Why can't these People be Married together?...

[NYcarbineer]

If gay marriage becomes legal, all forms of "marriage" will also become legal. Lawyers for bigamists and polygamists are waiting, the ACLU is waiting.

Gay marriage IS the beginning of the slippery slope. Anyone who denies that is either blind or stupid or both.

That's retarded. Monogamy, bigamy, and polygamy are all separate, distinct forms of unions;

there is no 'if one, then the other' obligation, judicially.

Man and Woman are the only Natural Way that our Species has it's "very Existence"...

Man and Man and Woman and Woman is only the "same" in number.

They are Distinctly Different and Separate from what Created them.

Thanks for Illustrating my Point for me.



peace...

Our species has always been polygamous. You've just made the argument that polygamy is a natural state of marriage.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Government recognizes marriage in order to ensure that mothers and children are supported.

If folks want hetero, homo, polyandry, or polygamy as a marriage style, sure.

 

[Redfish]

I personally don't give a shit what they do, provided my church and I are free to believe what we will.

But, how do you address the sure to come up issue of 1 person claiming two spouses for whatever benefits?

Is your Church Allowed to Deny Black People Entry?...

Can your Church Refuse to Hire a Black because of their Race?...



peace...

should a church be allowed to limit its congregation to certain kinds of people? Isn't that the definition of freedom?

 

[NYcarbineer]

They can enter into any relationship they want. The government just wont recognize the relationship.

The question is why is it vital that the government recognize it?

Your question is immaterial because government recognition of marriage is here to stay.

 

[Redfish]

Government recognizes marriage in order to ensure that mothers and children are supported.

If folks want hetero, homo, polyandry, or polygamy as a marriage style, sure.

not surprising coming from you.

 

[Avatar4321]

Husband, wife and lover all live together - Mirror Online

They look like a Happy, Caring, Stable, Loving Family... Who are you to Judge and tell them they can't be Married?

Bigots!



peace...

Well, that's the way it was in the bible… A man could have as many wives as he could afford.

So, if you really want to talk about traditional marriage.

Besides, polygamy would open up a whole new practice of law. Lawyers would love it if polygamy were legal again. The complications and legal scenarios are endless when one wife wants to split off.

you clearly have not been involved in family law disputes before.

 

[Avatar4321]

They can enter into any relationship they want. The government just wont recognize the relationship.

The question is why is it vital that the government recognize it?

Your question is immaterial because government recognition of marriage is here to stay.

Just because government recognizes marriage doesn't mean it should be obligated to recognize all relationships people call marriage.

 

[mal]

They can enter into any relationship they want. The government just wont recognize the relationship.

The question is why is it vital that the government recognize it?

Your question is immaterial because government recognition of marriage is here to stay.

Just because government recognizes marriage doesn't mean it should be obligated to recognize all relationships people call marriage.

The only Obligation they have is to Recognize the ONLY one that Creates Life.

All other Combinations are Secondary to our "very Existinence."



peace...

 

[Redfish]

That's retarded. Monogamy, bigamy, and polygamy are all separate, distinct forms of unions;

there is no 'if one, then the other' obligation, judicially.

Man and Woman are the only Natural Way that our Species has it's "very Existence"...

Man and Man and Woman and Woman is only the "same" in number.

They are Distinctly Different and Separate from what Created them.

Thanks for Illustrating my Point for me.



peace...

Our species has always been polygamous. You've just made the argument that polygamy is a natural state of marriage.

so you are ok with all forms of polygamy, all numbers of males and females? 5 males/8 females? one male/16 females? one female/9 males? how about some kids and animals to make it interesting? How about a tribal marriage? 300 Creek indians in a group marriage?

where does this shit end?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If gay marriage becomes legal, all forms of "marriage" will also become legal. Lawyers for bigamists and polygamists are waiting, the ACLU is waiting.

Gay marriage IS the beginning of the slippery slope. Anyone who denies that is either blind or stupid or both.

Gay marriage does absolutely nothing to open the door for polygamy. Gay marriage does not involve marrying multiple partners.

you are wrong. the argument for gay marriage is that these people are being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. The exact same argument WILL be made for bigamy and polygamy. They will have precedent on their side in court.

Gay marriage is step 1 towards the destruction of our society.

That's not the argument. The argument for same sex marriage is an equal protection argument.

The Constitution requires that laws apply equally to all situations that are the same, or sufficiently similar. Recognizing a civil marriage that 2 people can enter into but only if one is man and one is a woman violates equal protection because a marriage of two men or two women is a sufficiently similar situation and thus deserves the same civil recognition.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Man and Woman are the only Natural Way that our Species has it's "very Existence"...

Man and Man and Woman and Woman is only the "same" in number.

They are Distinctly Different and Separate from what Created them.

Thanks for Illustrating my Point for me.



peace...

Our species has always been polygamous. You've just made the argument that polygamy is a natural state of marriage.

so you are ok with all forms of polygamy, all numbers of males and females? 5 males/8 females? one male/16 females? one female/9 males? how about some kids and animals to make it interesting? How about a tribal marriage? 300 Creek indians in a group marriage?

where does this shit end?

Has the right to own a gun led to the right to own an atomic bomb?

 

[Redfish]

Gay marriage does absolutely nothing to open the door for polygamy. Gay marriage does not involve marrying multiple partners.

you are wrong. the argument for gay marriage is that these people are being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. The exact same argument WILL be made for bigamy and polygamy. They will have precedent on their side in court.

Gay marriage is step 1 towards the destruction of our society.

That's not the argument. The argument for same sex marriage is an equal protection argument.

The Constitution requires that laws apply equally to all situations that are the same, or sufficiently similar. Recognizing a civil marriage that 2 people can enter into but only if one is man and one is a woman violates equal protection because a marriage of two men or two women is a sufficiently similar situation and thus deserves the same civil recognition.

nice try, but FAIL

the argument is, and always has been, that gay couples are being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation, not because they are the "same" as a man/woman couple.

the argument is that they are not given "equal protection" because of their sexual orientation.

The exact same argument can, and will, be made by polygamists and bigamists, and it will be very hard for any court to rule against them if two person gay marriage is fully legalized. How could a court rule against a 3 person gay marriage if 2 person gay marriage was legal?

 

[Redfish]

Our species has always been polygamous. You've just made the argument that polygamy is a natural state of marriage.

so you are ok with all forms of polygamy, all numbers of males and females? 5 males/8 females? one male/16 females? one female/9 males? how about some kids and animals to make it interesting? How about a tribal marriage? 300 Creek indians in a group marriage?

where does this shit end?

Has the right to own a gun led to the right to own an atomic bomb?

good analogy, the govt has ruled that owning an atomic bomb is illegal.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They can enter into any relationship they want. The government just wont recognize the relationship.

The question is why is it vital that the government recognize it?

Your question is immaterial because government recognition of marriage is here to stay.

Just because government recognizes marriage doesn't mean it should be obligated to recognize all relationships people call marriage.

Did I say that? The government does have a constitutional obligation to provide equal protection under the law.

 

[Avatar4321]

Your question is immaterial because government recognition of marriage is here to stay.

Just because government recognizes marriage doesn't mean it should be obligated to recognize all relationships people call marriage.

Did I say that? The government does have a constitutional obligation to provide equal protection under the law.

Equal protection is irrelevant to the conversation. it does not require marriage be redefined.

 

[NYcarbineer]

so you are ok with all forms of polygamy, all numbers of males and females? 5 males/8 females? one male/16 females? one female/9 males? how about some kids and animals to make it interesting? How about a tribal marriage? 300 Creek indians in a group marriage?

where does this shit end?

Has the right to own a gun led to the right to own an atomic bomb?

good analogy, the govt has ruled that owning an atomic bomb is illegal.

So there's no slippery slope from guns to atomic bombs. Why would there be a slippery slope from same sex marriage to men marrying animals?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Just because government recognizes marriage doesn't mean it should be obligated to recognize all relationships people call marriage.

Did I say that? The government does have a constitutional obligation to provide equal protection under the law.

Equal protection is irrelevant to the conversation. it does not require marriage be redefined.

If you think equal protection is irrelevant than you are too ignorant of the law and the constituion to be in this conversation.

 

[Redfish]

Has the right to own a gun led to the right to own an atomic bomb?

good analogy, the govt has ruled that owning an atomic bomb is illegal.

So there's no slippery slope from guns to atomic bombs. Why would there be a slippery slope from same sex marriage to men marrying animals?

if it was not illegal to own a tank, a bazooka, a howitzer, or an atomic bomb some people would own them. people would be sliding down that slippery slope and buying such weapons. Laws are made to protect society from such things. Just like laws are made to define our social morals and ethics.

multi person marriage is the next step from gay marriage.

 

[Redfish]

Did I say that? The government does have a constitutional obligation to provide equal protection under the law.

Equal protection is irrelevant to the conversation. it does not require marriage be redefined.

If you think equal protection is irrelevant than you are too ignorant of the law and the constituion to be in this conversation.

the gay marriage argument is NOT about equal protection, that is a red herring. the argument is about discrimination based on sexual orientation.

 

[Avatar4321]

Did I say that? The government does have a constitutional obligation to provide equal protection under the law.

Equal protection is irrelevant to the conversation. it does not require marriage be redefined.

If you think equal protection is irrelevant than you are too ignorant of the law and the constituion to be in this conversation.

No. I simply understand what equal protection means. Everyone is to have the same right under the law. And everyone does have the same right under the law.