Alabama SC orders judges to stop issuing homosexuals "marriage" licenses.

[Syriusly]

Agreed. Furthermore "Bruce and Steve" weddings put their female children at psychological peril..

No, there is quite a huge legitimate interest in states denying gay marriage...and why the idea is gaining traction: Prince s Trust Survey The Voices of the Voteless Children in Gay Marriage Debate US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

...And the Justice-destroying precedent set in this kangaroo litigation is intolerable to Americans: Breaking Justice Kagan Must Recuse Herself From Upcoming Gay Marriage Hearing US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

***********
For all the uber liberals celebrating overt judicial bias in their favor on this question, consider the following:

Imagine seeing Justice Roberts or Thomas in a photo op just before a case on the Keystone Pipeline, shaking hands with the president of Haliburton; showing either of the Justices with a shovel, breaking ground for Haliburton on "the soon to be approved project".

Or going one step further as the Court is doing in this case and actively eroding state laws, allowing sections of the pipeline to be built in violation of states laws one by one by inexplicably refusing to uphold stays...so by the time a couple years had passed, nearly the entire length of the pipeline was complete so the Court could throw up its hands in surprise and say "well golly, it looks like the whole pipeline's nearly in anyway, so we'll just have to go ahead and approve this thing"..

That is the EXACT analogy of what's going on with this gay marriage thing. It's illegal. It's undemocratic. And it's Tyranny of the Judicial over the states.

The number of states that have legally-ratified "gay marriage" is under 10, or near that number anyway. It is not "36" or what have you. No way. If this injustice goes forward it will be the equivalent of a cult using our Highest Court to force subjegation of the states. Check your federally-issued rainbow "USA" Harvey Milk stamps (and his biography/Ca laws requiring kids to worship him) for details...

Do you know what The Prince's Trust, Halliburton, The Keystone Pipeline, and Harvey Milk stamps all have in common? None of them have anything to do with gay marriage or gay parents.

Sil's argument has essentially degenerated into rhetorical word salad.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if he worked in nuclear meltdowns and zombies.

And wolves, do not forget wolves.

She is only using this thread in hopes of generating traffic to her own failed threads. It is why she spams her thread's links in almost every gay marriage thread.

Yes- nothing better explains Silhouette than her talking about wolves raising children and asking whether the wolves should be allowed to get married......

I bet there weren't two male wolves involved either. Homosexuality is a flaw in the human species. Either by genetics or by choice.

If you want to discuss wolves raising children and whether they should be allowed to marry, Silhouette is just dying to have that conversation with a sympatico poster.

 

[bodecea]

Do you know what The Prince's Trust, Halliburton, The Keystone Pipeline, and Harvey Milk stamps all have in common? None of them have anything to do with gay marriage or gay parents.

Sil's argument has essentially degenerated into rhetorical word salad.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if he worked in nuclear meltdowns and zombies.

And wolves, do not forget wolves.

She is only using this thread in hopes of generating traffic to her own failed threads. It is why she spams her thread's links in almost every gay marriage thread.

Yes- nothing better explains Silhouette than her talking about wolves raising children and asking whether the wolves should be allowed to get married......

I bet there weren't two male wolves involved either. Homosexuality is a flaw in the human species. Either by genetics or by choice.

so is being fat

And yet, morbidly obese people are allowed to marry.

 

[Plasmaball]

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

For one, those children will wonder why the great majority of other kids have moms and dads, while they have two dads or two moms. The whole idea of these children feeling abnormal is enough to harm them.

Male/female conjugation is the primary way the human species reproduces, making homosexuality an aberration.

this weak argument i see. The children will be fine. In fact we have studies proving this, which i see you prefer to ignore for this ignorant argument about " the children".

 

[Plasmaball]

Sil's argument has essentially degenerated into rhetorical word salad.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if he worked in nuclear meltdowns and zombies.

And wolves, do not forget wolves.

She is only using this thread in hopes of generating traffic to her own failed threads. It is why she spams her thread's links in almost every gay marriage thread.

Yes- nothing better explains Silhouette than her talking about wolves raising children and asking whether the wolves should be allowed to get married......

I bet there weren't two male wolves involved either. Homosexuality is a flaw in the human species. Either by genetics or by choice.

so is being fat

And yet, morbidly obese people are allowed to marry.

fatass is moving into the Malcontent area of debating gay marriage.

 

[bodecea]

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

For one, those children will wonder why the great majority of other kids have moms and dads, while they have two dads or two moms. The whole idea of these children feeling abnormal is enough to harm them.

Male/female conjugation is the primary way the human species reproduces, making homosexuality an aberration.

You make the same argument for kids having one mom too, right?

You make the same argument for kids having one dad too, right?

You make the same argument for kids having only grandparents, right?

 

[bodecea]

And wolves, do not forget wolves.

She is only using this thread in hopes of generating traffic to her own failed threads. It is why she spams her thread's links in almost every gay marriage thread.

Yes- nothing better explains Silhouette than her talking about wolves raising children and asking whether the wolves should be allowed to get married......

I bet there weren't two male wolves involved either. Homosexuality is a flaw in the human species. Either by genetics or by choice.

so is being fat

And yet, morbidly obese people are allowed to marry.

fatass is moving into the Malcontent area of debating gay marriage.

Ooooooo! Coupling!

 

[TemplarKormac]

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

For one, those children will wonder why the great majority of other kids have moms and dads, while they have two dads or two moms. The whole idea of these children feeling abnormal is enough to harm them.

Male/female conjugation is the primary way the human species reproduces, making homosexuality an aberration.

And again- what does preventing gay marriage do to change that claim?

Scenario 1: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- not married.
Scenario 2: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- married.

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

If you don't like the answer to your question, simply say so.

 

[Silhouette]

You make the same argument for kids having one mom too, right?

You make the same argument for kids having one dad too, right?

You make the same argument for kids having only grandparents, right?

States realize all manner of oddball situations exist for unfortunate kids caught up in them. States only get involved incentivizing marriage to lure the best structural environment for children. Otherwise they wouldn't get involved at all. The best formative environment for kids is one where there is a mother and father adoptive mother and father or adoptive grandfather and grandmother present to provide those children with the gender they are for a role model.

As I've said before, wolves have raised children too; that doesn't mean we should have "wolf marriage" so their children can get the immediate legal benefits of marriage. As it turns out, perks and goodies are less important to kids than the psychological environment. We don't want to dilute that at great peril to kids in the word "marriage"..

 

[Syriusly]

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

For one, those children will wonder why the great majority of other kids have moms and dads, while they have two dads or two moms. The whole idea of these children feeling abnormal is enough to harm them.

Male/female conjugation is the primary way the human species reproduces, making homosexuality an aberration.

And again- what does preventing gay marriage do to change that claim?

Scenario 1: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- not married.
Scenario 2: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- married.

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

If you don't like the answer to your question, simply say so.

What part of me repeating the question didn't you understand? And why is it difficult for you to answer?

What does preventing gay marriage do to change that claim?

Scenario 1: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- not married.
Scenario 2: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- married.

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

 

[Syriusly]

You make the same argument for kids having one mom too, right?

You make the same argument for kids having one dad too, right?

You make the same argument for kids having only grandparents, right?

States realize all manner of oddball situations.

And again- what does preventing gay marriage do to change that claim?

Scenario 1: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- not married.
Scenario 2: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- married.

How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

 

[Ernie S.]

Marriage is a state matter- but subject to Constitutional guarantees.

Well since this isn't about race but rather is about lifestyles

All Americans have both a right to marriage, and are guaranteed equal rights before the law.

None of that has to do with race or lifestyle choices such as religion.

Straight or gay you have the right to marry. Agreed! Marriage is the civil and spiritual union of one man and one woman.
Look! I'm just fine with civil union to protect legal rights of gay couples. Just don't call it marriage, OK?

Marriage is not a trademarked term...It does not belong to the religious. Maybe the Religious act of coupling should be renamed and not be used by the State. Keep it in the religious realm.

That is the problem mixing Religion and government...The government belongs to all. If you want your rituals to remain sacred keep them sacred and out of the public square.

The dictionary definition of marriage is the legal and spiritual union of one man and one woman. It is not a trademark issue is is a factual issue. A union of 2 people of the same sex is not a marriage.

 

[Skylar]

The dictionary definition of marriage is the legal and spiritual union of one man and one woman.

The dictionary actually disagrees with you on this:

Marriage:

1. (broadly) any of the diverse forms of interpersonal union established invarious parts of the world to form a familial bond that is recognizedlegally, religiously, or socially, granting the participating partners mutual conjugal rights and responsibilities and including, for example,opposite-sex marriage, same-sex marriage, plural marriage, and arranged marriage:

Marriage Define Marriage at Dictionary.com

Marriage is what we agree it is.

A union of 2 people of the same sex is not a marriage.

Says you. Both the dictionary and the law of 37 of 50 States disagrees with you.

But hey, you continue to believe that the union of 2 people of the same sex is not a married. And gay people will keep getting married.

Sounds like a win-win to me.

 

[Geaux4it]

Keep up the good fight Bama

-Geaux
-------------------

Yep- Alabama- which didn't legalize mixed race marriages until 2000- 23 years after the Supreme Court said that State laws against mixed race marriages were unconstitutional.

Alabama- always fighting the good fight.

FAIL

No comparison

-Geaux

 

[Silhouette]

states forced to allow illegal gay marriage are not in agreement with anything dear..

 

[Silhouette]

What part of me repeating the question didn't you understand? And why is it difficult for you to answer?
What does preventing gay marriage do to change that claim?
Scenario 1: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- not married.
Scenario 2: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- married.
How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

You're really stretching here aren't you? Let me put this one to you in order to answer the allegory.

Scenario 1: Polygamists Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn are raising 24 children- not married
Scenario 2: Polygamists Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn are raising 24 children- married

How do Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn getting married harm those 24 children?

Scenario 1: Brother Billy Bob and Sister Irma Jean are raising their two kids in the backwoods of Kentucky- not married
Scenario 2: Brother Billy Bob and Sister Irma Jean are raising their two kids in the backwoods of Kentucky-married.

How does Billy Bob and Irma Jean getting married harm those two children?

The issue here isn't the harm or no harm done to the children of these marginal marriages that the majority of the US objects to. The issue is the potential to harm 100s of millions of children into the untold future by fractillating the structure of marriage to include "anything goes". The states must not stand for this because they will have to bear the brunt/expense and social upheaval of such an assault on the institution they have a right to incentivize to be the best formative environment for kids.

So it's the few kids caught up in gay lifestyle's interests vs the untold 100s of millions predicted to be harmed by blasting the barn doors open to multiple new descriptions of the word "marriage" and ergo the words "mom and dad/mother & father".

 

[Skylar]

states forced to allow illegal gay marriage are not in agreement with anything dear..

State marriage laws that violate constitutional guarantees are legally invalid. So how is it possible to violate a legally invalid law?

 

[Skylar]

What part of me repeating the question didn't you understand? And why is it difficult for you to answer?
What does preventing gay marriage do to change that claim?
Scenario 1: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- not married.
Scenario 2: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- married.
How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

You're really stretching here aren't you? Let me put this one to you in order to answer the allegory.

Scenario 1: Polygamists Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn are raising 24 children- not married
Scenario 2: Polygamists Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn are raising 24 children- married

How do Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn getting married harm those 24 children?

Scenario 1: Brother Billy Bob and Sister Irma Jean are raising their two kids in the backwoods of Kentucky- not married
Scenario 2: Brother Billy Bob and Sister Irma Jean are raising their two kids in the backwoods of Kentucky-married.

How does Billy Bob and Irma Jean getting married harm those two children?

The issue here isn't the harm or no harm done to the children of these marginal marriages that the majority of the US objects to. The issue is the potential to harm 100s of millions of children into the untold future by fractillating the structure of marriage to include "anything goes". The states must not stand for this because they will have to bear the brunt/expense and social upheaval of such an assault on the institution they have a right to incentivize to be the best formative environment for kids.

So it's the few kids caught up in gay lifestyle's interests vs the untold 100s of millions predicted to be harmed by blasting the barn doors open to multiple new descriptions of the word "marriage" and ergo the words "mom and dad/mother & father".

Yeah, How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

Or, if you'd like, how does preventing any same parents from marrying help their children?

Keep running.

 

[Syriusly]

What part of me repeating the question didn't you understand? And why is it difficult for you to answer?
What does preventing gay marriage do to change that claim?
Scenario 1: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- not married.
Scenario 2: Bruce and Bob are raising 2 children- married.
How does Bruce and Bob getting married harm those 2 children?

The issue here isn't the harm or no harm done to the children of these marginal marriages that the majority of the US objects to..

So you are agreeing that the children of Bruce and Bob are not harmed when Bruce and Bob get married.

Nor can you identify any children that are harmed by Bruce and Bob get married.

But we do know that those children suffer immediate legal harm by their parents not marrying

"There is an immediate legal injury and that's the voice of these children," he said. "There's some 40,000 children in California, according to the Red Brief, that live with same-sex parents, and they want their parents to have full recognition and full status. The voice of those children is important in this case, don't you think?"

Thank you for your concession that your opposition to gay marriage has nothing to do with concern for 'the well being of children'

You just are opposed to homosexuals.

 

[Syriusly]

states forced to allow illegal gay marriage are not in agreement with anything dear..

You are talking to yourself again.

And you are lying even when you talk to yourself.

 

[Syriusly]

Keep up the good fight Bama

-Geaux
-------------------

Yep- Alabama- which didn't legalize mixed race marriages until 2000- 23 years after the Supreme Court said that State laws against mixed race marriages were unconstitutional.

Alabama- always fighting the good fight.

FAIL

No comparison

-Geaux

Who is comparing anything?

I am just stating the facts:

Yep- Alabama- which didn't legalize mixed race marriages until 2000- 23 years after the Supreme Court said that State laws against mixed race marriages were unconstitutional.

Alabama- always fighting the good fight