Judge declines to marry same sex on religious grounds

[Syriusly]

The State has to provide a compelling argument why a specific population is excluded.

And the State can when it comes to the population of persons excluded from marriage based upon incest.

The State could not for the population of persons who happen to be gay.

correct, for now, but to do so, your reasoning is that we can exclude those that can't procreate because that group can procreate.

Correct not only now- but for the last 11 years since the first Court overturned bans on same gender marriage.

My reasoning has always been that that procreation is not the only argument against sibling marriage.

And I have supported my position.

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

 

[Pop23]

correct, for now, but to do so, your reasoning is that we can exclude those that can't procreate because that group can procreate.

Correct not only now- but for the last 11 years since the first Court overturned bans on same gender marriage.

My reasoning has always been that that procreation is not the only argument against sibling marriage.

And I have supported my position.

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You have continually failed to destroy my rational argument.

But you do dart and deflect each and every time you see your argument fail.

Your latest dumbfuckery was to claim you could exclude an entire demographic group from marriage because an entirely separate demographic group can procreate.



Of course then you say there are other legal reasons that straight same sex siblings couldn't because......

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Correct not only now- but for the last 11 years since the first Court overturned bans on same gender marriage.

My reasoning has always been that that procreation is not the only argument against sibling marriage.

And I have supported my position.

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You have continually failed to destroy my rational argument.

But you do dart and deflect each and every time you see your argument fail.

Your latest dumbfuckery was to claim you could exclude an entire demographic group from marriage because an entirely separate demographic group can procreate.



Of course then you say there are other legal reasons that straight same sex siblings couldn't because......

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

 

[Pop23]

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You have continually failed to destroy my rational argument.

But you do dart and deflect each and every time you see your argument fail.

Your latest dumbfuckery was to claim you could exclude an entire demographic group from marriage because an entirely separate demographic group can procreate.



Of course then you say there are other legal reasons that straight same sex siblings couldn't because......

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You have continually failed to destroy my rational argument.

But you do dart and deflect each and every time you see your argument fail.

Your latest dumbfuckery was to claim you could exclude an entire demographic group from marriage because an entirely separate demographic group can procreate.



Of course then you say there are other legal reasons that straight same sex siblings couldn't because......

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

 

[Pop23]

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You have continually failed to destroy my rational argument.

But you do dart and deflect each and every time you see your argument fail.

Your latest dumbfuckery was to claim you could exclude an entire demographic group from marriage because an entirely separate demographic group can procreate.



Of course then you say there are other legal reasons that straight same sex siblings couldn't because......

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You have continually failed to destroy my rational argument.

But you do dart and deflect each and every time you see your argument fail.

Your latest dumbfuckery was to claim you could exclude an entire demographic group from marriage because an entirely separate demographic group can procreate.



Of course then you say there are other legal reasons that straight same sex siblings couldn't because......

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

 

[Pop23]

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You have continually failed to destroy my rational argument.

But you do dart and deflect each and every time you see your argument fail.

Your latest dumbfuckery was to claim you could exclude an entire demographic group from marriage because an entirely separate demographic group can procreate.



Of course then you say there are other legal reasons that straight same sex siblings couldn't because......

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

Absolutely not

Cute question though.

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

 

[Maryland Patriot]

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

Absolutely not

Cute question though.

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

you keep asking the question, but you keep failing to say why it is such a concern to you.
how are we going to stop men from having sex with watermelons? sex with fruits certainly could be the next step.

 

[Syriusly]

Correct not only now- but for the last 11 years since the first Court overturned bans on same gender marriage.

My reasoning has always been that that procreation is not the only argument against sibling marriage.

And I have supported my position.

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

Yeah you keep saying that- but that makes as much sense as saying you oppose mixed race marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You saying it doesn't make it true- and 11 years of experience shows your prediction to thus far be completely wrong.

 

[Syriusly]

Correct not only now- but for the last 11 years since the first Court overturned bans on same gender marriage.

My reasoning has always been that that procreation is not the only argument against sibling marriage.

And I have supported my position.

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

What judge based what ruling on a study of incest?

I pointed out to you what a judge has pointed out to opponents of gay marriage- that argument doesn't fly.

 

[Syriusly]

didn't heterosexual marriage open the door for all other marriage options then?
should we just ban all marriage to make sure that some guy doesn't bang his sister in the wood shed while mom and dad sleep of last nights drinking?

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

There doesn't appear to be one to you- because you won't accept any argument.

Because that would shatter your stupid thesis.

 

[Pop23]

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

I've expressed my reason to oppose same sex marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

Yeah you keep saying that- but that makes as much sense as saying you oppose mixed race marriage, that being it opens the door to other, undesirable forms of alternative lifestyles.

You saying it doesn't make it true- and 11 years of experience shows your prediction to thus far be completely wrong.

Nice deflection.

Legal reasoning please

 

[Pop23]

So proceed, what other reason CAN there be?

You would deny one group due to the ABILITY of the other?

It is your argument.

And you don't see the legal problem with that?

No- since my argument has been consistent- unlike yours. I have never claimed that procreation is the only reason to deny incestuous marriage or polygamy.

That would be you.

Ohhhhh, you mean that judges opinion that I ripped to shreds?

Of course you could rip me to shreds by producing a link to the study of straight same sex sibling incest abuse

You do realize that Hundred of millions of straight same sex siblings currently live together, so that study you link should be fascinating.

Waiting with baited breath IDIOT.

You mean the judges opinion that spells out very clearly the non-procreation arguments.

You keep seeming to think that I have any obligation to prove your stupid thesis wrong.

You keep claiming that same gender marriage means that sibling marriage must be legalized then.

Yet same gender marriage has been legal for over 11 years in States- and still sibling marriage is illegal.

Your problem is you just can't figure out any rational reason for your opposition to sibling marriage.

And you blame homosexuals for that.

A judge based a ruling using a study on incest which likely included no straight same sex siblings!

Are you going to back up your dumbfuckery with a link to a study that concludes that straight same sex siblings are any more abusive to each other than the general population is, or are you finally done playing the moron?

What judge based what ruling on a study of incest?

I pointed out to you what a judge has pointed out to opponents of gay marriage- that argument doesn't fly.

Then you just admitted his comment was without merit.

You lost that argument then

 

[Pop23]

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

There doesn't appear to be one to you- because you won't accept any argument.

Because that would shatter your stupid thesis.

Present one that holds water.

Because that demographic group can procreate and that one can't had already failed the legal test.

If it had not, we would not be talking.

 

[Pop23]

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

Absolutely not

Cute question though.

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

you keep asking the question, but you keep failing to say why it is such a concern to you.
how are we going to stop men from having sex with watermelons? sex with fruits certainly could be the next step.

I see, another red herring. Marriage cannot be between a human and an inanimate object.

But another cute statement.

 

[Pop23]

No, it was its redefinition that did.

Oh, I love the argument that no one has obtained a marriage license yet as incestuous or plural.

Loving made interracial marriage legal nationwide 47 / 48 years ago, and same sex advocates claim it was that ruling that opened the door to them.

That then took 36 / 37 years for the first same sex marriage.

Same sex marriage has been legal nationwide for less than two weeks?

Unless someone can come up with a compelling state interest in denying a same sex set of straight siblings the constitutional right to marry, it will happen.

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

There doesn't appear to be one to you- because you won't accept any argument.

Because that would shatter your stupid thesis.

Shatter it then

What you waiting for

Your invitation in the mail?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

Absolutely not

Cute question though.

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

you keep asking the question, but you keep failing to say why it is such a concern to you.
how are we going to stop men from having sex with watermelons? sex with fruits certainly could be the next step.

I see, another red herring. Marriage cannot be between a human and an inanimate object.

But another cute statement.

so you admit that marriage CAN be between related individuals, obviously you do see some value there. Are you in fear of losing your wife to her brother?
Unless you tell us what your exact fears are, we can only come up with foolish responses to you. If you tell us, then we can have an open conversation that might turn on a light in our heads, or yours. Are you afraid of being enlightened? Im not. I used to be 100% against gay marriage, but after a long time of trying to argue it on forums and in person, I realized that not only was I being a bigoted ass about it, but in the end (no pun) it really did nothing to affect my life.
If it does not affect me, what right do I have to try and keep another person from being happy.
so please, outline your fears or negative feelings to marriage that does not involve only one man and one woman.

 

[Syriusly]

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

There doesn't appear to be one to you- because you won't accept any argument.

Because that would shatter your stupid thesis.

Shatter it then

What you waiting for

Your invitation in the mail?

I have- repeatedly.

Which is why you are so frustrated.

 

[Syriusly]

lets say it does become legal.
How does that hurt you.

How does incest hurt me?

yes, do you think you will be participating in it?

My line of questioning is how do you stop it. There appears no reasonable legal basis to stop same sex siblings from the right

There doesn't appear to be one to you- because you won't accept any argument.

Because that would shatter your stupid thesis.

Present one that holds water.

Because that demographic group can procreate and that one can't had already failed the legal test.

If it had not, we would not be talking.

I have posted the judges comments three times now- no reason for me to post her reasoning again.