Romney's Mormon Patriotism: 5 Privileged Sons and No Volunteers?

[JoeB131]

Gov't should not be in the marriage business anyway
Civil unions- fine
-----------------------------------

:

Here's my problem with Civil Unions.

Same problem I have with that.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Gov't should not be in the marriage business anyway
Civil unions- fine
-----------------------------------

:

Here's my problem with Civil Unions.

Same problem I have with that.

Oh please....
Marriage has been and should be defined by religion
Man and women- no one is denying them the ability to marry
someone of the opposite sex

Now if a religion chooses to call a same sex union a marriage in their ceremony - fine
But not the gov't.

As for benefits, it should be something you should be able to use with anyone, i feel.
Brother, sister, friend, lover etc

If one earns them and pays for them- then use it as you choose
Really, the gov't should just be registering all marriages as civil unions
for the possible contractual implications for the people involved.

As for taxes
the system we have sucks
There should really be no tax benefit for being married
It should be simplified, flat with taxes on luxury goods
to avoid the work trade off that some could choose to
avoid tax

Really, the Negative Income Tax might not be a bad
idea- if we could get rid of all the gov't bureaucratic crap



--------------------------
Hopefully
the camel flea is gone

here boy

 

[JakeStarkey]

You know, Jake, you seem to get into these obsessive relationships with other posters. Which is sad, sometimes you make good points.

Says the most disturbed posted on the board? Whatever, JoeDoosh. For instance, you are confused abut marriage. I have no trouble with all civil unions being registered by the government. Any marriage by a religion must be registered as a civil union legally in order to protect rights and obligations, and to ensure that the format is in compliance with law. "Marriage" as a rite should be reserved to religions. Any atheist can go to many churches that have no problem celebrating an atheist marriage, the same as a homosexual marriage.

 

[Neotrotsky]

You know, Jake, you seem to get into these obsessive relationships with other posters..

Which is sad, sometimes you make good points.

Yeah it is sad for him
good points sure but

Even a broken clock is right twice a day...

---------------------------------

here boy

 

[JakeStarkey]

I see NeoDoosh, my stalker has returned and is in cahoots with JoeB.

Here we have the Laurel and Hardy combination of the far left and the far right.

How funny.

 

[garyganu]

You know, Jake, you seem to get into these obsessive relationships with other posters. Which is sad, sometimes you make good points.

Hi Jake, I thought is was just me. lol

 

[JakeStarkey]

You know, Jake, you seem to get into these obsessive relationships with other posters. Which is sad, sometimes you make good points.

Here we have the Laurel and Hardy combination of the far left and the far right

Hi Jake, I thought is was just me. lol

Forgive me, gary, I meant the Three Stooges.

 

[garyganu]

Here we have the Laurel and Hardy combination of the far left and the far right

Hi Jake, I thought is was just me. lol

Forgive me, gary, I meant the Three Stooges.

Which one am I?

Anyhow, you know that they say that the only thing in the middle of the road is roadkill.

 

[JoeB131]

You know, Jake, you seem to get into these obsessive relationships with other posters. Which is sad, sometimes you make good points.

Says the most disturbed posted on the board? Whatever, JoeDoosh. For instance, you are confused abut marriage. I have no trouble with all civil unions being registered by the government. Any marriage by a religion must be registered as a civil union legally in order to protect rights and obligations, and to ensure that the format is in compliance with law. "Marriage" as a rite should be reserved to religions. Any atheist can go to many churches that have no problem celebrating an atheist marriage, the same as a homosexual marriage.

You may not have a problem with Civil Unions, but your boy Romney does...

At least until the Religious Whacks got him into a room and told him what he thought.

Marriage as a legal instrument should be equally available to all. Atheist, Christian, Jew, Gay Straight.

If the Religious Whacks don't like it, fuck them.

I remember when you used to not like the religious whacks... now you are bowing down.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Oh please....
Marriage has been and should be defined by religion
Man and women- no one is denying them the ability to marry
someone of the opposite sex

Why should it be defined by religion? Marriage existed before Christianity did, or any of the modern faiths. Why do they get to define an institution that preceeded them?

--------------------------
Hopefully
the camel flea is gone

here boy

No such luck.... I don't think he has any friends.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Marriage should be a private religious rite and not defined by any religion.

Civil unions should be open to all atheists and religionists and whatever.

If atheists don't like it, they don't count anyway.

 

[JoeB131]

Marriage should be a private religious rite and not defined by any religion.

Civil unions should be open to all atheists and religionists and whatever.

If atheists don't like it, they don't count anyway.

Except when we go to court and beat the silly asses off the religious folks and their attempts to march their superstitions onto the public square...

Fact is, Gay marriage in inevitable, and in addition to being remembered as a loser, Romney will be remembered as the George Wallace of Gay Rights.

 

[PredFan]

Back to the OP, isn't the Morman faith supposed to be pacivists? I believe that's right. So the fact that his sons haven't been in the military, is them simply following their faith.

 

[JoeB131]

Back to the OP, isn't the Morman faith supposed to be pacivists? I believe that's right. So the fact that his sons haven't been in the military, is them simply following their faith.

Nope. You are probably confusing them with the Amish.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Marriage should be a private religious rite and not defined by any religion.

Civil unions should be open to all atheists and religionists and whatever.

If atheists don't like it, they don't count anyway.

Except when we go to court and beat the silly asses off the religious folks and their attempts to march their superstitions onto the public square... Fact is, Gay marriage in inevitable, and in addition to being remembered as a loser, Romney will be remembered as the George Wallace of Gay Rights.

Fact is . . . civil religion will always dominate the public square regardless of court rulings. I do agree that universal marriage is inevitable, and I believe that marriage will be relegated to the domain of religion and legal relationships will be become that of civil unions.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Back to the OP, isn't the Morman faith supposed to be pacivists? I believe that's right. So the fact that his sons haven't been in the military, is them simply following their faith.

Nope. You are probably confusing them with the Amish.

Yep and Nope. JoeB is partially correct. Mormons through 1900 had little use for the US might and particularly that of the military. The RLDS, now the Community of Christ, have had a strong strain of pacifism for 150 years. The LDS supported the drafts of WWI and WWII, and in the last century have become the patriotic Americans of America.

 

[whitehall]

The Constitution doesn't say anything about a presidential candidates children serving in the Military but it does specify that a president must be born in the USA.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And, whitehall? You are not a doosh birther, are you?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

And, whitehall? You are not a doosh birther, are you?

You seriously sound like a libtard. Even if for some ungodly reason, you still believe that O-Tard was born in America; you can't deny that people practically believe that he was in Kenya. For about the 50th time, get over yourself Jake.

 

[Toro]

Birfers are idiots.

That is all.