Marriage Equality; does the end game begin?

[JakeStarkey]

There will never be an end game. Next will be incest and transgender marriage.

Nothing traditional will survive if the left has its way.

Live your own traditions. It is not the government's place to dictate what tradition shall occur inside private homes.

Wrong. Government has a vested interest in the continuation of the family unit. Not divorcing and being married were "traditional" and the left fucked that up.Mark

You are not government, and you do not define with authority the family unit. It's your opinion only.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The stupidity of the demagogues seeking to propagate the fallacy that allowing same-sex couples access to marriage law will result in the states being 'forced' to allow brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, or three or more persons to marry is considerable given the fact that same-sex couples have been allowed to marry for more than ten years now in some jurisdictions; and during the past ten years in none of those jurisdictions have brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, or three or more persons been allowed to marry.

So what? Change comes slowly, but it comes. No one said it will happen overnight.

Even subjects(like smoking bans) that people generally agree on, took years to fully implement. Starting with no smoking in public buildings to today "no smoking almost anywhere" bans.Mark

Fallacy of derivative analogies that inevitably fall apart.

 

[Rusty Houser]

To discuss marriage in a context framed or allowed by the media or gov't is to mock your Maker.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Wrong. Government has a vested interest in the continuation of the family unit.

Only to the big government loving statist fucks.

They don't? It was recently reported that about half of all kids are now brought up in single parent households. 80% of juveniles that go thru the court systems are from single family homes.
Society PAYS FOR these families thru welfare and increased incarceration Logic isn't statist.
Mark

Not to a statist progressive like you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Will he learn his mistake if he marries his pet monkey?

Animals cannot consent.

Who says? The "current" perception? Mark

What does that even mean? Quit babbling.

 

[JakeStarkey]

They don't? It was recently reported that about half of all kids are now brought up in single parent households. 80% of juveniles that go thru the court systems are from single family homes.
Society PAYS FOR these families thru welfare and increased incarceration

Maybe people should be responsible for their own offspring and choose who they will raise their own children. It's not the government's job to be involved in promoting what traditions people should live by.

Government is responsible for its citizenry. Its job is to make sure that civilization and quality of life continues. When the government sets policy to make it easy to divorce, become a single mother, and collect welfare, it is working AGAINST its own best interests by "rewarding" people for making stupid choices.

So, we agree. Making people responsible for their own choices is also my goal

Zephyr above is the best example of a modern progressive conservative, wanting to use Big Government to make people do what Zephyr wants: a perfect example of right wing fascism.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases
Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases KSL.com

The time has arrived to end the whining.

If SCOTUS takes it up, I predict marriage equality nationally by the end of the term.

I agree. I don't care which way it goes personally, just as I feel about polygamy. It was good news though, to read about a new ruling recently in your state of Utah, Jakey, where it has now been decriminalized. Or was that a federal rule?

This was, I believe, a state ruling that decriminalizes private polygamous relations. Try to work an extra public marriage into it, then the government will prosecute for bigamy.

 

[BULLDOG]

There will never be an end game. Next will be incest and transgender marriage.

Nothing traditional will survive if the left has its way.

Well, that's what crazy teabaggers claim, but they claim a lot of stuff that doesn't happen. Remember FEMA prisons?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Jones, they are fools and very poor demagogues who are yelling and peeing in the corner because they know marriage equality will be the law of the land shortly. They would like to act like the KKK fifty years ago, but they know that would be their personal demise.

Dems, KKK? No way. That was their thing in the 50's Are they going to do it again?

Those KKK folk are now conservatives on the far right.

No, they're still dems. They still try to segregate and exloit race, minorities, gender.

 

[80zephyr]

Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases
Supreme Court to discuss whether to take up same-sex marriage cases KSL.com

The time has arrived to end the whining.

If SCOTUS takes it up, I predict marriage equality nationally by the end of the term.

then get ready for brother/sister, mother/daughter, sister/sister, 3 men/4 women, et al. Because such a SCOTUS ruling would open the door for all forms of "marriage" using gay marriage as a valid legal precedent.

thats the real danger, the abnormality of homosexuality is just the foot in the door.

I disagree. Marriage equality still provides the same legal protections and benefits afforded by the existing marriage contract. Marriage equality does not seek to expand the provisions of the marriage contract beyond the current two adults with no pre-existing blood relationship.

There is no reason to worry about incestuous marriages because, by definition, an incestuous relationship already provides the next of kin relationship a marriage creates. Polygamist marriage is not something marriage equality will bring about because, again by definition, a polygamist marriage includes more than the two individuals joined in a marriage contract.

No one has ever provided any real, tangible evidence that marriage equality would adversely effect their own marriage. Instead, clumsy, ham handed stabs at hypothetical strawman,are offered up. I wonder why that is?

You stated:

Polygamist marriage is not something marriage equality will bring about because, again by definition, a polygamist marriage includes more than the two individuals joined in a marriage contract.

And? By "definition" marriage was between one man and one woman. It was defined by gender, now its not. How can you logically conclude that marriage is now defined by number?

You cannot.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

You want seven soul mates, OK, you go for it.

Give me one good reason why his logic does not apply. One. Mark

I don't care whether it applies. If he wants eight wives, let him go for it. Talk about punishment.

You don't care? Are you saying that his logic applies, ergo society has no right to limit marriage to two people?

Mark

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jones, they are fools and very poor demagogues who are yelling and peeing in the corner because they know marriage equality will be the law of the land shortly. They would like to act like the KKK fifty years ago, but they know that would be their personal demise.

Dems, KKK? No way. That was their thing in the 50's Are they going to do it again?

Those KKK folk are now conservatives on the far right.

No, they're still dems. They still try to segregate and exloit race, minorities, gender.

Tinkerbelle is asleep, so try the fairy dust on someone else.

KKK was always conservative, first Dem now GOP. Sux to be you.

 

[80zephyr]

There will never be an end game. Next will be incest and transgender marriage.

Nothing traditional will survive if the left has its way.

Live your own traditions. It is not the government's place to dictate what tradition shall occur inside private homes.

Wrong. Government has a vested interest in the continuation of the family unit. Not divorcing and being married were "traditional" and the left fucked that up.Mark

You are not government, and you do not define with authority the family unit. It's your opinion only.

Lol. I don't define it, and neither does government. Nature does. And like I stated, a "standard" family unit beats all others in terms of furthering society's goal of self preservation.

Mark

 

[JakeStarkey]

You want seven soul mates, OK, you go for it.

Give me one good reason why his logic does not apply. One. Mark

I don't care whether it applies. If he wants eight wives, let him go for it. Talk about punishment.

You don't care? Are you saying that his logic applies, ergo society has no right to limit marriage to two people?

You are saying that, not me. I happen to believe that marriage equality will not lead to polygamy. But that's me; you can believe differently if you wish.

 

[80zephyr]

The stupidity of the demagogues seeking to propagate the fallacy that allowing same-sex couples access to marriage law will result in the states being 'forced' to allow brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, or three or more persons to marry is considerable given the fact that same-sex couples have been allowed to marry for more than ten years now in some jurisdictions; and during the past ten years in none of those jurisdictions have brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, or three or more persons been allowed to marry.

So what? Change comes slowly, but it comes. No one said it will happen overnight.

Even subjects(like smoking bans) that people generally agree on, took years to fully implement. Starting with no smoking in public buildings to today "no smoking almost anywhere" bans.Mark

Fallacy of derivative analogies that inevitably fall apart.

In essence, you are saying you can't project the future. You would be correct, except when humans are part of that equation. That's why there is no fallacy.

Mark

 

[JakeStarkey]

There will never be an end game. Next will be incest and transgender marriage.

Nothing traditional will survive if the left has its way.

Live your own traditions. It is not the government's place to dictate what tradition shall occur inside private homes.

Wrong. Government has a vested interest in the continuation of the family unit. Not divorcing and being married were "traditional" and the left fucked that up.Mark

You are not government, and you do not define with authority the family unit. It's your opinion only.

Lol. I don't define it, and neither does government. Nature does. And like I stated, a "standard" family unit beats all others in terms of furthering society's goal of self preservation.

You have fallen as low as Where R My Keys: you are citing yourself as an authority. You are not.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The stupidity of the demagogues seeking to propagate the fallacy that allowing same-sex couples access to marriage law will result in the states being 'forced' to allow brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, or three or more persons to marry is considerable given the fact that same-sex couples have been allowed to marry for more than ten years now in some jurisdictions; and during the past ten years in none of those jurisdictions have brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, or three or more persons been allowed to marry.

So what? Change comes slowly, but it comes. No one said it will happen overnight.

Even subjects(like smoking bans) that people generally agree on, took years to fully implement. Starting with no smoking in public buildings to today "no smoking almost anywhere" bans.Mark

Fallacy of derivative analogies that inevitably fall apart.

In essence, you are saying you can't project the future. You would be correct, except when humans are part of that equation. That's why there is no fallacy.

You, not me, are saying that. You are not an authority, only a guy with an opinion. Yeah, your argument is a fallacy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Zephyr is a poor imitation of Where R My Keys as authority, and Keys is of no worth in the argumentation debate.

Guys: you are not authorities, and when you cite yourselves, the Board erupts in laughter at you.

 

[80zephyr]

They don't? It was recently reported that about half of all kids are now brought up in single parent households. 80% of juveniles that go thru the court systems are from single family homes.
Society PAYS FOR these families thru welfare and increased incarceration

Maybe people should be responsible for their own offspring and choose who they will raise their own children. It's not the government's job to be involved in promoting what traditions people should live by.

Government is responsible for its citizenry. Its job is to make sure that civilization and quality of life continues. When the government sets policy to make it easy to divorce, become a single mother, and collect welfare, it is working AGAINST its own best interests by "rewarding" people for making stupid choices.

So, we agree. Making people responsible for their own choices is also my goal

Zephyr above is the best example of a modern progressive conservative, wanting to use Big Government to make people do what Zephyr wants: a perfect example of right wing fascism.

And? Lets face it, shall we? All society's have rules to follow. From building restrictions to traffic laws, and up from there.

You are also a fascist you know. You would use big government to limit pedophilia and bestiality using the "consent" argument as your basis. And that basis is to protect society.

You are exactly like I am.

Mark

 

[SwimExpert]

And? By "definition" marriage was between one man and one woman. It was defined by gender, now its not.

1 - Same sex marriage goes back centuries, across many cultures. So shut up with that bullshit.

2 - You are missing the point entirely. Two people can enter into a contract. Or three, or four, or twenty. Of course, laws can regulate certain contracts to a maximum of two people, with good cause. And so is the case of marriage. The law limits the number of people who can enter into the contract. However, by creating gender based requirements, the government is discriminating on the basis of gender, without any legitimate cause.