What's new
By:

Prop 8 over turned in CA

What business is it of yours to say how many peoee can get married?

So long as there is not financial advantage marriage v non-married who cares.

What reasons do you have to limit it?
 
Ms Tree said:
What business is it of yours to say how many peoee can get married?

So long as there is not financial advantage marriage v non-married who cares.

What reasons do you have to limit it?
Click to expand...

Let's have philosophy hour shall we?

This country was founded on the basic principle of individual liberty and that the rights of individual supersede the rights of government.

With the above statement as a back drop for the debate let's take a look at a few things. For the sake of discussion let's assume that I am a deeply religious Hell Fire and Damnation Southern Baptist. Pro life and ulta conservative socially. I feel that ANYTHING that differs from my beliefs poses a danger. For people like these are their own worst enemy.

This is the hypocrisy of Social Conservatives. They scream about Freedom & Liberty and rights, yet as a group they are intent on legislating morality. If you want the Freedom and Liberty to practice your faith and/or lifestyle don't you in turn have to respect another persons right to worship and live as they please?

When you tolerate anothers Freedom & Liberty especially those who are different than you, you in essence expand and ensure you personal Freedom & Liberty.
 
Ms Tree said:
What business is it of yours to say how many peoee can get married?

So long as there is not financial advantage marriage v non-married who cares.

What reasons do you have to limit it?
Click to expand...

I don't know what a peoee is but i'm guessing it's some liberal gay slang... :lol:
But yew know, there is already a morass of financial brew-ha-ha's with tax laws and benefits with two 'person' unions and now you want to add an 'infinite' number.
Yea that will work... :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
So you are going to use the tax code as a justification for depriving people of equal rights?

Please tell me you are joking.

For items such as employer provided health care it can be provided to one spouse of choice, the others would need to find their own. Same with the kids.

There is a show on TV called sister wives. Interesting show. One man and 4 wives. I think they have 16 children. One legal marriage and the rest are married through the church with no legal standing.

Does not affect me. What do I care how many wives he has.
 
xUT said:
I don't know what a peoee is but i'm guessing it's some liberal gay slang... :lol:
But yew know, there is already a morass of financial brew-ha-ha's with tax laws and benefits with two 'person' unions and now you want to add an 'infinite' number.
Yea that will work... :lol: :lol: :lol:
Click to expand...

I think that's a city in Illinois........
 
Ms Tree said:
He presented no facts. How does animal cruelty have anything to do with the issue? As Hackman said, since you are not gay you have no idea what you are talking about an your opinion has no merit.
Click to expand...
Since you like to talk facts, I was wondering about this one fact I noticed. In post #78 you state; "I'm not black, not female, not gay."

Then in post #104; "I looked into it when I got married which is why we chose the route of marriage and not civil union."

Strange.....if your not gay, why would you be choosing between a marriage and a civil union? Since apparently you have a wife that is really, well, a female. Or the other way around, she's the hubby and your the wife... unsure how it works in a godless progressives house.

Not that I really care, but I thought maybe you haven't come out of the closet yet, and you might be lying.
 
Hackman said:
Since you like to talk facts, I was wondering about this one fact I noticed. In post #78 you state; "I'm not black, not female, not gay."

Then in post #104; "I looked into it when I got married which is why we chose the route of marriage and not civil union."

Strange.....if your not gay, why would you be choosing between a marriage and a civil union? Since apparently you have a wife that is really, well, a female. Or the other way around, she's the hubby and your the wife... unsure how it works in a godless progressives house.

Not that I really care, but I thought maybe you haven't come out of the closet yet, and you might be lying.
Click to expand...

Good post, I had the same thoughts for a long, long time.

th_pride-2.gif
 
Hackman said:
Since you like to talk facts, I was wondering about this one fact I noticed. In post #78 you state; "I'm not black, not female, not gay."

Then in post #104; "I looked into it when I got married which is why we chose the route of marriage and not civil union."

Strange.....if your not gay, why would you be choosing between a marriage and a civil union? Since apparently you have a wife that is really, well, a female. Or the other way around, she's the hubby and your the wife... unsure how it works in a godless progressives house.

Not that I really care, but I thought maybe you haven't come out of the closet yet, and you might be lying.
Click to expand...


Simply because I do not like the institution of marriage. I am agnostic and my wife is a recovering Catholic. Had civil union and marriage been the same we would have gladly gone the route of civil union. They were not. Legal unions work the same in theist and non-theist house holds.

Interesting how you chose this issue to latch on to instead of the fact that you were wrong about how a case get to the supreme court, you were wrong about unions and marriages being the same, you were wrong about unions being accepted in all states as well as a host of other issues. No, instead you are concerned why I was looking into a civil union with my wife instead of a marriage. I guess since facts seem to elude you, a trivial issue such as this is something more tangible to you.

Since you are unwilling or incapable of looking things up before you post here are a few links on the differences between marriage and civil unions.

NOW

About.com

About.com (second site)

Fact check

The Atlantic

I thought this was pretty interesting (funny as hell too).
...it is terribly humorous and ironic that the French created civil unions to protect the institution of marriage...and now civil unions are undermining marriage because people are opting for them instead of marriage. Talk about the law of unintended consequences. So possibly the lesson for our country is that the best way to protect the institution of marriage is not to deny people marriage by creating a separate but equal system, but to allow gays to marry.
Click to expand...
 
delldude said:
Good post, I had the same thoughts for a long, long time.

th_pride-2.gif
Click to expand...


BS. You and I have been debating on here for years and you know exactly who I am. You have never questioned nor commented about this in all that time. Now that this yahoo is being schooled on the differences between marriage and civil unions because he is too lazy or ignorant to look them up you jump on his band wagon to say "yea I've wondered also". Please. Give me a break.

Had he even had the slightest intellectual curiosity about the topic he would have looked up the facts of the issue and went on from there. Instead he picks up on the talking points du jour and marches off. He stated that unions and marriages were the same and that gays should be happy with that. I have clearly proven that they are neither the same nor legal in the entire US. In fact, unions are only allowed in 7 states out of how may states?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Legislating Morality
4 5 6
Replies
88
Views
14K
local 12 proud
local 12 proud
L
McCain vs Romney
Replies
12
Views
2K
NewHampshire Black Bears
N
Hopeful
AA executive bonus!
2 3
Replies
36
Views
6K
Bob Owens
B
TWU informer
S1113 Information
2
Replies
18
Views
6K
BoeingBoy
BoeingBoy
C
TWA Congressional Testimony APFA''s Ward vs. Cooper
Replies
11
Views
3K
TransWorldONE
T

Latest posts

Back
Top