Gay Marriage Fails In Maine

[ThePickledPunk]

Aaah ... but if my religion performs a gay marriage it is not legally recognized ... therefore it is connected to religion still.

I repeat, what about Incestuous Adult relationships? Why shouldn't they have the right to marry? Why shouldn't multiple Partners have the right to marriage, if it IS a right?

You are free to take that up.

BTW...when the Black Civil Rights movement was in full swing in the 50s/60s, were you known to excuse Segregation by saying "what about women's rights? Why shouldn't they have the same rights? Why shouldn't Hispanics have the same rights if it IS a right?"

Women and hispanics do have the same rights as all other Americans. So are you advocating for the legalization of incestuous and polygamist marriages? Not one attempt by the uber-left to explain why incestuous marriages and polygamist marriages should be left out of the "marriage should be for anyone who wants it" push...

 

[masquerade]

Did you just actually ask that? Wow.

Uhm yeah, I did. You certainly don't see people being obsessed with being heterosexual.

For the record, I don't give a rat's ass what people do behind closed doors. But I do believe in the institution of marraige between a MAN and a WOMAN.

You forgot God in your marriage equation.

The marraige of a man and a woman in the eyes of God.

Yes. Thank you.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Liberty lost yesterday. And those who cheer its defeat are quislings, aiding domestic enemies of the Constitution of the United States.

And how does this then apply to incestuous and polygamist relationships? Admit it, lefties. The arguments you use to promote gay marriages must also extend to incestuous and polygamist relationships, if it is truly equality upon which you premise your beliefs.

 

[mal]

Aaah ... but if my religion performs a gay marriage it is not legally recognized ... therefore it is connected to religion still.

I repeat, what about Incestuous Adult relationships? Why shouldn't they have the right to marry? Why shouldn't multiple Partners have the right to marriage, if it IS a right?

You are free to take that up.

BTW...when the Black Civil Rights movement was in full swing in the 50s/60s, were you known to excuse Segregation by saying "what about women's rights? Why shouldn't they have the same rights? Why shouldn't Hispanics have the same rights if it IS a right?"

Not Analagous...

You are NOT being Denied Rights.

You have the Same Rights as EVERYONE, Regardless of Gender or Color.

Women aren't Denied the Right to Marry, but they are Equally Denied the Ability to Redifine Marriage outside of One Man and One Woman as Men are, and as ANY Race are.

If you don't want to Marry, don't...

But don't Demand that Society Validate your Choice to Deviate by Redifining Marriage to Reflect Homosexual Coupling being Equal to Heterosexual Coupling when it is Factually NOT.

You can't Choose Race or Gender Naturally... It's a Product of something outside of your Control.

You can Choose who or what to have Sex with.



peace...

 

[mal]

he stated that Europeans aren't all up in everyone else's personal business, trying to regulate private issues. My friend had to agree with that one.

It's NOT Private when you Demand it be Sanctioned in Law in Public as Equal to something it's NOT...

Terrible Anecdote, Bodey... You used to be halfway Convincing at this.



peace...

 

[masquerade]

I repeat, what about Incestuous Adult relationships? Why shouldn't they have the right to marry? Why shouldn't multiple Partners have the right to marriage, if it IS a right?

You are free to take that up.

BTW...when the Black Civil Rights movement was in full swing in the 50s/60s, were you known to excuse Segregation by saying "what about women's rights? Why shouldn't they have the same rights? Why shouldn't Hispanics have the same rights if it IS a right?"

Not Analagous...

You are NOT being Denied Rights.

You have the Same Rights as EVERYONE, Regardless of Gender or Color.

Women aren't Denied the Right to Marry, but they are Equally Denied the Ability to Redifine Marriage outside of One Man and One Woman as Men are, and as ANY Race are.

If you don't want to Marry, don't...

But don't Demand that Society Validate your Choice to Deviate by Redifining Marriage to Reflect Homosexual Coupling being Equal to Heterosexual Coupling when it is Factually NOT.

You can't Choose Race or Gender Naturally... It's a Product of something outside of your Control.

You can Choose who or what to have Sex with.



peace...

 

[mal]

And I believe in the institution of marriage for loving adult couples.

So you Support Incestuous Marriage?

If (2) Sisters wanted to Marry and Take Care of a Child together, you would Support that as Equal to the Marriage you Seek?...





peace...

 

[ThePickledPunk]

I repeat, what about Incestuous Adult relationships? Why shouldn't they have the right to marry? Why shouldn't multiple Partners have the right to marriage, if it IS a right?

You are free to take that up.

BTW...when the Black Civil Rights movement was in full swing in the 50s/60s, were you known to excuse Segregation by saying "what about women's rights? Why shouldn't they have the same rights? Why shouldn't Hispanics have the same rights if it IS a right?"

Not Analagous...

You are NOT being Denied Rights.

You have the Same Rights as EVERYONE, Regardless of Gender or Color.

Women aren't Denied the Right to Marry, but they are Equally Denied the Ability to Redifine Marriage outside of One Man and One Woman as Men are, and as ANY Race are.

If you don't want to Marry, don't...

But don't Demand that Society Validate your Choice to Deviate by Redifining Marriage to Reflect Homosexual Coupling being Equal to Heterosexual Coupling when it is Factually NOT.

You can't Choose Race or Gender Naturally... It's a Product of something outside of your Control.

You can Choose who or what to have Sex with.



peace...

The whole equality question is ridiculous on its face. Using liberal logic, drug addicts are not treated equally under the law, because they are denied the right to use their drug of choice, while millions of coffe-drinkers go unpunished... ignoring the fact that, as a society, some drugs are valued differently than others...

 

[mal]

In your Opinion...

But the Fact is that the Coupling of Flesh is why we are even having this Discussion...

And another Fact is that Homosexuals are NOT Denied Marriage...



peace...

In a legal sense, yes they are in many places.

No they are NOT.

No Citizen of the United States is Denied Marriage... Loving Fixed that.

Some are Denied the Right to Redifine it Based on their Chosen Deviation from what Creates us, and that is their Choice, NOT Society's Burden.



peace...

 

[mal]

Your reasoning is not very sound at all. You're essentially arguing from a "just because," or even "altruistic" vantage point. "Honor our design," sort of shit, that's pie in the sky altruism and not logic, and currently has no bearing on determining our laws. We "Naturally" are designed to do a lot of things, but if our laws were based on these then we'd be fukt. Logic isn't on your side here. Marriage as a means to "honor our existence" is fluff, because marriage is not necessary TO EXIST. It's an honoring, which is emotional fluff.

In your Opinion...

But the Fact is that the Coupling of Flesh is why we are even having this Discussion...

And another Fact is that Homosexuals are NOT Denied Marriage...



peace...

are you really this stupid or are you trying to tell me that without marriage, there'd be no procreation?

Nope, and that's an Absurd Conclusion to Draw from my Assertion.

ProCreation is only Capable when we do NOT Defy our Natural Design.

It's what Distinguishes Hetero from Homo.

No (2) Homosexuals have EVER or will EVER ProCreate Naturally.

In that, they are Incapable of Marrying the Flesh in the Trueist Sense of our Existence and Homosexuals only Exist because of the Marriage of the Flesh.

If it's NOT about that at it's Base, then it's about ANYTHING ANYBODY wants it to be.

You can't Deny (2) 50-year-old Sisters who are in the Position to Raise a Grandchild for whatever Reason, the "Right" to Marry, if that Right is an Evolving thing...

Of course it's NOT, and Homosexuals can have ALL of their Private Business and Medical Issues Addressed with Civil Unions.

This isn't about that though, it's about Validating their Deviancy, or they will Collapse the whole Fucking Shithouse if they don't get it.



peace...

 

[del]

In your Opinion...

But the Fact is that the Coupling of Flesh is why we are even having this Discussion...

And another Fact is that Homosexuals are NOT Denied Marriage...



peace...

are you really this stupid or are you trying to tell me that without marriage, there'd be no procreation?

Nope, and that's an Absurd Conclusion to Draw from my Assertion.

ProCreation is only Capable when we do NOT Defy our Natural Design.

It's what Distinguishes Hetero from Homo.

No (2) Homosexuals have EVER or will EVER ProCreate Naturally.

In that, they are Incapable of Marrying the Flesh in the Trueist Sense of our Existence and Homosexuals only Exist because of the Marriage of the Flesh.

If it's NOT about that at it's Base, then it's about ANYTHING ANYBODY wants it to be.

You can't Deny (2) 50-year-old Sisters who are in the Position to Raise a Grandchild for whatever Reason, the "Right" to Marry, if that Right is an Evolving thing...

Of course it's NOT, and Homosexuals can have ALL of their Private Business and Medical Issues Addressed with Civil Unions.

This isn't about that though, it's about Validating their Deviancy, or they will Collapse the whole Fucking Shithouse if they don't get it.



peace...

i was right you are this stupid. "marrying the flesh in the truest sense"


what a fucking idiot.

 

[bodecea]

Did you just actually ask that? Wow.

Uhm yeah, I did. You certainly don't see people being obsessed with being heterosexual.

For the record, I don't give a rat's ass what people do behind closed doors. But I do believe in the institution of marraige between a MAN and a WOMAN.

You forgot God in your marriage equation.

So, people who don't believe in God or don't believe in the "correct" number of gods can't get married?

 

[mal]

A comment without facts to back it up. I'm waiting.

You will Deny the "two Dad's" Books?...

The Pledge the Kindergarten Teacher was Busted trying to get her Students to make to "Bisexuals" and the rest?...

The Activist Organizations who go on Campus to Prompote the Lifestyle and hand out Materials for the Children in Schools?...

I've Debated you over the Years as these Events Occured...

Don't play Stupid about them now in an Attempt to get someone to do Research you will Later Dismiss Hoping to Frustrate them into NOT Debating with you any longer or about this Subject.

Your Goal is Silencing the Opposition... Always has been.

If I had the Time and Cared, I bet I could Find you calling someone who Disagrees with you a Closet Case on this Thread...

Predictable Tactic that you will Certainly Employ if you haven't already.



peace...

 

[mal]

are you really this stupid or are you trying to tell me that without marriage, there'd be no procreation?

Nope, and that's an Absurd Conclusion to Draw from my Assertion.

ProCreation is only Capable when we do NOT Defy our Natural Design.

It's what Distinguishes Hetero from Homo.

No (2) Homosexuals have EVER or will EVER ProCreate Naturally.

In that, they are Incapable of Marrying the Flesh in the Trueist Sense of our Existence and Homosexuals only Exist because of the Marriage of the Flesh.

If it's NOT about that at it's Base, then it's about ANYTHING ANYBODY wants it to be.

You can't Deny (2) 50-year-old Sisters who are in the Position to Raise a Grandchild for whatever Reason, the "Right" to Marry, if that Right is an Evolving thing...

Of course it's NOT, and Homosexuals can have ALL of their Private Business and Medical Issues Addressed with Civil Unions.

This isn't about that though, it's about Validating their Deviancy, or they will Collapse the whole Fucking Shithouse if they don't get it.



peace...

i was right you are this stupid. "marrying the flesh in the truest sense"


what a fucking idiot.

This is what you call Debating?... Sorry I took you Seriously.

That Mistake won't Occur again.

I Thought something had Changed, and I was Wrong.



peace...

 

[ThePickledPunk]

Uhm yeah, I did. You certainly don't see people being obsessed with being heterosexual.

For the record, I don't give a rat's ass what people do behind closed doors. But I do believe in the institution of marraige between a MAN and a WOMAN.

You forgot God in your marriage equation.

So, people who don't believe in God or don't believe in the "correct" number of gods can't get married?

Actually, in most states all that is required for two people to get married is to have a ceremony witnessed by two people and presided over by someone given to power to solemnize marriages by the state. No religious requirement at all. What the fuck is wrong with your brain? Why dont you tell me what state you live in, and I will provide the relevant statute, cause you appear to be too fuckin lazy to do much for yourself.

 

[maineman]

Aaah ... but if my religion performs a gay marriage it is not legally recognized ... therefore it is connected to religion still.

I repeat, what about Incestuous Adult relationships? Why shouldn't they have the right to marry? Why shouldn't multiple Partners have the right to marriage, if it IS a right?

Kittenkodder running away.

incest is illegal OUTSIDE marriage... why would we sanction it WITHIN marriage?

 

[bodecea]

I repeat, what about Incestuous Adult relationships? Why shouldn't they have the right to marry? Why shouldn't multiple Partners have the right to marriage, if it IS a right?

You are free to take that up.

BTW...when the Black Civil Rights movement was in full swing in the 50s/60s, were you known to excuse Segregation by saying "what about women's rights? Why shouldn't they have the same rights? Why shouldn't Hispanics have the same rights if it IS a right?"

Women and hispanics do have the same rights as all other Americans.

They do NOW. They did NOT back then.

So are you advocating for the legalization of incestuous and polygamist marriages?

I would need to be convinced that a) incest is legal like being gay is legal and only involves consenting adults. 2) polygamy is legal and only involves consenting adults. 3) that neither incest nor polygamy crate any inherent legal problems with things such as inheritance, child custody, medical decision making. 4) that the government cannot provide a COMPELLING reason to withhold such rights of marriage from them. If I can be convinced that there are no problems in those 4 areas, sure...why not?

Not one attempt by the uber-left to explain why incestuous marriages and polygamist marriages should be left out of the "marriage should be for anyone who wants it" push...

Funny how you are all concerned about incest and polygamy and want us to be all concerned about incest and polygamy. I AM quite sure you held MLK Jr. responsible for not being all concerned about the rights of women and hispanics during the civil rights movement too.

Your concern is touching. Start a movement.

 

[bodecea]

I repeat, what about Incestuous Adult relationships? Why shouldn't they have the right to marry? Why shouldn't multiple Partners have the right to marriage, if it IS a right?

Kittenkodder running away.

incest is illegal OUTSIDE marriage... why would we sanction it WITHIN marriage?

Will you kindly not bring up inconvenient truths to the Clerk's cause?

 

[KittenKoder]

KittenKoder has real life to deal with RGS ...


... however, if there is no religious stigma involved then simply not making gender the issue (as in any gender can enter in the contract with any gender) there should be no problem.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Not one attempt by the uber-left to explain why incestuous marriages and polygamist marriages should be left out of the "marriage should be for anyone who wants it" push...

If that means you don't consider me "uber-left" then I'll thank you kindly. I don't consider myself uber-left. But if it means you didn't read my previous post, I'll ask you to reconsider:

In terms of incest - the polluting of the gene pool is the detriment to society. Same thing with polygamy - the resulting gene pool loses it's diversity and is contaminated.