Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    Sorry folks, your slippery slope is still a figment of your imagination.
    From the OP article:

    "We should have every right to inherit from each other and visit each other—I don’t care what you call it, we’re not second-class citizens!” says Janet Lessin. “Any people who wish to form a marriage with all the rights and duties of a marriage should have the legal right to. The spurious arguments of marriage being for procreation of children is ridiculous.”
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    From the OP article:
    So what? I find it hard to believe that this woman and her unconventional relationship have been any more or less enabled by same-sex marriage (which btw, is still illegal most everywhere). One quote from an article does not make a movement. They have a term for this sort of thing... its called "crying wolf".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Senior Member Molon Labe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Jihad Me At Hello
    Posts
    4,769
    Quote Originally Posted by BadCat View Post
    And coming soon to a Justice of the Peace in YOUR neighborhood...

    Man, Man, Woman marriages.
    Woman, Woman, Man marriages.
    Man, woman, underaged girl marriages.
    Man, Man, goat marriages.
    Woman, woman, horse marriages.
    Man, Man, young boy, dead woman marriages.
    Woman, woman, young boy, dead horse marriages.

    It's "progressive"!

    You forgot man, man, step daughter & man, man, stepson
    What would we do without progressive thinking.
    Gun Control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound - Unknown


    The problem is Empty People, Not Loaded Guns - Linda Schrock Taylor
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Power CUer NJCardFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    15,912
    Quote Originally Posted by stsinner View Post
    America was once a great country with great morals. No more. Sick fucking people. Sick fucking judges. Sick fucking schools. Our poor children have to inherit this shit hole of a country now, no better than Amsterdam. It's like all of America is now Las Vegas.
    If anyone has trouble understand the concept of Sodom and Gomorrah, just take a look around.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by wilbur View Post
    So what? I find it hard to believe that this woman and her unconventional relationship have been any more or less enabled by same-sex marriage (which btw, is still illegal most everywhere). One quote from an article does not make a movement. They have a term for this sort of thing... its called "crying wolf".
    Then why do all of these unconventional people cite the movement for gay marriage as a fundamental precedent in legalizing their own arrangements? You're aware that there are several suits currently working their way through the court system to decriminalize and ultimately legalize polygamy, right? You're aware of the fight going on in Germany to sanction "marriage" between two siblings, right?

    While one quote doesn't make a movement, there is simply no reason to believe that people in unconventional relationships will not attach themselves to a movement that already exists. And why not? Redefining marriage opens up the possibility of endless tinkering. How could you say that two women and five men should not receive the legal benefits of marriage when two men can? What would be your contra argument?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Senior Member FeebMaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    1,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    Then why do all of these unconventional people cite the movement for gay marriage as a fundamental precedent in legalizing their own arrangements? You're aware that there are several suits currently working their way through the court system to decriminalize and ultimately legalize polygamy, right? You're aware of the fight going on in Germany to sanction "marriage" between two siblings, right?

    While one quote doesn't make a movement, there is simply no reason to believe that people in unconventional relationships will not attach themselves to a movement that already exists. And why not? Redefining marriage opens up the possibility of endless tinkering. How could you say that two women and five men should not receive the legal benefits of marriage when two men can? What would be your contra argument?
    You brought this on yourselves by getting the government involved in marriage in the first place.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by Gingersnap View Post
    Then why do all of these unconventional people cite the movement for gay marriage as a fundamental precedent in legalizing their own arrangements? You're aware that there are several suits currently working their way through the court system to decriminalize and ultimately legalize polygamy, right? You're aware of the fight going on in Germany to sanction "marriage" between two siblings, right?

    While one quote doesn't make a movement, there is simply no reason to believe that people in unconventional relationships will not attach themselves to a movement that already exists. And why not? Redefining marriage opens up the possibility of endless tinkering. How could you say that two women and five men should not receive the legal benefits of marriage when two men can? What would be your contra argument?
    Again, so what? Such ankle bitters straggling behind, looking for a free ride to legitimacy on the backs of others, are something that we always have to deal with, when changing just about any law. I'm sure there's probably some nuts in Texas who feel emboldened to fight for state approval to carpet their lawns with landmines, anytime gun control laws are repealed. But so what?

    Its interesting that gay marriage has had comparatively resounding success, when compared with polygamists movements, who have been fighting their battle much longer.
    Last edited by wilbur; 05-13-2009 at 12:28 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by FeebMaster View Post
    You brought this on yourselves by getting the government involved in marriage in the first place.
    You'll get no argument from me on that point. If government does have to be involved in personal relationships, we could at least make those relationships contractual and not sexual.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Redondo Beach, CA
    Posts
    1,003
    Quote Originally Posted by FeebMaster View Post
    You brought this on yourselves by getting the government involved in marriage in the first place.
    I guess we own a big thanks to the supporters of Prop 8 then. Government tried to get out (In re Marriage Cases) but they were pulled back in... (Al Pacino GF III)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •