Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 62
  1. #21  
    HR Corporate Scum patriot45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Plant City, Florida
    Posts
    10,813
    Quote Originally Posted by LogansPapa View Post
    So gay couples arenít able, some how, to adopt - have a surrogate - or artificially inseminate? Is there a law Iím not up to speed on?
    Quote by others-

    These are the considerations that make many sincere people balk at the notion of same-sex marriage. Such a "marriage" can certainly be based on love, and even entail the adoption and raising of children, but it cannot, by definition, eventuate in children generated by the couple in question.

    : ďGrow your own dope. Plant a liberal.Ē
    Ē Obummercare, 20 percent of the time it works everytime.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Senior Member LogansPapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Surf City, USA
    Posts
    3,782
    Quote Originally Posted by patriot45 View Post
    Quote by others-

    So, by that statement - it would be better not to adopt the child?
    At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    11,361
    "it cannot, by definition, eventuate in children generated by the couple in question."

    This argument makes no sense to me. My husband and I married with no intention of having children, and our marriage is valid. Elderly people marry each other all the time, with no intention or ability of having children, and their marriages are valid.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by LogansPapa View Post
    "otehr"? Shit - no wonder I can't keep up.;)
    learn to interpolate FGS !
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Senior Member LogansPapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Surf City, USA
    Posts
    3,782
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    learn to interpolate FGS !
    :D(okay - funny shit right there. Don't care where you're from.):p
    At Coretta Scott King's funeral in early 2006, Ethel Kennedy, the widow of Robert Kennedy, leaned over to him and whispered, "The torch is being passed to you." "A chill went up my spine," Obama told an aide. (Newsweek)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Vepr
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Molon Labe View Post
    No. the next step will inevitably be someone who wants to have 2 wives. I mean...there's already TV shows about this type thing.
    Or maybe it will be the NAMBLA bunch who argue that 15 year old boys are able to have relationships with adult males. That's what is next IMO.
    As long as I do not have to pay for their kids or support them in any other way and they are not treading on someoneís constitutional rights I donít care how many wives or husbands someone has. If a guy is a glutton for punishment and wants to have more than one then have at it.

    As far as underage marrying goes I do not consider it any better when a 30 some year old male marries a 15 year old female which happens way more often than what you mentioned. But that is not a gay marriage issue that is a state law issue on underage marriage.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    HR Corporate Scum patriot45's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Plant City, Florida
    Posts
    10,813
    Quote Originally Posted by linda22003 View Post
    "it cannot, by definition, eventuate in children generated by the couple in question."

    This argument makes no sense to me. My husband and I married with no intention of having children, and our marriage is valid. Elderly people marry each other all the time, with no intention or ability of having children, and their marriages are valid.

    It certainly makes sense to me. You are not gay, by definition, a gay couple cannot generate thier own children.
    Unless they mutate even more.

    : ďGrow your own dope. Plant a liberal.Ē
    Ē Obummercare, 20 percent of the time it works everytime.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    11,361
    I'm not aware that any institution apart from the Catholic Church demands the intention or possibility of procreation as a qualifier for marriage. The state certainly does not demand it, nor has it any business doing so.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,852
    Quote Originally Posted by patriot45 View Post
    It certainly makes sense to me. You are not gay, by definition, a gay couple cannot generate thier own children.
    Unless they mutate even more.
    So then we should only allow marriage for fertile couples in child rearing age groups who intend to have children? No old couples, no sterile people, and especially not those crazies that just don't want kids.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,970
    Quote Originally Posted by linda22003 View Post
    Who knows? God is pretty busy smiting the Heartland right now.
    Right: He got N.O. and CA could be next.
    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
  •