Are Children A Part Of The Gay Marriage Conversation?

[RKMBrown]

Really? Then show us the state laws...any state law...on marriage that requires procreation.

The absence of such laws doesn't disprove my contention. Are their any state laws that require you to use your driver's license to drive?

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

You also don't need a license to drive. Any 15 year old kid can get into his parents care and drive it down the freeway. You also don't need to drive to have a license. You can put it in the drawer and leave it there until you want to vote.

Your "logic" doesn't shoot down my position.

You stupid liberal turds keep using the same pathetic arguments over and over and over. They are just as faulty now as they were 10 years ago.

Yes it does shoot down your position. Anyone can kill anyone with a gun does that mean we should ban all guns? Or are you saying we should only ban gay marriage because it does not affect you personally?

 

[RKMBrown]

The issue is REPRODUCTION, not fertility. The numbskulls on your side of the dispute are the ones trying to make fertility an issue.

Reproduction isn't a requirement to get married. Your side wishes it to be but only for gay couples seeking to get married. They never apply those same standards to straight couples. Why is that?

Gays are icky. Guess how well that argument goes in court?

Polygamists are icky?

Depends on the context. Consenting adults, no...those polygamist colonies where the basically rape little girls, yes. There is also an economic disadvantage to polygamy that does not exist with monogamy...the whole "poor guys have to do without" thing.

I'm not opposed to polygamy the way you are opposed to gays marrying. I wish them luck but their "fight" has nothing to do with marriage equality for gays. It's a distraction.

It has everything to do with the joke called "gay marriage." Every argument used to support gay marriage can also be used to support polygamy. Of course, legalizing polygamy would turn the institution of marriage into a real joke, and then gays will lose everything they have gained.

What do you have against plural marriages? Why do you think everyone but you and people just like you are a joke?

 

[RKMBrown]

That's the only reason marriage exists.

Really? Then show us the state laws...any state law...on marriage that requires procreation.

The absence of such laws doesn't disprove my contention. Are their any state laws that require you to use your driver's license to drive?

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

Apparently the extent of bripat's logic is everyone that agrees with him is right and everyone that disagrees should be drawn, quartered, and punished for their insolence.

 

[bripat9643]

Really? Then show us the state laws...any state law...on marriage that requires procreation.

The absence of such laws doesn't disprove my contention. Are their any state laws that require you to use your driver's license to drive?

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

Apparently the extent of bripat's logic is everyone that agrees with him is right and everyone that disagrees should be drawn, quartered, and punished for their insolence.

If you find yourself on the same side as a dingbat like Jillian, then you know you're also a dingbat.

 

[Seawytch]

Could you clarify your question a bit? I want give you an answer but I am not sure what you're asking me.

Sorry, that should have started with "is" not "if"

Thanks
Of course not. It's because they are biological unable to reproduce as a couple. Being able to produce offspring isn't a requirement to get hitched. It seems you only want that requirement for gays but not straights seeking marriage. You want to have it both ways and you can't. Sorry.

We will see whether I can or can't. That will be decided by SCOTUS.

The point is, the two demographic groups are as different as night and day. Adults should be able to agree to that point.

No Pop, they are not that different. There is no difference in married gays with children and married straights with children. There is also no difference between married gays without children and married straight couples without children.

All couples, gay or straight, get married for all the same reasons but you only want to deny gays. You're losing.

The challenged laws discriminate against a minority defined by an immutable characteristic, and the only rationale that the states put forth with any conviction— that same-sex couples and their children don't need marriage because same-sex couples can't produce children, intended or unintended—is so full of holes that it cannot be taken seriously.

~ Judge Richard Posner

Hero Federal Appeals Judge Burns Down the Case Against Gay Marriage

Posner is a hack and a moron.

Right, of course he is. Brilliant argument, truly. So devastating. And still your "argument" was laughed out of court. Keep at it though.

 

[bripat9643]

Reproduction isn't a requirement to get married. Your side wishes it to be but only for gay couples seeking to get married. They never apply those same standards to straight couples. Why is that?

Gays are icky. Guess how well that argument goes in court?

Polygamists are icky?

Depends on the context. Consenting adults, no...those polygamist colonies where the basically rape little girls, yes. There is also an economic disadvantage to polygamy that does not exist with monogamy...the whole "poor guys have to do without" thing.

I'm not opposed to polygamy the way you are opposed to gays marrying. I wish them luck but their "fight" has nothing to do with marriage equality for gays. It's a distraction.

It has everything to do with the joke called "gay marriage." Every argument used to support gay marriage can also be used to support polygamy. Of course, legalizing polygamy would turn the institution of marriage into a real joke, and then gays will lose everything they have gained.

What do you have against plural marriages? Why do you think everyone but you and people just like you are a joke?

Whether I have anything against them isn't the point. The bottom line is that they are coming. When they arrive the respectability that homosexuals hoped to gain from legalized "gay marriage" will evaporate. When anything goes, marriage doesn't confer any kind of respectability. It devolves to being nothing more than a scheme to get government benefits.

 

[bripat9643]

Sorry, that should have started with "is" not "if"

Thanks
Of course not. It's because they are biological unable to reproduce as a couple. Being able to produce offspring isn't a requirement to get hitched. It seems you only want that requirement for gays but not straights seeking marriage. You want to have it both ways and you can't. Sorry.

We will see whether I can or can't. That will be decided by SCOTUS.

The point is, the two demographic groups are as different as night and day. Adults should be able to agree to that point.

No Pop, they are not that different. There is no difference in married gays with children and married straights with children. There is also no difference between married gays without children and married straight couples without children.

All couples, gay or straight, get married for all the same reasons but you only want to deny gays. You're losing.

The challenged laws discriminate against a minority defined by an immutable characteristic, and the only rationale that the states put forth with any conviction— that same-sex couples and their children don't need marriage because same-sex couples can't produce children, intended or unintended—is so full of holes that it cannot be taken seriously.

~ Judge Richard Posner

Hero Federal Appeals Judge Burns Down the Case Against Gay Marriage

Posner is a hack and a moron.

Right, of course he is. Brilliant argument, truly. So devastating. And still your "argument" was laughed out of court. Keep at it though.

No one gets terribly upset by the laughter of a two-bit hack like Posner.

 

[rightwinger]

Gays are icky. Guess how well that argument goes in court?

Polygamists are icky?

Depends on the context. Consenting adults, no...those polygamist colonies where the basically rape little girls, yes. There is also an economic disadvantage to polygamy that does not exist with monogamy...the whole "poor guys have to do without" thing.

I'm not opposed to polygamy the way you are opposed to gays marrying. I wish them luck but their "fight" has nothing to do with marriage equality for gays. It's a distraction.

It has everything to do with the joke called "gay marriage." Every argument used to support gay marriage can also be used to support polygamy. Of course, legalizing polygamy would turn the institution of marriage into a real joke, and then gays will lose everything they have gained.

What do you have against plural marriages? Why do you think everyone but you and people just like you are a joke?

Whether I have anything against them isn't the point. The bottom line is that they are coming. When they arrive the respectability that homosexuals hoped to gain from legalized "gay marriage" will evaporate. When anything goes, marriage doesn't confer any kind of respectability. It devolves to being nothing more than a scheme to get government benefits.

How does it affect your marriage?

You are married aren't you?

 

[bripat9643]

The absence of such laws doesn't disprove my contention. Are their any state laws that require you to use your driver's license to drive?

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

You also don't need a license to drive. Any 15 year old kid can get into his parents care and drive it down the freeway. You also don't need to drive to have a license. You can put it in the drawer and leave it there until you want to vote.

Your "logic" doesn't shoot down my position.

You stupid liberal turds keep using the same pathetic arguments over and over and over. They are just as faulty now as they were 10 years ago.

Yes it does shoot down your position. Anyone can kill anyone with a gun does that mean we should ban all guns? Or are you saying we should only ban gay marriage because it does not affect you personally?

I have no idea what a gun has to do with marriage. It would have made as much sense to compare marriage with a fish tank. Getting a driver's license is the proper analogy. It's an analogy that no one can refute.

 

[bripat9643]

Polygamists are icky?

Depends on the context. Consenting adults, no...those polygamist colonies where the basically rape little girls, yes. There is also an economic disadvantage to polygamy that does not exist with monogamy...the whole "poor guys have to do without" thing.

I'm not opposed to polygamy the way you are opposed to gays marrying. I wish them luck but their "fight" has nothing to do with marriage equality for gays. It's a distraction.

It has everything to do with the joke called "gay marriage." Every argument used to support gay marriage can also be used to support polygamy. Of course, legalizing polygamy would turn the institution of marriage into a real joke, and then gays will lose everything they have gained.

What do you have against plural marriages? Why do you think everyone but you and people just like you are a joke?

Whether I have anything against them isn't the point. The bottom line is that they are coming. When they arrive the respectability that homosexuals hoped to gain from legalized "gay marriage" will evaporate. When anything goes, marriage doesn't confer any kind of respectability. It devolves to being nothing more than a scheme to get government benefits.

How does it affect your marriage?

You are married aren't you?

For gays, the taste of victory will be bitter when everyone thinks marriage is a joke.

 

[bendog]

Polygamists are icky?

Depends on the context. Consenting adults, no...those polygamist colonies where the basically rape little girls, yes. There is also an economic disadvantage to polygamy that does not exist with monogamy...the whole "poor guys have to do without" thing.

I'm not opposed to polygamy the way you are opposed to gays marrying. I wish them luck but their "fight" has nothing to do with marriage equality for gays. It's a distraction.

It has everything to do with the joke called "gay marriage." Every argument used to support gay marriage can also be used to support polygamy. Of course, legalizing polygamy would turn the institution of marriage into a real joke, and then gays will lose everything they have gained.

What do you have against plural marriages? Why do you think everyone but you and people just like you are a joke?

Whether I have anything against them isn't the point. The bottom line is that they are coming. When they arrive the respectability that homosexuals hoped to gain from legalized "gay marriage" will evaporate. When anything goes, marriage doesn't confer any kind of respectability. It devolves to being nothing more than a scheme to get government benefits.

How does it affect your marriage?

You are married aren't you?

It's challenging to remain faithful when throngs of virile young Aryan men want to fondle my tallywhacker. (-:

 

[mdk]

Depends on the context. Consenting adults, no...those polygamist colonies where the basically rape little girls, yes. There is also an economic disadvantage to polygamy that does not exist with monogamy...the whole "poor guys have to do without" thing.

I'm not opposed to polygamy the way you are opposed to gays marrying. I wish them luck but their "fight" has nothing to do with marriage equality for gays. It's a distraction.

It has everything to do with the joke called "gay marriage." Every argument used to support gay marriage can also be used to support polygamy. Of course, legalizing polygamy would turn the institution of marriage into a real joke, and then gays will lose everything they have gained.

What do you have against plural marriages? Why do you think everyone but you and people just like you are a joke?

Whether I have anything against them isn't the point. The bottom line is that they are coming. When they arrive the respectability that homosexuals hoped to gain from legalized "gay marriage" will evaporate. When anything goes, marriage doesn't confer any kind of respectability. It devolves to being nothing more than a scheme to get government benefits.

How does it affect your marriage?

You are married aren't you?

For gays, the taste of victory will be bitter when everyone thinks marriage is a joke.

As if I care what other people think of my marriage. Hint: I don't.

 

[mdk]

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

You also don't need a license to drive. Any 15 year old kid can get into his parents care and drive it down the freeway. You also don't need to drive to have a license. You can put it in the drawer and leave it there until you want to vote.

Your "logic" doesn't shoot down my position.

You stupid liberal turds keep using the same pathetic arguments over and over and over. They are just as faulty now as they were 10 years ago.

Yes it does shoot down your position. Anyone can kill anyone with a gun does that mean we should ban all guns? Or are you saying we should only ban gay marriage because it does not affect you personally?

I have no idea what a gun has to do with marriage. It would have made as much sense to compare marriage with a fish tank. Getting a driver's license is the proper analogy. It's an analogy that no one can refute.

It's easily refutable in fact. Driving is a privilege. Marriage is a right. The SC has affirmed 14 times since 1888 that marriage is a right. Can you name a single SC case that affirmed driving as right?

 

[bripat9643]

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

You also don't need a license to drive. Any 15 year old kid can get into his parents care and drive it down the freeway. You also don't need to drive to have a license. You can put it in the drawer and leave it there until you want to vote.

Your "logic" doesn't shoot down my position.

You stupid liberal turds keep using the same pathetic arguments over and over and over. They are just as faulty now as they were 10 years ago.

Yes it does shoot down your position. Anyone can kill anyone with a gun does that mean we should ban all guns? Or are you saying we should only ban gay marriage because it does not affect you personally?

I have no idea what a gun has to do with marriage. It would have made as much sense to compare marriage with a fish tank. Getting a driver's license is the proper analogy. It's an analogy that no one can refute.

It's easily refutable in fact. Driving is a privilege. Marriage is a right. The SC has affirmed 14 times since 1888 that marriage is a right. Can you name a single SC case that affirmed driving as right?

The Supreme Court is a gang of political hacks.

I couldn't care less what they have to say on the subject.

Civil marriage is a set of privileges granted by the state. Nothing could be more obvious. I'ts no more of a right than any other government privilege, like Social Security.

 

[rightwinger]

Depends on the context. Consenting adults, no...those polygamist colonies where the basically rape little girls, yes. There is also an economic disadvantage to polygamy that does not exist with monogamy...the whole "poor guys have to do without" thing.

I'm not opposed to polygamy the way you are opposed to gays marrying. I wish them luck but their "fight" has nothing to do with marriage equality for gays. It's a distraction.

It has everything to do with the joke called "gay marriage." Every argument used to support gay marriage can also be used to support polygamy. Of course, legalizing polygamy would turn the institution of marriage into a real joke, and then gays will lose everything they have gained.

What do you have against plural marriages? Why do you think everyone but you and people just like you are a joke?

Whether I have anything against them isn't the point. The bottom line is that they are coming. When they arrive the respectability that homosexuals hoped to gain from legalized "gay marriage" will evaporate. When anything goes, marriage doesn't confer any kind of respectability. It devolves to being nothing more than a scheme to get government benefits.

How does it affect your marriage?

You are married aren't you?

For gays, the taste of victory will be bitter when everyone thinks marriage is a joke.

Do you think it is a joke?
You are not even married are you Fingerboy?

 

[mdk]

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

You also don't need a license to drive. Any 15 year old kid can get into his parents care and drive it down the freeway. You also don't need to drive to have a license. You can put it in the drawer and leave it there until you want to vote.

Your "logic" doesn't shoot down my position.

You stupid liberal turds keep using the same pathetic arguments over and over and over. They are just as faulty now as they were 10 years ago.

Yes it does shoot down your position. Anyone can kill anyone with a gun does that mean we should ban all guns? Or are you saying we should only ban gay marriage because it does not affect you personally?

I have no idea what a gun has to do with marriage. It would have made as much sense to compare marriage with a fish tank. Getting a driver's license is the proper analogy. It's an analogy that no one can refute.

It's easily refutable in fact. Driving is a privilege. Marriage is a right. The SC has affirmed 14 times since 1888 that marriage is a right. Can you name a single SC case that affirmed driving as right?

The Supreme Court is a gang of political hacks.

I couldn't care less what they have to say on the subject.

Civil marriage is a set of privileges granted by the state. Nothing could be more obvious. I'ts no more of a right than any other government privilege, like Social Security.

I am sure you care when they vote in the way you wish. I have the courts on my side, you have your opinion which amounts to a hill of beans legally speaking. You can call it a privilege until your blue in the face but it doesn't make it so. I can call myself The Arch-Duke of Pittsburgh but I don't expect anyone to call me, My Lord.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The proponents of cultural McCarthyism, skewing data and findings, are clearly acting like McCarthyites..

 

[RKMBrown]

The absence of such laws doesn't disprove my contention. Are their any state laws that require you to use your driver's license to drive?

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

Apparently the extent of bripat's logic is everyone that agrees with him is right and everyone that disagrees should be drawn, quartered, and punished for their insolence.

If you find yourself on the same side as a dingbat like Jillian, then you know you're also a dingbat.

Even dingbats get things right some times.

 

[RKMBrown]

That would depend on what you are driving and where you are driving it. You can drive a bike in your back yard without a license in all 57 states.

Apparently you didn't read my post very carefully. Does a driver's license require you to drive?

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

You also don't need a license to drive. Any 15 year old kid can get into his parents care and drive it down the freeway. You also don't need to drive to have a license. You can put it in the drawer and leave it there until you want to vote.

Your "logic" doesn't shoot down my position.

You stupid liberal turds keep using the same pathetic arguments over and over and over. They are just as faulty now as they were 10 years ago.

Yes it does shoot down your position. Anyone can kill anyone with a gun does that mean we should ban all guns? Or are you saying we should only ban gay marriage because it does not affect you personally?

I have no idea what a gun has to do with marriage. It would have made as much sense to compare marriage with a fish tank. Getting a driver's license is the proper analogy. It's an analogy that no one can refute.

no...

driving on public roads is a privilege for which you must have a license

getting married is a liberty of free men that tyrants like you are refusing to gay couples

carrying and bearing arms is a liberty of free men that tyrants like Obama are attempting to refuse to citizens who wish to carry and bear arms

You are trying to compare a liberty to a privilege. Thus your argument is illogical.

I provided you with a more appropriate example where you can compare liberty to liberty. That you don't understand my example, just points out your bigotry toward gays.

No one is trying to stop anyone from driving. You just have to get a license. There's no law stopping gays from getting a drivers license. That would be even dumber than stopping them from getting a marriage license.

 

[RKMBrown]

which has nothing to do with the reasons for marriage. one does not a) need to be married to procreate; nor b) procreate to be married.

your lack of logic and fact-based thinking is laughable.

You also don't need a license to drive. Any 15 year old kid can get into his parents care and drive it down the freeway. You also don't need to drive to have a license. You can put it in the drawer and leave it there until you want to vote.

Your "logic" doesn't shoot down my position.

You stupid liberal turds keep using the same pathetic arguments over and over and over. They are just as faulty now as they were 10 years ago.

Yes it does shoot down your position. Anyone can kill anyone with a gun does that mean we should ban all guns? Or are you saying we should only ban gay marriage because it does not affect you personally?

I have no idea what a gun has to do with marriage. It would have made as much sense to compare marriage with a fish tank. Getting a driver's license is the proper analogy. It's an analogy that no one can refute.

It's easily refutable in fact. Driving is a privilege. Marriage is a right. The SC has affirmed 14 times since 1888 that marriage is a right. Can you name a single SC case that affirmed driving as right?

The Supreme Court is a gang of political hacks.

I couldn't care less what they have to say on the subject.

Civil marriage is a set of privileges granted by the state. Nothing could be more obvious. I'ts no more of a right than any other government privilege, like Social Security.

No, civil marriage is not a set of privileges granted by the state.

You need to look up the definition of "is." I think you are confused. There are certain privileges provided to holders of a marriage license, yes. Marriage licenses are a contract between two consenting adults that the government regulates. The reason for the contract is to manage property rights. Tax benefits, and regulations regarding patient access have been written to give the group of married couples special benefits to the exclusion of all others. These are not privileges these are discriminatory actions taken against everyone else.