DOMA ruled unconstitutional

What the SCOTUS called "Fundamental to our very Existence and Survival" is a Right that EVERY American of Consenting Age has...

The Right to Marriage.

Because some Choose to Defy their Natural Design and Equipment is not Society's Burden.

Homosexual Coupling and Heterosexual Coupling are Inherently and Naturally Unequal.

One Produces Life and the other does not yet ALL of us are Equipped and Designed for one of them.

:)

peace...
Yep isn't that just like the left to support more people who do not want to pull their weight and share the burden of helping the human race survive?
Help the human race survive? Are you this stupid in real life?
Are you as stupid as I think you are?
 
So everyone in the last few pages seems ok with civil unions? And these would have the same benefits as marriage, they just wouldn't be using the word "marriage"?


Wow, who knew all the hoopla, claiming it would destroy the institution, cause the downfall of the US, and would cause the spread of AIDs, was all about what we CALL it.

I never thought semantics was the issue.

Adorable.

It's not Semantics. It's about calling something Equal in Law to something that it is not.

Homosexual Coupling and Heterosexual Coupling are Inherently Unequal Naturally.

They are Free to Defy their Natural Design and Equipment but they are not Free to Demand that Society give it Sanction as Equal to that which Creates us in Marriage.

It's not Equal.

The Legal Issues they have can be dealt with in Civil Unions.

Siblings who Care for Children together could Benefit also.

Same Sex Couples who are not Homosexual could also Benefit... What?

Homosexual Coupling does not have to Dishonestly be called Marriage to Acheive this.

End of List.

:)

peace...
 
As there are no rational answers to this question: 'What harm will befall you personally by same sex marriage equality?' those with the capability for rational thought must dismiss objections to same sex marriage equality as invalid.
If objections are invalid there remains no rational reason to oppose same sex marriage equality.

Those still posing objections have yet to make their case. So, we must then presume that those still posing objections are just objecting to homosexuality altogether.

As homosexuality is a personal choice and has no adverse affects on the institution of marriage or personal lives and is not criminal behavior, those objecting must be seen for what they are: bigots and small minded haters without the capacity for rationality in this area.

Why then are they potent enough to throw roadblocks up in the way of liberty? Do they claim to be Americans? What then about America do they love? It certainly isn't the liberty and freedom we have here.

It's as if we are back in the 1960s arguing for the basic freedoms for African Americans. No rational objections were posed then, and, as a result of the protections of law all Americans now enjoy, we have a stronger nation. We could not, nor should we, hold any moral authority while we allow blatant discrimination based on immutable characteristics like skin color or sexual orientation.

Nosmo- you seem like a rational, decent poster. But this is absurd. Just because the question posed is meaninglerss, does not mean that there are no valid reasons for opposition to gay marriage. What harm would befall you if we could marry donkeys? None? Are you in favor of such legal relationships? Are you a bigot? A small-minded hater? Incapable of rational though on the matter?
I recognize marriage as a contract. Contracts are entered by adults, not animals. The donkey proposition is a strawman.

bigrebnc has problem with marriage as a contract. he does not understand that animals cannot contract. these are strawmen arguments that are failing the far right.

The true libertarian, the true conservative, has no trouble with society changing to fit the needs of a particular time.
 
I'm closing in on locating the homophobe talking point web page. So far, I have discovered these two bits:

Q: Why are we opposed to gay marriage?

A: Because incest!



Q: Why are we opposed to gay marraige?

A: Because bestiality!



In the meantime, God only knows how many times I have had to explain the 14th amendment to homophobes, but I'm sure you guys can recall me saying umpteen times that "I hate fags" is not a rational reason to exclude gays from marriage.

Well, well, well. What do you know...

In terms of morality, the judge cited the Supreme Court’s 2003 decision striking down a Texas sodomy law. “Moral disapproval alone cannot justify legislation discriminating on this basis,” Boudin said.

Appeals court strikes down DOMA: Tradition doesn't justify unequal treatment (+video) - CSMonitor.com
 
Yep isn't that just like the left to support more people who do not want to pull their weight and share the burden of helping the human race survive?
Help the human race survive? Are you this stupid in real life?
Are you as stupid as I think you are?

I shall send out notices to all gay people in the world (we talk to each other, you know)...we shall not FAIL YOU in helping the human race survive! That we swear!
 
All far right homophobes have a tremendous interest in incest and bestiality.

Just watch bigrebnc. Oh, he also has a fascination with the 9th and 10th but won't tell us what why?
 
Help the human race survive? Are you this stupid in real life?
Are you as stupid as I think you are?

I shall send out notices to all gay people in the world (we talk to each other, you know)...we shall not FAIL YOU in helping the human race survive! That we swear!

*WHEW*! Well thats a relief! I thought bigrednc was right and the human race would vanish because gays don't reproduce.

Thank God you can help. Otherwise, who knows where we would be.





The above comments are purely sarcastic in nature. Any resemblance between the sentiments expressed and reality is nonsense.
 
So everyone in the last few pages seems ok with civil unions? And these would have the same benefits as marriage, they just wouldn't be using the word "marriage"?


Wow, who knew all the hoopla, claiming it would destroy the institution, cause the downfall of the US, and would cause the spread of AIDs, was all about what we CALL it.

I never thought semantics was the issue.


I can't speak for everyone, but I'd be fine with Civil Unions applying to everyone equally. Strike "Civil Marriage" from the law and replace it with Civil Unions for everyone, then it would be up to the individuals involved (and in many cases their respective religious organization) as whether or not to call it "marriage".



>>>>
 
I recognize marriage as a contract. Contracts are entered by adults, not animals. The donkey proposition is a strawman.

If it's a simple contract you want then there is no law saying you and your homosexual partner couldn't enter into a legal contract. You just can't call it MARRIAGE!

Isn't it odd how you don't seem to want to answer my question about what my home-state is? You made a comment about it....and yet you can't even seem to identify it.

This is what passes for knowledge with you?

Fact is I didn't see your question, some of us actually have a job.

As far as the state you reside in, I'd guess California where most of the population is far left liberals.
 
If it's a simple contract you want then there is no law saying you and your homosexual partner couldn't enter into a legal contract. You just can't call it MARRIAGE!

Isn't it odd how you don't seem to want to answer my question about what my home-state is? You made a comment about it....and yet you can't even seem to identify it.

This is what passes for knowledge with you?

Fact is I didn't see your question, some of us actually have a job.

As far as the state you reside in, I'd guess California where most of the population is far left liberals.

No, you said my home state....and it is not California. And here I thought you might know what you were talking about. :lol::lol::lol:

Who am I kidding? You're a Texan. :lmao: :lmao:
 
If it's a simple contract you want then there is no law saying you and your homosexual partner couldn't enter into a legal contract. You just can't call it MARRIAGE!


Actually the Commonwealth of Virginia's Constitution (amongst others) specifically bars the state from recognizing contracts that try to create a legal status equivalent to Civil Marriage but called by another name.



>>>>
 
I shall send out notices to all gay people in the world (we talk to each other, you know)...we shall not FAIL YOU in helping the human race survive! That we swear!


Oh great...


...............First there is GAYDAR so ya'll can find each other...


.........................Now there is a GayNet so ya'll can communicate.


.................................What's next to reveal? GayWashing where ya'll beam mind control.



>>>>
 
Yep once gays are given the right then brothers and sisters will demand the same rights to marriage.

This point has been so thoroughly and completely debunked I am amazed you aren't embarassed to keep repeating it over and over like some robot bashing its own head.
 
I shall send out notices to all gay people in the world (we talk to each other, you know)...we shall not FAIL YOU in helping the human race survive! That we swear!


Oh great...


...............First there is GAYDAR so ya'll can find each other...


.........................Now there is a GayNet so ya'll can communicate.


.................................What's next to reveal? GayWashing where ya'll beam mind control.



>>>>

I can neither confirm nor deny.
 
Abnormal is not normal and never will be.
There is nothing wrong with being abnormal. In fact the world would be a lot better place if we just accepted the fact that some people are different, not because they choose to be, but because that's the way they were born. A person doesn't choose their sexual orientation any more than they choose their skin color.
 

Forum List

Back
Top