Breaking. Prop 8.... struck down.

[g5000]

Next thing you know, someone will be asking for evidence that pedophilia is harmful in their zeal to equate it with gay marriage.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Next thing you know, someone will be asking for evidence that pedophilia is harmful in their zeal to equate it with gay marriage.

You have failed to prove either claim. You have not proven that the US should be concerned with the rather paltry level of possible defects in allowing incestual relations between consenting adults and you have not proven that multiple marriage would be dangerous or harmful if legalized.

What you have done is claim that Love matters, that marriage is somehow a Civil Right and that what TWO consenting adults agree to do is no ones business but their own and that the Government must support them.

 

[g5000]

BUT you should not be allowed to marry your sibling right? Even if both of you are adults and it is consensual? And since multiple marriage is illegal when do you plan to protest THAT violation ( according to your theory) of their Civil Rights?

Incest causes harm. And I have outlined the harm caused by polygamy.

So your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

You have proven absolutely nothing, you have made a couple statements without evidence, fact or links to back up your claims. Incest between consenting adults causes WHAT harm? What you mean is the ICK factor is to high for your sensibilities. As for multiple marriages the argument has been that love trumps all and is a civil right. Again you have an ick factor so have no problem regulating that away.

You know what is funny about this, Gunny? You cleary equate gay sex with incest and polygamy, which means YOU believe incest and polygamy are harmful to society, and you are trying to say if we allow gay marriage we must allow these "other" harmful things, too. You are trying to imply gay sex is harmful by connecting it to other things you believe are harmful.

So...nice try. You already know they are harmful or you would not have brought them up and tried to paint gay sex with the same brush.

Now, where were we? Oh, yeah: Your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

 

[Zander]

Good for the gays. Divorce lawyers are celebrating across the Golden State!

 

[Mr.Nick]

Conservatives call us a REPUBLIC, not a Democracy because a Constitutional Republic protects the minority from the majority...EXCEPT, when the minority is a group that Conservatives don't like.

Then, they like a good ol fashioned Mob Rule Democracy.... I wish they'd make up their minds.

We are a republic....

I couldn't even imagine a direct federal democracy...

Most people are idiots, hence we're not a direct democracy.

 

[g5000]

Next thing you know, someone will be asking for evidence that pedophilia is harmful in their zeal to equate it with gay marriage.

You have failed to prove either claim. You have not proven that the US should be concerned with the rather paltry level of possible defects in allowing incestual relations between consenting adults and you have not proven that multiple marriage would be dangerous or harmful if legalized.

Why did you bring them up if you didn't already believe they are harmful? What exactly, then, WAS YOUR POINT?

Your illogic is flailing all over the place!

 

[Mr.Nick]

you can't much more stupid than this..

in what universe was gay marriage/civil unions illegal in the first place?

In what universe were woman forbidden to vote in the first place.

In what universe was slavery legal in the first place???

So why the fuck would someone write an amendment that protects individuals that were already protected???

Redundancy....

seriously who abused you? I just....you are fucking brain damaged..seriously it almost hurts to read this shit.

Answer the question Clair...

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Incest causes harm. And I have outlined the harm caused by polygamy.

So your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

You have proven absolutely nothing, you have made a couple statements without evidence, fact or links to back up your claims. Incest between consenting adults causes WHAT harm? What you mean is the ICK factor is to high for your sensibilities. As for multiple marriages the argument has been that love trumps all and is a civil right. Again you have an ick factor so have no problem regulating that away.

You know what is funny about this, Gunny? You cleary equate gay sex with incest and polygamy, which means YOU believe incest and polygamy are harmful to society, and you are trying to say if we allow gay marriage we must allow these "other" harmful things, too. You are trying to imply gay sex is harmful by connecting it to other things you believe are harmful.

So...nice try. You already know they are harmful or you would not have brought them up and tried to paint gay sex with the same brush.

Now, where were we? Oh, yeah: Your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

You have failed to prove your point. Once again we allow people with KNOWN defects to marry and reproduce. We do not even test for most of them and if one is discovered in a blood test all that happens is the couple are informed.

You have argued that marriage is a Civil Right. What right do you have to deny 2 consenting adults the right to marry if, as you claim it IS a Civil Right? Your harm theory does not even come close to panning out. All that is left is your ICK factor.

You can not claim it is to protect the health of the society as Gays can not reproduce and have a VERY high incidence of disease and sickness associated with their chosen sexual practices. Some of which spread to other people in the Society.

 

[Mr.Nick]

SO which version of marriage we going for here?

I'm fond of the rapist and victim one.

nobody going to take a stab?

That doesn't even make sense you dumb skitzo motherfucker.

 

[g5000]

BUT you should not be allowed to marry your sibling right? Even if both of you are adults and it is consensual? And since multiple marriage is illegal when do you plan to protest THAT violation ( according to your theory) of their Civil Rights?

Why did you bring these up if they are not harmful, Gunny?

You put yourself at a crossroads here. Since you equated gay relationships with incest and polygamy, you either averring to us that they are all harmful, or all not harmful, since you claim they are equal.

Which is it?

 

[NLT]

Gay MARRIAGE is not a civil right and you cheapen the history of Civil Rights protests by claiming so.

It became a civil right when they voted to deny homosexuals the right to marry the person they love

So if Ralph , an adult, Loves Mary, his adult Sister, and she loves him, and they are denied the right to marry, IS THAT ALSO a Civil Right issue?

How about if John , an adult, loves Mary, Sybil and Rachael, all 3 adults and they love him, if they can not get married is that too a Civil Right?

Or do you ADMIT that the State has a compelling interest in defining what is marriage and who can legally do so?

What if abdul wants to marry his goat, is that a civil right? I guess so in Californacation.

 

[g5000]

You have proven absolutely nothing, you have made a couple statements without evidence, fact or links to back up your claims. Incest between consenting adults causes WHAT harm? What you mean is the ICK factor is to high for your sensibilities. As for multiple marriages the argument has been that love trumps all and is a civil right. Again you have an ick factor so have no problem regulating that away.

You know what is funny about this, Gunny? You cleary equate gay sex with incest and polygamy, which means YOU believe incest and polygamy are harmful to society, and you are trying to say if we allow gay marriage we must allow these "other" harmful things, too. You are trying to imply gay sex is harmful by connecting it to other things you believe are harmful.

So...nice try. You already know they are harmful or you would not have brought them up and tried to paint gay sex with the same brush.

Now, where were we? Oh, yeah: Your comparison of these harmful practices to harmless gay relationships is illogical.

You have failed to prove your point. Once again we allow people with KNOWN defects to marry and reproduce. We do not even test for most of them and if one is discovered in a blood test all that happens is the couple are informed.

You have argued that marriage is a Civil Right. What right do you have to deny 2 consenting adults the right to marry if, as you claim it IS a Civil Right? Your harm theory does not even come close to panning out. All that is left is your ICK factor.

You can not claim it is to protect the health of the society as Gays can not reproduce and have a VERY high incidence of disease and sickness associated with their chosen sexual practices. Some of which spread to other people in the Society.

Why are you equating incest and polygamy to gay sex? How are they equal? Are they all equally harmless or all equally harmful?

Please explain the logic you used to justify bringing these two new entities into the equation.

 

[rightwinger]

Love is not a valid argument dumb ass.

Why not? If two consenting adults who love each other want to get married, why prevent that? I don't want to hear that it will then pave the way to people marrying children etc, children are not consenting adults.

Marriage has nothing to do with love...

Legal documents can't love one another....

That is some of the dumbest shit ever...

Marriage is a legal document and idea - in the US at least.

In that case, Marriage has nothing to do with sex and nothing to do with having children. It is a legal contract between two consenting adults

So, why shouldn't it apply to adults of the same sex?

 

[g5000]

It became a civil right when they voted to deny homosexuals the right to marry the person they love

So if Ralph , an adult, Loves Mary, his adult Sister, and she loves him, and they are denied the right to marry, IS THAT ALSO a Civil Right issue?

How about if John , an adult, loves Mary, Sybil and Rachael, all 3 adults and they love him, if they can not get married is that too a Civil Right?

Or do you ADMIT that the State has a compelling interest in defining what is marriage and who can legally do so?

What if abdul wants to marry his goat, is that a civil right? I guess so in Californacation.

Wow. The stupidity multiplies.

So bestiality and gay sex are the same...how?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

BUT you should not be allowed to marry your sibling right? Even if both of you are adults and it is consensual? And since multiple marriage is illegal when do you plan to protest THAT violation ( according to your theory) of their Civil Rights?

Why did you bring these up if they are not harmful, Gunny?

You put yourself at a crossroads here. Since you equated gay relationships with incest and polygamy, you either averring to us that they are all harmful, or all not harmful, since you claim they are equal.

Which is it?

I am arguing that YOUR desire to claim Gay marriage is a Civil Right has consequences. I am further pointing out that when people like you claim all that matters is what two consenting adults want you are LYING. You are being a hypocrite.

Further this notion that LOVE is somehow a Civil Right is hilarious.

Also the fact remains when you and your buddies trot out the argument that the Government has no right to be involved in peoples bedrooms you are also lying. You have stated forcefully now over and over you are opposed to Incest among consenting adults and multiple marriages. YOU DO SUPPORT the Government being involved in the Bedroom.

 

[Mr.Nick]

It became a civil right when they voted to deny homosexuals the right to marry the person they love

So if Ralph , an adult, Loves Mary, his adult Sister, and she loves him, and they are denied the right to marry, IS THAT ALSO a Civil Right issue?

How about if John , an adult, loves Mary, Sybil and Rachael, all 3 adults and they love him, if they can not get married is that too a Civil Right?

Or do you ADMIT that the State has a compelling interest in defining what is marriage and who can legally do so?

What if abdul wants to marry his goat, is that a civil right? I guess so in Californacation.

Oh, be careful, progressives would call that the "slippery slope."

Remember these are the same idiots that brought us "gender neutral" kids..

 

[WillowTree]

I have no problem with gay marriage, but the people of California voted not to have it in their state. If judges are just going to overturn the will of the people then why vote at all?

That's a very good question. Remember this is one of Newt's projects. to get judges to quit legislating.

 

[g5000]

BUT you should not be allowed to marry your sibling right? Even if both of you are adults and it is consensual? And since multiple marriage is illegal when do you plan to protest THAT violation ( according to your theory) of their Civil Rights?

Why did you bring these up if they are not harmful, Gunny?

You put yourself at a crossroads here. Since you equated gay relationships with incest and polygamy, you either averring to us that they are all harmful, or all not harmful, since you claim they are equal.

Which is it?

I am arguing that YOUR desire to claim Gay marriage is a Civil Right has consequences. I am further pointing out that when people like you claim all that matters is what two consenting adults want you are LYING. You are being a hypocrite.

Further this notion that LOVE is somehow a Civil Right is hilarious.

Also the fact remains when you and your buddies trot out the argument that the Government has no right to be involved in peoples bedrooms you are also lying. You have stated forcefully now over and over you are opposed to Incest among consenting adults and multiple marriages. YOU DO SUPPORT the Government being involved in the Bedroom.

I can almost see the spittle hitting the screen. Now we have strawmen entering the picture.

So let's take this one step at a time, all socratic-like: Would there be anything wrong with making incest legal?

 

[Stephanie]

The nation is becoming too degenerate, across the board, to not be forced to accept one more depravity as normal behavior.

It's not depravity.

What depravity is...... is telling blacks they are not worthy of being in the company of whites

What depravity is....is telling a white and a black who love each other that they are not allowed to marry

What depravity is......is telling people they are not allowed to show who they love in public

We are a much more moral society than we used to be. It is not even close

good grief.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Why not? If two consenting adults who love each other want to get married, why prevent that? I don't want to hear that it will then pave the way to people marrying children etc, children are not consenting adults.

Marriage has nothing to do with love...

Legal documents can't love one another....

That is some of the dumbest shit ever...

Marriage is a legal document and idea - in the US at least.

In that case, Marriage has nothing to do with sex and nothing to do with having children. It is a legal contract between two consenting adults

So, why shouldn't it apply to adults of the same sex?

Because most people are Christians and under Christianity it is a sin...