The line is drawn at two adults over 18 , not married to anyone else , not related by blood .......there is no such thing as the sanctity of marriage , it doesnt exist , it never has and it never will.
It seems to me its just about making sure that the people who defile marriage everday get to be the only one's in that exclusive club.

I'm sorry, this doesnt make sense to me. And no I wont be okay with underage girls getting married off. In the only polygamy cases that I've read about; the girls were married off and were not able to choose who their husband is.

Also do you feel that just because I'm gay that I must have really fucl<ed up morals and think its is okay for 13 year old kids to be forced into marriage with 50 year old men?

To me - that is totally different than having two consenting adults who love each other, want to be garunteed the same rights as two other consenting adults who love each other get.


I'm sorry - I dont see the correlation between gay marriage and polygamists forcing children to marry. Maybe its just me :zz:

more marriages end in divorce than stay together

people can get married and divorced 1000 times if they want

atheists are able to get married whenever they want


where the hell is sanctity of marriage and why the hell can people use that as their logic against gay marriage. It is so hypocritical I cant even get my brain around it.

If gays cant be married because of "sanctity" and religion then:

There needs to be a Constitutional amendment banning pre-marital sex (even tho I really wouldnt want this cause since i cant get married I'd never be able to get any!!)

Constitutional amendment banning un-wed pregnancies

Constitutional amendment banning people from being able to judge someone else, because according to the Holy Book, only God is allowed to pass judgement.

etc, etc.

If they want their cake - they should be forced to eat the whole darn thing!

so you feel that if gays get the right to be married.. than people will push to have the right to marry someone against their will (brainwashed or not)?

I'm not worried about that senario coming in to play to be very honest with you.

Sorry.. I'm pretty passionate about this topic because it hits close to home.

I wish that all hardcore Christians will give birth to a gay son or daughter.. so they have to look their son or daughter in the eye and say "I dont feel you deserve equal rights".

I'll steal the words of another famous person, GPK

"GFY"


"Just don't tell anyone's pastor, rabbi, etc.
what they can say or not in their houses of worship, when same-sex marriage
becomes legal across the land."

Ok I wont, never planned to. They are entitled to their own opinion, but their opinion should not be allowed to become law, especially when it takes rights away from others.

You people bore me.

My work is done.

It was fun while it lasted.

Glad I could bore you... go choke on a dick please.

Where's Morty when I really need him - VAPORIZE THIS SOB!

I don't know, why don't you ask them?
oh wait- you can't :rolleyes:

so your logic is ?

The majority of the tax dollars goes to the military?

What if the majority of spending shifts away from the military ?

Will the person doing the tax dollar shift away from the military hate our soldiers?

My thinking is that the military is just one thing. it may cost the most but it is still one thing my tax dollars go to. When I say I disagree with the majority of stuff the government spends my money on, I mean all the other bs programs like public education :p <The public schools in my area are nothing more than drop out factories with a 49% graduation rate. >

as for the topic at hand... If gays can marry, when will people be allowed to marry their pets? (Who are you to judge :rolleyes: )

Where I work ~ gay co-habitation couples are allowed to claim their partners on their healthcare benefits but.............

if you are just living with your girlfriend/ boyfriend and are not gay you cannot.

I guess it's because gays cannot get married where a couple living together can and choose not to.

Why should people, that choose to be gay, given benefits that "straight" people who choose not to get married are denied.

if polygamy was legal for men, but not for women, i'd have the same argument. rights are given to married couples that aren't available for same sex couples. that's where the line was crossed.
and it's not apples and oranges, either everyone really is equal, or they aren't.

I'm having trouble understanding why more than two persons can't enter into a marriage. Can someone help me to understand why wwe can't have polygamous marriages if all parties are consenting adults?

No moral objections, please

so, basically cm...what you're saying is that opening the door to gays is opening the door to all sort of freakish stuff....like it's a gateway lifestyle or something? sorry, i don't see a correlation between two consenting adults wanting to be married and polygamists or child molesters. but you seem to see a connection. interesting.

i've never really thought about it to be honest with you. i'd never enter into one. i can't imagine sharing my husband with another woman. i just don't see it working.
some people might. but then, some people are into lots of things. i don't see a compelling reason to allow it imo.

I just saw this now...and I am not really here.I think you know that.


This is the TrueSwine I already vaporized ...only Steve's sense of "what is the wrong thing to do here?"....erased it all.


So he was bored, his wurg is done here and he was done before it lasted...........good.

He's gone on his own.

lori? a choice? i've always argued that you're born that way...but you know, i've never asked anyone.

I knew he'd come to help me :{>: :{>:


(he must have thought it was safe and then re-vaporized when he saw your non-presence)

First off, I'm not a big fan of the Mormons in general, and I'm pro Gay rights.
However, just because you don't see a compelling reason for polygamous marriage, it doesn't mean others(i.e traditional Mormons and many others around the world) don't like the idea.

I don't like the idea of polygamous marriage, either, but I'm having a hard time justifying why, if not for a personal preference objection(just like some might not prefer blacks and whites marrying)

I see your point.. the reason I can come up for justifying why they shouldnt be allowed is that people could take advantage of the rights given by the govn't through marriage... i.e. marrying a lot of people and then getting 10 different social security checks after their multiple spouse's pass away.

i always figured it was mostly guys who would be for the idea.
but, like i said, the whole deal is about allowing two adults marry in some circumstances, but not in others. if there is no legal reason (precluding age, too closely related for example, or not free from previous legal contract) then i don't see how the govt can say yes to some, no to others. really, that's all it comes down to.

I saw that... almost responded to him but didnt have the energy at the time..

If it was a choice I'd be with men in a second... they are MUCH easier to deal with than women IMO... less hormonal changes and what not. :p

Men are easier to understand (again my opinion) - and maybe that is because my brain works like a mans.


But then again... I do have the choice to be with a man regardless of how my heart and sex organs feel. But then I'd be uncomfortable my whole life and living a lie.

along with the marrying pets sentence... :eek:

people like Wingnut and cmfwhatever and Bush make me feel ashamed to be a republican :(

I will add that I agree with Wingnut... that if gay couples in a domestic partnership are allowed to get med insurance benefits... than straight couples in domestic partnerships should also get the same benefits.

I'm for equality for all.. not more rights for gays, and less rights for hetero's.

Equal for all.


but wingnut.. that choice comment you made was absurd & and sure as heck doesnt help your argument or cred.

I'll accept the two person marriage rule. There is the problem of multiple social security checks for the widows and widowers. Then, that brings up the whole problem of everyone within the polygamous marriage needed to have a contract with each and every other individual involved in this "marriage".

Now, let's talk about age of consent for marriage. Do we all agree that 16 years old is the right choice? Or do some think it should be higher? Lower? Different for boys than girls?

Whoever said gays and lesbians wanted to get married in a church anyway?
Maybe they want to go to Vegas and get drunk like a movie star and get married :D .

There should be a little provision saying that churches would reserve the right to not marry gays. But I don't see the problem in letting a government official marry them.

They already reserve the right not to marry people ,usually people who want to get married in a church have several meetings with the pastor or priest , if the pastor or priest doesnt see fit that they should be married they can say no.
Its sorta like the right to refuse service to anyone.

When are we getting married?:{>:

When your joint falls off.

Git outta here:mad: :mad:

Fine.

You may not really be here but it's nice to see your humor lingers on my friend.:)

:(

When you promise me a rose garden :{>:

churches have the right to turn down anyone already. my husband and i got turned down by the priest at the roman catholic church where he grew up-we hadn't gone thru the six months of 'instruction' that they supposedly require. hell, we hadn't even known each other six months when we got married!! :D

i say supposedly because a few years later, his younger bro got married to a non catholic, no instruction, in the same church-but a different priest. now, she was knocked up...maybe he was just in a hurry to get her married and converted?

anyway, we got married by the judge, now the mayor of el dorado. almost 23 years later, and it's all good.

You got it babe;)

Thank you.

And thanks for noticing I m not here.



:) :)

does a rabbi have to marry a couple that's not jewish? does a priest have to marry a couple that's not catholic?

do we need to have provision's that make those answer's clear?

there's a difference between public and private space in the law. churches are private.

if i own a restaurant, under the law i can't discriminate. that doesn't mean when i go home i have no choice in whom comes to dinner.

why would a church need clarification on this point? if i'm a priest i can refuse to marry you because you didn't get baptized. or because i don't think you're in love. or because i'm busy. or because i just don't like you. or for no reason whatsoever.

do you still think a church that didn't want to would have to marry a gay couple? any examples anywhere that this has happened?

I always notice when you're not here.



Or there.:)

Thanks again








:zz:







thud