the government needs to issue us all a new name because the name you have now no longer means what it did before.

New name? "Bigots" comes to mind.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 220]

kallend

*********When Hawaii became one of the United States in 1959, did the other 49 states become something less? When a new species is added to the endangered species list, do the ones already on it become something less? Was the sanctity of a same-race marriages reduced by Loving v. Virginia? Or when Alabama overturned its ban on interracial marriage in 2000?

This is not a case of subtraction by addition. The list of federally recognized marriages wasn't reduced in any way, but rather expanded. My marriage is the same today as it was two days ago. If someone else chooses to think less of their marriage today, the fault is their own.

Blues,
Dave

I think what turtle means is this was like a club that only allowed straight members in, and that’s what made this club different Straights ONLY. Now the courts said you have gay members in as well therefore the club no longer is what it used to be because the definition has changed.


Did i kind of get it Turtle?

Its more of a religious ideal.

Do you not agree?

Like I said. I think the government needs to issue us all a new name because the name you have now no longer means what it did before.

New name? "Bigots" comes to mind.

If that is what you want to be called, you can have that one if you wish, but be careful, the government might change the definition.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Darius11 12]

Giving them(gays) rights to call their union marriage violates what religions says is marriage.The reason we have such a thing as marriage to begin with is religion.

I think I get it. I truly do believe Marriage should not be something the government should interfere with in any way. It does get weird when a religious idea becomes part of the law. It’s lacking rational. It’s either religious or its not and I do believe marriage is at its root a traditional idea based in religion.

Now personally I don’t think it’s should be a government institutions to begin with, but I do get what you mean.....i think.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Its more of a religious ideal.

Oh, you would like goverment to create and uphold laws according to religous ideas? How positively sharia of you.

[kallend 2,027]

Darius11

Giving them(gays) rights to call their union marriage violates what religions says is marriage.The reason we have such a thing as marriage to begin with is religion.

.

Do you have a definitive source for that?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Darius11 12]

kallend

***Giving them(gays) rights to call their union marriage violates what religions says is marriage.The reason we have such a thing as marriage to begin with is religion.

.

Do you have a definitive source for that?

No I do not, however I have yet to see a weeding without some religious ceremony.


Do you have a definitive source as to where marriage began? I know the idea is ancient before Jesus, Moses, or Mohammad. But not sure if anyone knows for sure. I do think even the ancient weddings were based on the religion of the time place and people.

Would you agree that in this country and many others Marriage is a religious institute?

For the record again I do not care who marries who as long as we are talking about adults, and by adults I mean old enough to know I don’t think 18 is magical number for all. I am simply trying to understand if I can see someone else’s view point because I have had a few friends surprise me with objections to allowing gays to marry.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[livendive 8]

I'm an atheist-leaning agnostic and my wife is an atheist. Our marriage has zero basis in religion. Also, the institution itself predates any of the abrahimic religions, both in Asia and in ancient Egypt. The fact that subscribers to these belief-systems have tried to co-opt the term for their own purposes matters not to me. Also, plenty of religious institutions in the US (a country theoretically founded on religious freedom) are happy to conduct same-sex marriages, and most states allow a justice of the peace to marry two people without any religious significance. Of course Turtle and I are both ordained ministers with the Universal Life Church, an institution that promotes religious freedom and simply espouses "Do only that which is right." He and I can differ on what we believe is "right", and both of us should only perform those weddings that we believe fit the bill.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[kelpdiver 2]

turtlespeed

I just feel that something has been stolen from people that entered into a nuptial agreement with a knowledge of what the definition of that agreement was, and now the government has ruined that for them.

If you can only describe it as "something," it's hard to believe it is tangible or substantive, and it's hard to cite as justification for denying gays the same rights.

If you feel that "wedding" belongs to RELIGION, maybe the solution is for the Christian sects to start calling it super-real-weddings to differentiate from the state defined union of two persons with implicit benefits.

Darius - to you question - millions of people married in the USSR and China outside of religion. Many or most had ceremonies of some sort. They're not all religious.

Quote

Perhaps look at it like this: You grew up thinking and believing that you were your fathers son, and then, one day, the government decided that you weren't.

It would be hard for the government to rewrite history or biology.