Gay Marriage Fails In Maine

[Barb]

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?"

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to bodecea again.

 

[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?

Kittenkodder running away.

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

Not in all states.

 

[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?

Kittenkodder running away.

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

I guess what you are really saying is that incestuous couples are even more heavily discriminated against than gay couples....

 

[Immanuel]

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?

With that I agree and so, by the way, is polygamy.

Making gay marriage legal would not have to affect such things as they are already illegal.

Note: I'm not changing my position re gay marriage.

Immie

edit: whoops, sorry, others already said the same thing.

 

[del]

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...

you should be used to it by now.

put something up that isn't twaddle and we'll see what happens.

marrying the flesh in the truest sense.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

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.

Do you have any evidence that gay relationships only involve consenting adults? That there are no inherent problems with succession, custody, and medical decision making making?
Didnt think so.

And your point about MLK is as absurd as the rest of your existence. Civil rights is about all Americans. Which is why your comparison of civil rights to gay "rights" to marry must also consider the additional relationships covered by your futile arguments.

 

[maineman]

Kittenkodder running away.

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

I guess what you are really saying is that incestuous couples are even more heavily discriminated against than gay couples....

you guess wrong. incestuous couples are illegal. gay couples are not.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

Kittenkodder running away.

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

With that I agree and so, by the way, is polygamy.

Making gay marriage legal would not have to affect such things as they are already illegal.

Note: I'm not changing my position re gay marriage.

Immie

edit: whoops, sorry, others already said the same thing.

Why should polygamist and incestuous relationships be hit with a double whammie- not being legal and not being able to marry, if the relationship involves consenting adults?

 

[ThePickledPunk]

BTW- three people can be involved in a relationship, just like two gays. But three people cannot marry each other. Seems unfair, no?

 

[Immanuel]

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

With that I agree and so, by the way, is polygamy.

Making gay marriage legal would not have to affect such things as they are already illegal.

Note: I'm not changing my position re gay marriage.

Immie

edit: whoops, sorry, others already said the same thing.

Why should polygamist and incestuous relationships be hit with a double whammie- not being legal and not being able to marry, if the relationship involves consenting adults?

Because there are reasons that the majority of people feel that they should be illegal. I agree with incest being illegal. I do not agree that polygamy should be illegal but I am not of the majority in that opinion. As long as the majority believe that incest and polygamy are immoral and against the law then making gay marriage legal would in no way require making incestuous relationships or polygamy legal.

Immie

 

[Valerie]

BTW- three people can be involved in a relationship, just like two gays. But three people cannot marry each other. Seems unfair, no?

No, because three adults does not equal two adults.

 

[Father Time]

So people have eliminated gay marriage because it would've ... it would've...err not sure, what exactly would it have done?

 

[del]

So people have eliminated gay marriage because it would've ... it would've...err not sure, what exactly would it have done?

we've had it here for 5+ years and the only effect seems to be a spike in the gay divorce rate.

 

[Barb]

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...

That little peace symbol is disingenuous, You have no peace for those who are other than you are. Hetro marriage is sanctioned by the state, based largely on religious grounds. There are churches that, on religious grounds perform same sex marriage.Those churches should not, and according to Constitutional law WILL NOT (all the while that they are) be denied the same sanction the mainstream Christian religion is that performs their state sanctioned ceremony. You want to make it all about your church? That's fine, restrict the ceremony to your church. Beyond that, you HAVE no say unless the owners want to pay back taxes.

 

[Father Time]

"The other side based many of its campaign ads on claims — disputed by state officials — that the new law would mean "homosexual marriage" would be taught in public schools. "

Deja vu. This is the same exact Bullshit they had in California, I wonder if they can get gay marraige overturned with resulting to lies?

 

[ThePickledPunk]

With that I agree and so, by the way, is polygamy.

Making gay marriage legal would not have to affect such things as they are already illegal.

Note: I'm not changing my position re gay marriage.

Immie

edit: whoops, sorry, others already said the same thing.

Why should polygamist and incestuous relationships be hit with a double whammie- not being legal and not being able to marry, if the relationship involves consenting adults?

Because there are reasons that the majority of people feel that they should be illegal. I agree with incest being illegal. I do not agree that polygamy should be illegal but I am not of the majority in that opinion. As long as the majority believe that incest and polygamy are immoral and against the law then making gay marriage legal would in no way require making incestuous relationships or polygamy legal.

Immie

polygamy is only illegal as it applies to marriage.

 

[Barb]

So people have eliminated gay marriage because it would've ... it would've...err not sure, what exactly would it have done?

we've had it here for 5+ years and the only effect seems to be a spike in the gay divorce rate.

Misery loves company.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

BTW- three people can be involved in a relationship, just like two gays. But three people cannot marry each other. Seems unfair, no?

No, because three adults does not equal two adults.

precisely. and a man and a man does not equal a man and a woman. Whats your point?

 

[Father Time]

BTW- three people can be involved in a relationship, just like two gays. But three people cannot marry each other. Seems unfair, no?

No, because three adults does not equal two adults.

Yeah but it does equal one relationship.

 

[ThePickledPunk]

"The other side based many of its campaign ads on claims — disputed by state officials — that the new law would mean "homosexual marriage" would be taught in public schools. "

Deja vu. This is the same exact Bullshit they had in California, I wonder if they can get gay marraige overturned with resulting to lies?

How would marriage be explained then? If gay marriage was legal, why should it not addressed by educators?