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.
Many people are promiscuous before they marry. Again, since this is never an issue raised by any about any other group, it is irrelevant here.
What BS! Of course it is relevant. Statistically, homosexuals are NOT a monogamous group. That is why the discussion has relevance- successful marriages for the majority of couples, require monogamy. The sheer volume of different partners homosexuals admit having, seriously calls into question their ability to sustain a "commitment" to marriage.
Re-writing law to include a group whose behavior is by and large destructive with much higher suicide rates; disease; addiction and promiscuity is stupid and ignorant; all so people can feel "inclusive".
The homosexual lifestyle will never afford homosexuals a true sense of normalcy. No matter how far they can bend society to accept them, they cannot make their behavior natural.
We allow convicted murders to marry. We allow convicted pedophiles to marry. This whole "they aren't normal" is irrelevant unless you are going to hold straight couples to standards of "normal" as well.
I see you were corrected for spamming. That's good. We can all see that you didn't see my answers to you, or you would not be adding the silliness to your sig. Go for it, son.
What BS! Of course it is relevant. Statistically, homosexuals are NOT a monogamous group. That is why the discussion has relevance- successful marriages for the majority of couples, require monogamy. The sheer volume of different partners homosexuals admit having, seriously calls into question their ability to sustain a "commitment" to marriage.
Re-writing law to include a group whose behavior is by and large destructive with much higher suicide rates; disease; addiction and promiscuity is stupid and ignorant; all so people can feel "inclusive".
The homosexual lifestyle will never afford homosexuals a true sense of normalcy. No matter how far they can bend society to accept them, they cannot make their behavior natural.
We allow convicted murders to marry. We allow convicted pedophiles to marry. This whole "they aren't normal" is irrelevant unless you are going to hold straight couples to standards of "normal" as well.
We allow men and women to marry. That is the standard all people are held to. It is already even steven.
We do not allow pedophiles to marry children.
The standard of normal in this argument is specific to natural design.
I see you were corrected for spamming. That's good. We can all see that you didn't see my answers to you, or you would not be adding the silliness to your sig. Go for it, son.
So what is the 9th and 10th amendment for? How would they be applied and used?
They got aids by having gay sexPlease explain how two married people can get AIDS.
Your logic is so totally fucked. Millions of heteros died over the course of CENTURIES from syphilis. So we should ban hetero marriage!
Syphilis is still going strong, even though there is a cure for it. Otherwise, millions more Americans would still be dying from it.
AIDS will one day be cured, too.
Gay married people, gay people were the first people in America to be attacked by aids.
If neither partner has AIDS, they're not going to magically contract it from being gay.
They got aids by having gay sexGay married people, gay people were the first people in America to be attacked by aids.
If neither partner has AIDS, they're not going to magically contract it from being gay.
What I said was a court in Massachusetts ruling that the DOMA is unconstitutional is not surprising.No what you claimed was the first circuit court was a federal court and was not a lower court.
And I admitted the mistake.
But what you said, and stuck with, was "And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws".
Now would you like to admit you were wrong there? Or will you continue to claim the court ruled DOMA was unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws?
I am not sure that's what happened. But a STATE court is allowed to pass judgment on the Constitutionality (under the FEDERAL Constitution) of any law that comes across it's bench.
The STATE Court determination may not enjoy much of a shelf life, but that doesn't mean that they are forbidden from making the ruling.
That's not what he said (a state court finding something unconstitutional). He said the court (which in this case was actually a federal court) found the federal law unconstitutional based on the laws of Massachusetts and not because of a defect in the law when compared to the federal Constitution.
(Now you and I know that was probably a mistake on BigReb's part, just like all the Judges ruling on the case are homosexuals, just seeing if he will admit his error.)
>>>>
So saying the first circuit court of appeals is not a lower court and fine with you.
But me saying that a court in Boston ruling that the DOMA is unconstitutional is not a surprise is not ok. Got it.
What I said was a court in Massachusetts ruling that the DOMA is unconstitutional is not surprising.And I admitted the mistake.
But what you said, and stuck with, was "And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws".
Now would you like to admit you were wrong there? Or will you continue to claim the court ruled DOMA was unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws?
How about what you actually said?
"And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws".
We allow convicted murders to marry. We allow convicted pedophiles to marry. This whole "they aren't normal" is irrelevant unless you are going to hold straight couples to standards of "normal" as well.
We allow men and women to marry. That is the standard all people are held to. It is already even steven.
We do not allow pedophiles to marry children.
The standard of normal in this argument is specific to natural design.
We don't allow anyone to marry children.
And natural design is not part of why married couples get all the benefits they do.
What I said was a court in Massachusetts ruling that the DOMA is unconstitutional is not surprising.
And why would there be any doubt that a lower court in Massachusetts would say that the DOMA is unconstitutional in accordance with Massachusetts state laws.
We allow men and women to marry. That is the standard all people are held to. It is already even steven.
We do not allow pedophiles to marry children.
The standard of normal in this argument is specific to natural design.
We don't allow anyone to marry children.
And natural design is not part of why married couples get all the benefits they do.
Yes, I know we don't allow pedophiles to marry the objects of their affection- because it is wrong and abnormal. I used that analogy because you introduced pedophiles into the discussion- I was merely highlighting the error in how you used them. Like other adults in our society- though they are forbidden to marry the objects of their affections, they can marry adults of the opposite sex.
Natural design has ALWAYS been a part of why couples marry and their marriage is benefited by some societies. Because heterosexual marriage benefits the social structure and strengthens community.
What BS! Of course it is relevant. Statistically, homosexuals are NOT a monogamous group. That is why the discussion has relevance- successful marriages for the majority of couples, require monogamy. The sheer volume of different partners homosexuals admit having, seriously calls into question their ability to sustain a "commitment" to marriage.
Re-writing law to include a group whose behavior is by and large destructive with much higher suicide rates; disease; addiction and promiscuity is stupid and ignorant; all so people can feel "inclusive".
The homosexual lifestyle will never afford homosexuals a true sense of normalcy. No matter how far they can bend society to accept them, they cannot make their behavior natural.
We allow convicted murders to marry. We allow convicted pedophiles to marry. This whole "they aren't normal" is irrelevant unless you are going to hold straight couples to standards of "normal" as well.
We allow men and women to marry. That is the standard all people are held to. It is already even steven.
We allow convicted murders to marry. We allow convicted pedophiles to marry. This whole "they aren't normal" is irrelevant unless you are going to hold straight couples to standards of "normal" as well.
We allow men and women to marry. That is the standard all people are held to. It is already even steven.
Actually that is not necessarily the standard (IIRC) there are seven states and the District of Columbia that have passed laws allowing men to Civilly Marry men and women to Civilly Marry women.
>>>>
Wrong: Homosexual marriage is, by its nature, a deconstruct of society.
Statistically, homosexuals are NOT a monogamous group. - Successful marriages for the majority of couples, require monogamy. The sheer volume of different partners homosexuals admit having, seriously calls into question their ability to sustain a "commitment" to marriage.
Re-writing law to include a group whose behavior is by and large destructive with much higher suicide rates; disease; addiction and promiscuity is stupid and ignorant; all so people can feel "inclusive".
The homosexual lifestyle will never afford homosexuals a true sense of normalcy. No matter how far they can bend society to accept them, they cannot make their behavior natural.
Wrong: Homosexual marriage is, by its nature, a deconstruct of society.
Statistically, homosexuals are NOT a monogamous group. - Successful marriages for the majority of couples, require monogamy. The sheer volume of different partners homosexuals admit having, seriously calls into question their ability to sustain a "commitment" to marriage.
Re-writing law to include a group whose behavior is by and large destructive with much higher suicide rates; disease; addiction and promiscuity is stupid and ignorant; all so people can feel "inclusive".
The homosexual lifestyle will never afford homosexuals a true sense of normalcy. No matter how far they can bend society to accept them, they cannot make their behavior natural.
So promoting monogamy through access to such legal conditions as Civil Marriage would be a good thing then.
>>>>
We allow men and women to marry. That is the standard all people are held to. It is already even steven.
Actually that is not necessarily the standard (IIRC) there are seven states and the District of Columbia that have passed laws allowing men to Civilly Marry men and women to Civilly Marry women.
>>>>
Yes, and there are also challenges to those laws- none of which were passed by voters.
