Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm fine with going down the State vote path, however this is something that can be repeated. 60% of the population might be "against" in 1990 whereas 60% might be "in favor of" in 2014. Maybe we should have the states vote once every few years.
I'd actually be all for that, but once voted in favor of it's permanent within that states border.
It'd be put up or shut up.
No, Pop. Under that logic all of the laws that were "one and done-ed" in 1786 would remain all throughout history. Popular opinion is ever shifting, and I think these laws ought to be updated continually to better reflect the norms and opinions of the society at hand as they continue to evolve.
Why would you be afraid/weary of a continual vote?
Get real. None will happen until SSM is more widespread.
So lets say incestuous marriages are now legal between US adults. What happens next?
Do we have like 11 sets of brother/sister couples who would actually want to marry each start to line up? Does this translate to societal breakdown? Hardly..
You realize this is an extremely, extremely, rare occurrence today (incestuous relationships between adults) that would have absolutely no impact on shaping the norms or trends for the greater society, right?
I'd actually be all for that, but once voted in favor of it's permanent within that states border.
It'd be put up or shut up.
No, Pop. Under that logic all of the laws that were "one and done-ed" in 1786 would remain all throughout history. Popular opinion is ever shifting, and I think these laws ought to be updated continually to better reflect the norms and opinions of the society at hand as they continue to evolve.
Why would you be afraid/weary of a continual vote?
I'm not sure if you understand. If SSM wins, it can't be repealed. If the will of the people demand it, you can't put these people on a yo yo.
Of course I would also like the option of getting rid of marriage as a state institution all together on the same ballot.
Get real. None will happen until SSM is more widespread.
So lets say incestuous marriages are now legal between US adults. What happens next?
Do we have like 11 sets of brother/sister couples who would actually want to marry each start to line up? Does this translate to societal breakdown? Hardly..
You realize this is an extremely, extremely, rare occurrence today (incestuous relationships between adults) that would have absolutely no impact on shaping the norms or trends for the greater society, right?
I would say that those in these relationships would be deeply in the closet. Far deeper then same sex.
So lets say incestuous marriages are now legal between US adults. What happens next?
Do we have like 11 sets of brother/sister couples who would actually want to marry each start to line up? Does this translate to societal breakdown? Hardly..
You realize this is an extremely, extremely, rare occurrence today (incestuous relationships between adults) that would have absolutely no impact on shaping the norms or trends for the greater society, right?
I would say that those in these relationships would be deeply in the closet. Far deeper then same sex.
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
So lets say incestuous marriages are now legal between US adults. What happens next?
Do we have like 11 sets of brother/sister couples who would actually want to marry each start to line up? Does this translate to societal breakdown? Hardly..
You realize this is an extremely, extremely, rare occurrence today (incestuous relationships between adults) that would have absolutely no impact on shaping the norms or trends for the greater society, right?
I would say that those in these relationships would be deeply in the closet. Far deeper then same sex.
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
I would say that those in these relationships would be deeply in the closet. Far deeper then same sex.
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
If marriage is not about procreation, then arguing that excluding sibling makes any sense is incorrect. Many argue marriage can be for pure economic reasons. If that's the case, how do you exclude siblings simply looking for economic Justice.
No I am not being a smart ass
They have every much the right as the next guy to seek such equality. I simply do not see how one can argue against it.
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
If marriage is not about procreation, then arguing that excluding sibling makes any sense is incorrect. Many argue marriage can be for pure economic reasons. If that's the case, how do you exclude siblings simply looking for economic Justice.
No I am not being a smart ass
They have every much the right as the next guy to seek such equality. I simply do not see how one can argue against it.
There's nothing stopping them from making the argument now. Same goes for Polygamy. The precedent has already been set without gays.
I would say that those in these relationships would be deeply in the closet. Far deeper then same sex.
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
I'm kinda with you on this one. I think siblings of a certain age should be able to civilly marry so they can make decisions for each other and so forth.
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
I'm kinda with you on this one. I think siblings of a certain age should be able to civilly marry so they can make decisions for each other and so forth.
They already have a mechanism for that. It's called "power of attorney."
It's not even a matter of what people believe, it's a matter of what they have a right to.
If we governed by Pure Democracy - Native Americans and African Americans would have become extinct a few generations back.
I know it may seem strange , my arguing in favor of a Gay Cause - but you simply can not, as a rational person who claims to believe in the standards this country , who believes in our constitution and our continuing freedom argue with a straight face that Gays have no right to Marry. They have the same rights as you and I - despite their mental illness.
Point is the TREND is support for same-sex marriage.
You cant continue to deny the installment of same-sex marriage when 80% of the population is in favor of it, Greenbean. We might not be there yet, but by all means the TREND is going in that direction. Older people tend not to support while younger people overwhelmingly support. Its a fact of life that in 30 years the opinion of the younger people will win out (because the old people will either be retired or gone).
Thats just the way of things amigo.
I would say that those in these relationships would be deeply in the closet. Far deeper then same sex.
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
I'm kinda with you on this one. I think siblings of a certain age should be able to civilly marry so they can make decisions for each other and so forth.
If marriage is not about procreation, then arguing that excluding sibling makes any sense is incorrect. Many argue marriage can be for pure economic reasons. If that's the case, how do you exclude siblings simply looking for economic Justice.
No I am not being a smart ass
They have every much the right as the next guy to seek such equality. I simply do not see how one can argue against it.
There's nothing stopping them from making the argument now. Same goes for Polygamy. The precedent has already been set without gays.
Not without providing proof of infertility. Is that correct?
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
I'm kinda with you on this one. I think siblings of a certain age should be able to civilly marry so they can make decisions for each other and so forth.
Are you fcking kidding me ?!? , you slimy little pervert -did I read that right ? Are you actually advocating incest WTF ! I didn't even think you were that pathetic !! Are YOU the product of inbreeding - is that what happened to you ???
Well ya, but I hear folks bring up the incest marriage argument as a sort of slippery slope type stance and I usually say "so what"? There's very few people in the US who would actually marry their sister, and there's very few people who would marry multiple people (polygamy). I say, just let them do it. Whatever. Has no effect on anyone.
You can make the argument that incestuous relationships result in kids with deformities, however that would be the extent of me arguing against those sorts of marriages.
I'm kinda with you on this one. I think siblings of a certain age should be able to civilly marry so they can make decisions for each other and so forth.
They already have a mechanism for that. It's called "power of attorney."
Or maybe even better than that, when they were denied the Vote?...
How about someone telling me when Gays were Slaves in this Country and were regularly Whipped by their Owners?...
I'll be here waiting, because I am certain all of the people who continue to Dishonestly compare the "struggle" of Gays making their Homosexuality as public as possible Analagous to what Blacks have Suffered in this Country for hundreds of years can explain to me how they are even remotely comparible...
Honest people KNOW they are not.
peace...
Gays Remain Minority Most Targeted by Hate Crimes
If gays wanted to stay alive, they kept those drinking fountains inside their closet. And this thread is a disgusting and dishonest attack on gays. Pitiful. Just pitiful.
Was Jeffery Dahmer gay?
Why yes, yes he was
The creep not only killed homosexuals, he ate em
Why no pick?
I'm kinda with you on this one. I think siblings of a certain age should be able to civilly marry so they can make decisions for each other and so forth.
Are you fcking kidding me ?!? , you slimy little pervert -did I read that right ? Are you actually advocating incest WTF ! I didn't even think you were that pathetic !! Are YOU the product of inbreeding - is that what happened to you ???
I wasn't advocating anything. I'm saying that the small minority of siblings that WOULD want to marry each other is so small as to not register statistically and that most of them would be elderly. Read next time, imbecile.
Gays Remain Minority Most Targeted by Hate Crimes
If gays wanted to stay alive, they kept those drinking fountains inside their closet. And this thread is a disgusting and dishonest attack on gays. Pitiful. Just pitiful.
Was Jeffery Dahmer gay?
Why yes, yes he was
The creep not only killed homosexuals, he ate em
Why no pick?
There are so many straight mass murderers, it's not even news anymore, unless they kill like a hundred people.
A Guide to Mass Shootings in America
Are you fcking kidding me ?!? , you slimy little pervert -did I read that right ? Are you actually advocating incest WTF ! I didn't even think you were that pathetic !! Are YOU the product of inbreeding - is that what happened to you ???
I wasn't advocating anything. I'm saying that the small minority of siblings that WOULD want to marry each other is so small as to not register statistically and that most of them would be elderly. Read next time, imbecile.
Okay, you're slightly on track on that one - but you still didn't answer the question ....are you the product of inbreeding ?
