Is gay marriage the most important issue in the USA?

[Redfish]

if gay marriage is sanctioned by the SC, what legal arguments can be brought to deny polygamous marriage?

what will you say: will you say its just not right? will you say its bad for society? what will your arguments be when the gay marriage precedent is sitting on the table?

The same could be said of straight marriage.

Even if that were true, what does it matter? If between consenting adults, its their business.

Link to the poly marriage ACLU is "preparing"?

wrong, straight marriage is one man and one woman. that sets the precedent for nothing else. whereas gay marriage of two people of the same sex sets a valid legal precedent for sibling marriage and multiple person marriage.

as to the ACLU, look it up, I am not your teacher.

Of course straight marriage set a precedent but why hold gays to a higher standard than straights?

Your hysteria is unfounded but I ask again, what if related people want to marry? What if poly groups want to marry? So what?

Consenting adults = none of your business and has no impact on your life.

As for ACLU, why didn't you just say you don't know what you're talking about? If its true, you should be celebrating. Or are you one of those who has no idea why the ACLU exists?

ACLU of Utah to Join Polygamists in Bigamy Fight American Civil Liberties Union

THank you.

And you lied when you said "all forms of marriage are okay with me".

I've been very clear. I've said it over and over.

CONSENTING ADULTS

Get it?

OK, all forms of marriage involving consenting adults. I get it. Now, you and your brother can get married to avoid the inheritence tax when one of you dies. Yee Haa.

 

[danielpalos]

Redfish has made an admirable attempt to defend his position. Yes, five years will come, and those of us still alive can determine whether it is is good or not. I disagree with Redfish on his points, as any good Christian would.

Is the Pope a good Christian? He disagrees with you 100% How about MLK? was he a good Christian? He also disagreed with you. Bily Graham, good Christian?

Our supreme law of the land is more supreme than Religion; our Founding Fathers ordained an established it so, and spake it so, in Article the Sixth.

 

[Redfish]

if gay marriage is sanctioned by the SC, what legal arguments can be brought to deny polygamous marriage?

what will you say: will you say its just not right? will you say its bad for society? what will your arguments be when the gay marriage precedent is sitting on the table?

The same could be said of straight marriage.

Even if that were true, what does it matter? If between consenting adults, its their business.

Link to the poly marriage ACLU is "preparing"?

wrong, straight marriage is one man and one woman. that sets the precedent for nothing else. whereas gay marriage of two people of the same sex sets a valid legal precedent for sibling marriage and multiple person marriage.

as to the ACLU, look it up, I am not your teacher.

Of course straight marriage set a precedent but why hold gays to a higher standard than straights?

Your hysteria is unfounded but I ask again, what if related people want to marry? What if poly groups want to marry? So what?

Consenting adults = none of your business and has no impact on your life.

As for ACLU, why didn't you just say you don't know what you're talking about? If its true, you should be celebrating. Or are you one of those who has no idea why the ACLU exists?

ACLU of Utah to Join Polygamists in Bigamy Fight American Civil Liberties Union

Did you notice the DATE of your big scary case that's you say is being prepared?

But, what do you object to?

just one example, if you want more, google is your friend.

OK, lets say that Tom, Jack, Jim, Mary, June, and Louise marry. They have 8 kids amoung them, however no one knows who fathered which kids, they also have a big house and 6 cars.

Now, Tom and June decide to divorce the others. How many lawyers and how much court time will be tied up to sort this out? and how does society benefit from this lunacy?

 

[Seawytch]

ACLU does lots of cases that fail, and this one will also.

Jake...it was from 1999. There is no current challenge to the ban on polygamist marriages. Chickenfish's sky is falling.

 

[Redfish]

Redfish has made an admirable attempt to defend his position. Yes, five years will come, and those of us still alive can determine whether it is is good or not. I disagree with Redfish on his points, as any good Christian would.

Is the Pope a good Christian? He disagrees with you 100% How about MLK? was he a good Christian? He also disagreed with you. Bily Graham, good Christian?

Our supreme law of the land is more supreme than Religion; our Founding Fathers ordained an established it so, and spake it so, in Article the Sixth.

Yeah, and we have constitional amendments to clarify what they did not write clearly in the constitution.

If you want gay marriage federally sanctioned, then pass a constitutional amendment.

 

[Redfish]

Redfish has made an admirable attempt to defend his position. Yes, five years will come, and those of us still alive can determine whether it is is good or not. I disagree with Redfish on his points, as any good Christian would.

Is the Pope a good Christian? He disagrees with you 100% How about MLK? was he a good Christian? He also disagreed with you. Bily Graham, good Christian?

Our supreme law of the land is more supreme than Religion; our Founding Fathers ordained an established it so, and spake it so, in Article the Sixth.

I was addressing jake, not you. he said that good Christians would approve of gay marriage, I gave him 3 good Christians who do not.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The same could be said of straight marriage.

Even if that were true, what does it matter? If between consenting adults, its their business.

Link to the poly marriage ACLU is "preparing"?

wrong, straight marriage is one man and one woman. that sets the precedent for nothing else. whereas gay marriage of two people of the same sex sets a valid legal precedent for sibling marriage and multiple person marriage.

as to the ACLU, look it up, I am not your teacher.

Of course straight marriage set a precedent but why hold gays to a higher standard than straights?

Your hysteria is unfounded but I ask again, what if related people want to marry? What if poly groups want to marry? So what?

Consenting adults = none of your business and has no impact on your life.

As for ACLU, why didn't you just say you don't know what you're talking about? If its true, you should be celebrating. Or are you one of those who has no idea why the ACLU exists?

ACLU of Utah to Join Polygamists in Bigamy Fight American Civil Liberties Union

THank you.

And you lied when you said "all forms of marriage are okay with me".

I've been very clear. I've said it over and over.

CONSENTING ADULTS

Get it?

OK, all forms of marriage involving consenting adults. I get it. Now, you and your brother can get married to avoid the inheritence tax when one of you dies. Yee Haa.

Oh, if only I had brothers in the 1%.

But yeah, what do I care if brothers marry?

 

[danielpalos]

Redfish has made an admirable attempt to defend his position. Yes, five years will come, and those of us still alive can determine whether it is is good or not. I disagree with Redfish on his points, as any good Christian would.

Is the Pope a good Christian? He disagrees with you 100% How about MLK? was he a good Christian? He also disagreed with you. Bily Graham, good Christian?

Our supreme law of the land is more supreme than Religion; our Founding Fathers ordained an established it so, and spake it so, in Article the Sixth.

Yeah, and we have constitional amendments to clarify what they did not write clearly in the constitution.

If you want gay marriage federally sanctioned, then pass a constitutional amendment.

You are mistaken; there is nothing but Perfection in the instrument of our Republic. There is no ambiguity, but only reading comprehension issues on the part of the Posterity. Our supreme law of the land is more supreme than Religion; our Founding Fathers ordained an established it so, and spake it so, in Article the Sixth; on the Part of the Public Sector.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

ACLU does lots of cases that fail, and this one will also.

I didn't see a link to any polygamy marriage case, did you? Chickenfish saying it is so doesn't make it so.

Redfish is saying it because it follows. In reality, this in truth... When the argument suspends all the sound reasons to discourage sexual deviancy, as the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Deviancy has done... It becomes impossible to discourage any form of injurious deviancy.

If you'd like to prove that... You're invited to argue against polygamy using the paradigm used by the cult Advocating to Normalize Sexual Deviancy.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Redfish has made an admirable attempt to defend his position. Yes, five years will come, and those of us still alive can determine whether it is is good or not. I disagree with Redfish on his points, as any good Christian would.

Is the Pope a good Christian? He disagrees with you 100% How about MLK? was he a good Christian? He also disagreed with you. Bily Graham, good Christian?

Our supreme law of the land is more supreme than Religion; our Founding Fathers ordained an established it so, and spake it so, in Article the Sixth.

I was addressing jake, not you. he said that good Christians would approve of gay marriage, I gave him 3 good Christians who do not.

What do "christians" have to do with it? Would they rather people live "in sin"?

If they don't like same sex marriage, they probably shouldn't marry someone of the same sex. Other than, its none of their business.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Redfish has made an admirable attempt to defend his position. Yes, five years will come, and those of us still alive can determine whether it is is good or not. I disagree with Redfish on his points, as any good Christian would.

Is the Pope a good Christian? He disagrees with you 100% How about MLK? was he a good Christian? He also disagreed with you. Bily Graham, good Christian?

Our supreme law of the land is more supreme than Religion; our Founding Fathers ordained an established it so, and spake it so, in Article the Sixth.

Yeah, and we have constitional amendments to clarify what they did not write clearly in the constitution.

If you want gay marriage federally sanctioned, then pass a constitutional amendment.

Are you aware of the job description of the SCOTUS?

 

[danielpalos]

ACLU does lots of cases that fail, and this one will also.

I didn't see a link to any polygamy marriage case, did you? Chickenfish saying it is so doesn't make it so.

Redfish is saying it because it follows. In reality, this in truth... When the argument suspends all the sound reasons to discourage sexual deviancy, as the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Deviancy has done... It becomes impossible to discourage any form of injurious deviancy.

If you'd like to prove that... You're invited to argue against polygamy using the paradigm used by the cult Advocating to Normalize Sexual Deviancy.

In other words, the right cannot accept the moral challenge of Individual Liberty and must resort to the communism of Religion for moral support.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

its really marriage equality.

Equality.

Marriage is the joining of One Man and One Woman.

 

[danielpalos]

its really marriage equality.

Equality.

Marriage is the joining of One Man and One Woman.

I make a motion that marriage as the joining of One Man and One Woman be reserved to Religion and a Deaconate.

 

[Pop23]

Under our current understanding, gender issued dorm assignments make sense. Guys bunk with guys. But when guy = gay then gay guy gets to be housed with the sex he is most attracted too. The heterosexual is prohibited from sleeping in and living with the gender he is most attracted too.

Hate to break it to you Pops, but gay guys already bunk in the guy dorm and lesbians bunk in the female dorm. Been like that for years. And I'm speaking as the father of two college graduates.

That doesn't have anything to do with denying same-sex civil marriage.

They can, but the school doesn't assign that on a random basis.

They sure do. Most schools have a "matching program", if you don't fine your own roommate and they will randomly assign you to another unassigned person.

My daughter matched up with someone the summer before her freshman year. However the person she matched with ended up changing to a different school at the last minute. Therefore they randomly matched her to another unassigned individual.

>>>>

Hate to break it to you WW. Just because theirs never been a civil suit, doesn't mean it ain't discrimination.

SSM is going to open up a whole lot of new "victim" doors.

The victim world could get mighty crowded.

What the hell are you talking about?

You make a post implying that same-sex civil marriage will lead to gay guys being able to live in male college dorms.

The fact is that gay guys (along with straight guys) live in male college dorms and lesbians (along with straight women) live in female college dorms. That's the way it already is and SSCM will have no impact on that.

(As a matter of fact in the college my daughter went to gay guys, straight guys, lesbians, and straight women all lived in the same dorm. Males lived on the 1st and 3rd floors and women on the 2nd and 4th - all in the same dorm.)


>>>>

what was the STD rate?

See fish, it's another paradox.

Gay male students are attracted to males, doesn't matter if the other male is straight or gay does it?

Straight male students are attracted to females. A straight male student would much rather see a female romping around in her underware than anothe dude? Agreed? Not true with a gay male student, is it?

So why can't straight males be randomly chosen to bunk with females in a college dorm. Shouldn't housing be as randomly chosen as a quick pick lottery ticket? After all, the times they are a changing with sexuality being far more important than gender, right?

Why should a gay male get this benefit not granted to straight males. Doesn't seem all that inclusive that they don't, does it?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

ACLU does lots of cases that fail, and this one will also.

I didn't see a link to any polygamy marriage case, did you? Chickenfish saying it is so doesn't make it so.

Redfish is saying it because it follows. In reality, this in truth... When the argument suspends all the sound reasons to discourage sexual deviancy, as the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Deviancy has done... It becomes impossible to discourage any form of injurious deviancy.

If you'd like to prove that... You're invited to argue against polygamy using the paradigm used by the cult Advocating to Normalize Sexual Deviancy.

In other words, the right cannot accept the moral challenge of Individual Liberty and must resort to the communism of Religion for moral support.

Liberty intrinsically brings RESPONSIBILITY. For instance... One of those responsibilities is to never exercise one's rights to the detriment of the means of another to exercise their rights.

Claiming or even 'believing' that deviancy is normal ... Which is to say that the human physiological norm is a suggestion and not a design which defines the highest potential for viability for the individual and by extension, THE SPECIES.

Advising others that the deciet is truth... Is not a function of liberty. It is a function of undermining the potential for liberty.

But hey... In fairness to you, as a Relativist insufficiently rigged; intellectually speaking, to recognize truth... There was no way you could have known that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Marriage Equality will become the universal law of the Land and requires no Amendment.

Christians indeed are split on the issue.

Where R My Keys, who pretends to be an authority, is fun to read for his social con silliness.

Pop23, when not being deliberately obtuse because of irkiness, is arguing with some merit. Good on him

Redfish, thank you for this thread.

 

[danielpalos]

ACLU does lots of cases that fail, and this one will also.

I didn't see a link to any polygamy marriage case, did you? Chickenfish saying it is so doesn't make it so.

Redfish is saying it because it follows. In reality, this in truth... When the argument suspends all the sound reasons to discourage sexual deviancy, as the Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Deviancy has done... It becomes impossible to discourage any form of injurious deviancy.

If you'd like to prove that... You're invited to argue against polygamy using the paradigm used by the cult Advocating to Normalize Sexual Deviancy.

In other words, the right cannot accept the moral challenge of Individual Liberty and must resort to the communism of Religion for moral support.

Liberty intrinsically brings RESPONSIBILITY. For instance... One of those responsibilities is to never exercise one's rights to the detriment of the means of another to exercise their rights.

Claiming or even 'believing' that deviancy is normal ... Which is to say that the human physiological norm is a suggestion and not a design which defines the highest potential for viability for the individual and by extension, THE SPECIES.

Advising others that the deciet is truth... Is not a function of liberty. It is a function of undermining the potential for liberty.

But hey... In fairness to you, as a Relativist insufficiently rigged; intellectually speaking, to recognize truth... There was no way you could have known that.

What metrics and basis are you using for your term, deviancy?

 

[Pop23]

Redfish is melting.

SCOTUS, as Redfish well knows, says marriage is a constitutional right. What Redfish believes is for Redfish only.

And there is no COMPELLING state interest in denying gays or for that matter straight same sex couples the rights and benefits of marriage. Actually I've been chatting with a few others on this board and they can't find a compelling state interest in denying those rights to same sex siblings, rather straight or gay, or opposite sex siblings when one or the other can't procreate.

Strange. Isn't it?

 

[Judicial review]

Gay marriage isn't eve close to the top issue.