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.
Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
What is considered a multi millionaire? If the farm's worth three million is that multi millions multiples of what? I think you have to have or million to be a multi millionaire because that's multiples of 2. 2 times 2 is four.You don’t understand the statute, it doesn’t authorize ‘incestuous marriages.’I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
The premise of your thread fails as a slippery slope fallacy, straw man fallacy, and red herring fallacy – you are both foolish and ignorant.
Obergefell addressed solely same-sex couples who were eligible to enter into marriage contracts, having nothing to do with ‘incestuous marriages,’ and in no way ‘authorizing’ such ‘marriages.’
Consequently there is no 'mess.'
FACTS have no place in this discussion but I do appreciate your efforts.
The OP is idiotic as usual but the funniest part is saying that the family farmer is multimillionaire.
FACTS have no place in this discussion but I do appreciate your efforts.
The OP is idiotic as usual but the funniest part is saying that the family farmer is multimillionaire.
You don't think there are multimillionaire farmers? Have you seen land prices since ethanol?
You really are an idiot.
There are multimillionaire corporate farms. And there will be more if you fools get a Republican in the WH.
+++++
How about this:
Keeping in mind that its really none of your business, how about you describe your absolute worst case scenario for SSM and then say EXACTLY what the "ramifications" of that would be.
IOW, not what YOU don't personally like but rather, actual, real life consequences.
I'll be back to see what you wrote.
The average acre of farmland in Iowa is over $8,500.
To have a net worth of $1,000,000 the farmer would only have to own 117 acres. That's tiny
The average size farm in Iowa is 333 acres.
Do the math idiot, the average farmer has net farmland only of roughly 3 million. That doesn't include equipment and homes, buildings, pushing that number way up.
OBTW: some areas in Iowa have prices of over 10,000 per acre. A millionaire would own only 100 acres, in a lot of places that called a hobby farm.
So you have no idea what farming equipment and stock costs? There is no way to farm without incurring massive debt.
The latest gimmick the 1% is using to drive family farmers out of business is a variation on tenant or share-crop farming. Big corporations sell stock to family farms and "buy" them back when they're ready for market. What it really means is the farmer owns everything that costs money while the corporation owns the profits. The corp's require certain conditions and every year they take more. The farmer gets into the "partnership" in hopes of holding on to their farms and end up going bankrupt. Then, the corp's buy them out.
BUT, you rabid RWs are always whining about the "death tax" on estates over $5.5 million but you want to make sure the family farmer can't keep their hard work in the family?
IOW, take from the working man, give to the rich. SSDD from the right and apparently, all RWs are wealthy and don't have families.
Dummy, I grew up on a farm, three generations of farmers in the family. We had 3/4 section of land. Do the math.
If land was bought at 100s of dollars an acre, with bussel corn prices gone through the roof, and your land increased to 8.5K per acre you have, over time exceeded the $5.5 million mark.
If it saved the farmers son a minimal amount, based on the cost of a marriage license, what's the down side?
Gay activists make me laugh, they actually think that same sex marriage only included them
Get a clue, any same sex couples can marry for any reason now.
What is considered a multi millionaire? If the farm's worth three million is that multi millions multiples of what? I think you have to have or million to be a multi millionaire because that's multiples of 2. 2 times 2 is four.You don’t understand the statute, it doesn’t authorize ‘incestuous marriages.’I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
The premise of your thread fails as a slippery slope fallacy, straw man fallacy, and red herring fallacy – you are both foolish and ignorant.
Obergefell addressed solely same-sex couples who were eligible to enter into marriage contracts, having nothing to do with ‘incestuous marriages,’ and in no way ‘authorizing’ such ‘marriages.’
Consequently there is no 'mess.'
FACTS have no place in this discussion but I do appreciate your efforts.
The OP is idiotic as usual but the funniest part is saying that the family farmer is multimillionaire.
Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
The Iowa code addresses the law AND lists those not eligible, no same sex, closely related relationships appear on the list.
That's not true.
>>>>
Explain.
Oh yes, the flat exclusion of first cousins, well I guess that's something to be optimistic about.
You got it.
(Not saying the law won't need to be updated because the way it's worded, just pointing out that there was a ban against closely related individuals irregardless of gender.
But to think that given how recently the Obergefell decision was issued and that the law bars first cousins from marrying that it wouldn't apply to closer relatives - well - is just no realistic.
>>>>
You don't think there are multimillionaire farmers? Have you seen land prices since ethanol?
You really are an idiot.
There are multimillionaire corporate farms. And there will be more if you fools get a Republican in the WH.
+++++
How about this:
Keeping in mind that its really none of your business, how about you describe your absolute worst case scenario for SSM and then say EXACTLY what the "ramifications" of that would be.
IOW, not what YOU don't personally like but rather, actual, real life consequences.
I'll be back to see what you wrote.
The average acre of farmland in Iowa is over $8,500.
To have a net worth of $1,000,000 the farmer would only have to own 117 acres. That's tiny
The average size farm in Iowa is 333 acres.
Do the math idiot, the average farmer has net farmland only of roughly 3 million. That doesn't include equipment and homes, buildings, pushing that number way up.
OBTW: some areas in Iowa have prices of over 10,000 per acre. A millionaire would own only 100 acres, in a lot of places that called a hobby farm.
So you have no idea what farming equipment and stock costs? There is no way to farm without incurring massive debt.
The latest gimmick the 1% is using to drive family farmers out of business is a variation on tenant or share-crop farming. Big corporations sell stock to family farms and "buy" them back when they're ready for market. What it really means is the farmer owns everything that costs money while the corporation owns the profits. The corp's require certain conditions and every year they take more. The farmer gets into the "partnership" in hopes of holding on to their farms and end up going bankrupt. Then, the corp's buy them out.
BUT, you rabid RWs are always whining about the "death tax" on estates over $5.5 million but you want to make sure the family farmer can't keep their hard work in the family?
IOW, take from the working man, give to the rich. SSDD from the right and apparently, all RWs are wealthy and don't have families.
Dummy, I grew up on a farm, three generations of farmers in the family. We had 3/4 section of land. Do the math.
If land was bought at 100s of dollars an acre, with bussel corn prices gone through the roof, and your land increased to 8.5K per acre you have, over time exceeded the $5.5 million mark.
If it saved the farmers son a minimal amount, based on the cost of a marriage license, what's the down side?
Gay activists make me laugh, they actually think that same sex marriage only included them
Get a clue, any same sex couples can marry for any reason now.
3/4 section?
That's a hobby farm.
What is considered a multi millionaire? If the farm's worth three million is that multi millions multiples of what? I think you have to have or million to be a multi millionaire because that's multiples of 2. 2 times 2 is four.You don’t understand the statute, it doesn’t authorize ‘incestuous marriages.’I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
The premise of your thread fails as a slippery slope fallacy, straw man fallacy, and red herring fallacy – you are both foolish and ignorant.
Obergefell addressed solely same-sex couples who were eligible to enter into marriage contracts, having nothing to do with ‘incestuous marriages,’ and in no way ‘authorizing’ such ‘marriages.’
Consequently there is no 'mess.'
FACTS have no place in this discussion but I do appreciate your efforts.
The OP is idiotic as usual but the funniest part is saying that the family farmer is multimillionaire.
There are two things that determine what any given thing is worth.
One is how much someone will pay for it and the other is how much of it is free and clear of debt.
And so why does it matter if they marry, exactly....?That doesnt mean take away gay marriage.Is incestuous marriage really something youre oh so concerned about, or what?
Lets do the old adage about guns.
Guns dont kill people, people kill people with guns.
Gay marriage doesnt cause incestuous marriage. Incestuous marriage causes incestuous marriage.
The "two" concepts are unique, not the same and certainly not "married" to one another.
Marriage is law, the Iowa law defines eligibility. The change caused the INCLUSSION. Funny this wasn't included in the 9th circuits decision as at least one brief submitted include it.
It means fix a stupid fucking law in Iowa.
Next issue?
Yes, fix it, explain how?
Case by case, explain how a legislature can exclude a same sex couple of sisters while allowing lesbians from marrying?
Neither can procreate, and they are not remarkably different in nature.
You can go down the list if you want, each have a right in Iowa to marry and the state must demonstrate a compelling interest in denying each subsets right to marry
Beyond bizarre...when they keep thinking and talking about male gay sex.......way more than any gay man I know.Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
Agree.
Its their business and your sex life is yours.
Its truly bizarre to me that some want to control what consenting adults do together in the bedroom.
Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
Agree.
Its their business and your sex life is yours.
Its truly bizarre to me that some want to control what consenting adults do together in the bedroom.
To fix the law, you include the same bar to same sex marriages as you do to hetero marriages.That doesnt mean take away gay marriage.Is incestuous marriage really something youre oh so concerned about, or what?
Lets do the old adage about guns.
Guns dont kill people, people kill people with guns.
Gay marriage doesnt cause incestuous marriage. Incestuous marriage causes incestuous marriage.
The "two" concepts are unique, not the same and certainly not "married" to one another.
Marriage is law, the Iowa law defines eligibility. The change caused the INCLUSSION. Funny this wasn't included in the 9th circuits decision as at least one brief submitted include it.
It means fix a stupid fucking law in Iowa.
Next issue?
Yes, fix it, explain how?
Case by case, explain how a legislature can exclude a same sex couple of sisters while allowing lesbians from marrying?
Neither can procreate, and they are not remarkably different in nature.
You can go down the list if you want, each have a right in Iowa to marry and the state must demonstrate a compelling interest in denying each subsets right to marry
In any case--why is there an inheritance tax on family farms in Ohio anyway? That is a stupid law too.
Beyond bizarre...when they keep thinking and talking about male gay sex.......way more than any gay man I know.Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
Agree.
Its their business and your sex life is yours.
Its truly bizarre to me that some want to control what consenting adults do together in the bedroom.
Maybe if he wasn't raised to hate himself by a Christian society.Beyond bizarre...when they keep thinking and talking about male gay sex.......way more than any gay man I know.Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
Agree.
Its their business and your sex life is yours.
Its truly bizarre to me that some want to control what consenting adults do together in the bedroom.
I also think about how John Wayne Gacy also wore a clowns mask and was gay.
Interesting to say the least.
So I guess since you wear a clowns mask........
It is your theory afterall.
Nope.And so why does it matter if they marry, exactly....?That doesnt mean take away gay marriage.Is incestuous marriage really something youre oh so concerned about, or what?
Lets do the old adage about guns.
Guns dont kill people, people kill people with guns.
Gay marriage doesnt cause incestuous marriage. Incestuous marriage causes incestuous marriage.
The "two" concepts are unique, not the same and certainly not "married" to one another.
Marriage is law, the Iowa law defines eligibility. The change caused the INCLUSSION. Funny this wasn't included in the 9th circuits decision as at least one brief submitted include it.
It means fix a stupid fucking law in Iowa.
Next issue?
Yes, fix it, explain how?
Case by case, explain how a legislature can exclude a same sex couple of sisters while allowing lesbians from marrying?
Neither can procreate, and they are not remarkably different in nature.
You can go down the list if you want, each have a right in Iowa to marry and the state must demonstrate a compelling interest in denying each subsets right to marry
You would not object to the farmer marrying his daughter?
Maybe if he wasn't raised to hate himself by a Christian society.Beyond bizarre...when they keep thinking and talking about male gay sex.......way more than any gay man I know.Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
Agree.
Its their business and your sex life is yours.
Its truly bizarre to me that some want to control what consenting adults do together in the bedroom.
I also think about how John Wayne Gacy also wore a clowns mask and was gay.
Interesting to say the least.
So I guess since you wear a clowns mask........
It is your theory afterall.
Nope.And so why does it matter if they marry, exactly....?That doesnt mean take away gay marriage.Marriage is law, the Iowa law defines eligibility. The change caused the INCLUSSION. Funny this wasn't included in the 9th circuits decision as at least one brief submitted include it.
It means fix a stupid fucking law in Iowa.
Next issue?
Yes, fix it, explain how?
Case by case, explain how a legislature can exclude a same sex couple of sisters while allowing lesbians from marrying?
Neither can procreate, and they are not remarkably different in nature.
You can go down the list if you want, each have a right in Iowa to marry and the state must demonstrate a compelling interest in denying each subsets right to marry
You would not object to the farmer marrying his daughter?
Any farmer marrying his daughter is already mentally ill and challenged, i dont need the govt to shit.on them even more. I dont pick on the retarded
Must be a low roof, corn is going for about $3.50 a bushel.If the land is paid for....Iowa has some of most expensive farmland in the nation, but in central Oklahoma the top soil is the deepest..FACTS have no place in this discussion but I do appreciate your efforts.
The OP is idiotic as usual but the funniest part is saying that the family farmer is multimillionaire.
You don't think there are multimillionaire farmers? Have you seen land prices since ethanol?
You really are an idiot.
There are multimillionaire corporate farms. And there will be more if you fools get a Republican in the WH.
+++++
How about this:
Keeping in mind that its really none of your business, how about you describe your absolute worst case scenario for SSM and then say EXACTLY what the "ramifications" of that would be.
IOW, not what YOU don't personally like but rather, actual, real life consequences.
I'll be back to see what you wrote.
The average acre of farmland in Iowa is over $8,500.
To have a net worth of $1,000,000 the farmer would only have to own 117 acres. That's tiny
The average size farm in Iowa is 333 acres.
Do the math idiot, the average farmer has net farmland only of roughly 3 million. That doesn't include equipment and homes, buildings, pushing that number way up.
OBTW: some areas in Iowa have prices of over 10,000 per acre. A millionaire would own only 100 acres, in a lot of places that called a hobby farm.
You understand that the land was purchase likely for hundreds of dollars per acre, ethanol pushed the prices through the roof.
Yes....the Christians made him do it....add that to the nutty, idiotic things that Leftists regularly say.Maybe if he wasn't raised to hate himself by a Christian society.Beyond bizarre...when they keep thinking and talking about male gay sex.......way more than any gay man I know.Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.I firmly oppose incestuous marriage and have been struggling to find a legal basis as to how many incestuous marriages could be banned. I've been called foolish, but it appears it's already legal in at least one state, or at least, not prohibited, if I read the statute correctly.
The link below is to the State of Iowa code addressing who is eligible to marry:
Iowa Code 595.19
Did you notice that only opposite gender closely related individuals are listed as those prohibited to Marry? Same sex closely related relatives are not prohibited from marriage.
The law was written prior to same sex marriage being ruled legal obviously, but it is now the law.
This creates an interesting paradox.
A straight farmer, looking to pass his farm onto his son without the burdon of the inheritance tax could simply Marry his son and POOF, no inheritance tax, but he could not do that with his daughter?
I came across this odd situation from a brief submitted to the ninth circuit, and apparently ignored. That lead me to research if anyone thought that same sex siblings actually wanted the right.
In a marriage equality forum a couple of people posted that they were in same sex sibling relationships and were upset that they could not Marry as other same sex couples now could.
It also appears that several other states have similar laws to Iowa, and others define incest as vaginal penetration.
What a mess we made.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
Agree.
Its their business and your sex life is yours.
Its truly bizarre to me that some want to control what consenting adults do together in the bedroom.
I also think about how John Wayne Gacy also wore a clowns mask and was gay.
Interesting to say the least.
So I guess since you wear a clowns mask........
It is your theory afterall.
Must be a low roof, corn is going for about $3.50 a bushel.If the land is paid for....Iowa has some of most expensive farmland in the nation, but in central Oklahoma the top soil is the deepest..You don't think there are multimillionaire farmers? Have you seen land prices since ethanol?
You really are an idiot.
There are multimillionaire corporate farms. And there will be more if you fools get a Republican in the WH.
+++++
How about this:
Keeping in mind that its really none of your business, how about you describe your absolute worst case scenario for SSM and then say EXACTLY what the "ramifications" of that would be.
IOW, not what YOU don't personally like but rather, actual, real life consequences.
I'll be back to see what you wrote.
The average acre of farmland in Iowa is over $8,500.
To have a net worth of $1,000,000 the farmer would only have to own 117 acres. That's tiny
The average size farm in Iowa is 333 acres.
Do the math idiot, the average farmer has net farmland only of roughly 3 million. That doesn't include equipment and homes, buildings, pushing that number way up.
OBTW: some areas in Iowa have prices of over 10,000 per acre. A millionaire would own only 100 acres, in a lot of places that called a hobby farm.
You understand that the land was purchase likely for hundreds of dollars per acre, ethanol pushed the prices through the roof.
I can't see myself supporting incest, can you? Are they trying to make a point? Are you? Go ahead make your case for incest then nambla.Maybe if he wasn't raised to hate himself by a Christian society.Beyond bizarre...when they keep thinking and talking about male gay sex.......way more than any gay man I know.Iowa can easily solve this. There Mess cleaned up.
My parents best man came to visit my parents. He brought his husband. Two wonderful guys. 70 been together happy for over 50 years. Not a word was spoken of sexuality and no public displays of affection. Why shouldn't they be legally married? You should see what I do to women's butts before you speak. That's not natural either. Lol so what? You gonna stop me from marrying my fiancee because we only do it in the butt?
Agree.
Its their business and your sex life is yours.
Its truly bizarre to me that some want to control what consenting adults do together in the bedroom.
I also think about how John Wayne Gacy also wore a clowns mask and was gay.
Interesting to say the least.
So I guess since you wear a clowns mask........
It is your theory afterall.
This will be highly interesting on a number of ways.
First, will one small group, those that are not remarkably different than ordinary same sex partners (sisters wanting the benefits of marriage vs. a lesbian couple) be excluded because another group also seeking the same benefit, can procreate?
I think that went down in flames the last time it was tried
And, since at least one brief was given to the court (likely more) and that court said his ruling would not lead to legal incest, did the court willfully lie?
And think about it, did Kennedy actually make certain forms of incest legal in Iowa as well as a few other states states that describe incest as "vaginal penetration"?
You would think a Supreme Court judge, given the resources at his command, and this being a law effecting all 50 states would have, at a minimum, taken the time to find how each state defind the institution?
Maybe he was playing golf that day?
