Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There is no right to marry. no rights are being lost.
You'd be saying the opposite if only gays could marry and heteros couldn't, you'd be on capitol hill with a torch and pitch fork.
But since a liberty is being denied to people you don't like, you think it's a good thing.
That would be abnormal it's not how things have been done.
She's right it must be because she's smart.
Dear idiot;
If she can hear NC sighing, she's nutz.
Love;
Boop
I said she's right I live here I have heard the people .
Again.
You're not denying a "right" to refuse to reward everybody for a behavior that is specific to a particular group.
You're not violating the rights of drop outs by refusing to give them a BS.
And you're not violating the rights of gays by refusing to give them the benefits we afford hetero married couples. They aren't a hetero married couple, they lose out on the benefits that are there to promote what is the #1 construct we have to ensure success of children. We afford special privileges to married couples because as a society, we want more of them.
You don't have to get married. You can choose not to.
And if you choose not to, you won't be afforded the perks of participating in that particular construct. It's your choice.
Call me crazy, but when I get married I won't view it as "government rewarding me for my heterosexual behavior."
What a nut job.
I'm not a hard core libertarian, I have my cut off with right normal and abnormal do you agree that abnormal rights should not be protected rights?You'd be saying the opposite if only gays could marry and heteros couldn't, you'd be on capitol hill with a torch and pitch fork.
But since a liberty is being denied to people you don't like, you think it's a good thing.
That would be abnormal it's not how things have been done.
Plz stop calling yourself a libertarian. We libertarians don't advocate for gov't to decide for us who's abnormal and who isn't.
Reb, we're just going to move forward without you.
Again.
You're not denying a "right" to refuse to reward everybody for a behavior that is specific to a particular group.
You're not violating the rights of drop outs by refusing to give them a BS.
And you're not violating the rights of gays by refusing to give them a marriage certificate, that will entitle them to the benefits we afford hetero married couples. They aren't a hetero married couple, they lose out on the benefits that are there to promote what is the #1 construct we have to ensure success of children. We afford special privileges to married couples because as a society, we want more of them.
You don't have to get married. You can choose not to.
And if you choose not to, you won't be afforded the perks of participating in that particular construct. It's your choice.
There is no right to marry. no rights are being lost.
You'd be saying the opposite if only gays could marry and heteros couldn't, you'd be on capitol hill with a torch and pitch fork.
But since a liberty is being denied to people you don't like, you think it's a good thing.
That would be abnormal it's not how things have been done.
Again.
You're not denying a "right" to refuse to reward everybody for a behavior that is specific to a particular group.
You're not violating the rights of drop outs by refusing to give them a BS.
And you're not violating the rights of gays by refusing to give them the benefits we afford hetero married couples. They aren't a hetero married couple, they lose out on the benefits that are there to promote what is the #1 construct we have to ensure success of children. We afford special privileges to married couples because as a society, we want more of them.
You don't have to get married. You can choose not to.
And if you choose not to, you won't be afforded the perks of participating in that particular construct. It's your choice.
Call me crazy, but when I get married I won't view it as "government rewarding me for my heterosexual behavior."
What a nut job.
It doesn't matter what you view it as, it is what it is.
We offer perks to married couples because it is in our best interests to encourage stable, traditional families.
Homosexual couples don't fit the definition. They are free to live outside the construct, but they aren't entitled to the perks we afford if they do. Their rights aren't being violated, they just made a choice not to participate.
Reb, we're just going to move forward without you.
Do you ever post more than 10 words at a time.
You've got 9,000 posts....one of these days one of them will be meaningful.
It's normal it's been like this since man and woman started having children.
Why aren't humans asexual?
I'm saying both being gay and having blue eyes is abnormal if that's how you want to use the term. Both happen the minority of time in nature.
But I'm not being denied any liberty because I'm blue eyed, it's gays who are.
There is no right to marry. no rights are being lost.
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
She's just trolling. When she's outgunned, she fixates on minutia, and rushes to abuse the rep system.
She's gained 20 points in the last 2 days. That's almost impossible.
I'm not a hard core libertarian, I have my cut off with right normal and abnormal do you agree that abnormal rights should not be protected rights?That would be abnormal it's not how things have been done.
Plz stop calling yourself a libertarian. We libertarians don't advocate for gov't to decide for us who's abnormal and who isn't.
Pedophiles, Bestiality, Bigamist? should people be allowed to marry at any age?
She's just trolling. When she's outgunned, she fixates on minutia, and rushes to abuse the rep system.
She's gained 20 points in the last 2 days. That's almost impossible.
No, it's not. I know it's not going to be a possibility for you - but I've made friends on both sides of the fence. I make people laugh, and I have fun. I pos rep across the aisle.
And wtf are you doing tracking my rep?
You'd be saying the opposite if only gays could marry and heteros couldn't, you'd be on capitol hill with a torch and pitch fork.
But since a liberty is being denied to people you don't like, you think it's a good thing.
That would be abnormal it's not how things have been done.
No, it's not abnormal. The psychiatric classification of homosexuality as a disease is long gone. Homosexual behavior has been decided by the courts as a private act, and therefor no more illegal that heterosexual behavior. You live way back in the past.
I'm saying both being gay and having blue eyes is abnormal if that's how you want to use the term. Both happen the minority of time in nature.
But I'm not being denied any liberty because I'm blue eyed, it's gays who are.
There is no right to marry. no rights are being lost.
that is 100% false ...
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
Loving v. Virginia | The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law
She's just trolling. When she's outgunned, she fixates on minutia, and rushes to abuse the rep system.
She's gained 20 points in the last 2 days. That's almost impossible.
No, it's not. I know it's not going to be a possibility for you - but I've made friends on both sides of the fence. I make people laugh, and I have fun. I pos rep across the aisle.
And wtf are you doing tracking my rep?
I noticed it after your stupid neg rep to me bragging about how you had "blasted" past me.
Reb, we're just going to move forward without you.
Do you ever post more than 10 words at a time.
You've got 9,000 posts....one of these days one of them will be meaningful.
Do some digging, you'll find out.
On the other hand, you use lots of words, and rarely say anything worth repeating. So there's that measure of worth.
Do you ever post more than 10 words at a time.
You've got 9,000 posts....one of these days one of them will be meaningful.
Do some digging, you'll find out.
On the other hand, you use lots of words, and rarely say anything worth repeating. So there's that measure of worth.
Two lines ? Wow.
You and Franco must be attending the same classes.
Don't hurt yourself.
