Rubio on gay marriage

[Votto]

Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice

According to Rubio, he does not think that being gay is a choice but also thinks that marriage should remain between a man and a woman. He even attended a gay marriage even though he said that he did not support the decision.

This is interesting in light of recent allegations that the Senator attended bath houses in Miami in his early days. If it's true, then he is either bisexual or currently living al lie. It is also interesting that he would attend a marriage he did not support.

Can anyone figure this incoherent stance out?

 

[Rouge Rover]

Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice

According to Rubio, he does not think that being gay is a choice but also thinks that marriage should remain between a man and a woman. He even attended a gay marriage even though he said that he did not support the decision.

This is interesting in light of recent allegations that the Senator attended bath houses in Miami in his early days. If it's true, then he is either bisexual or currently living al lie. It is also interesting that he would attend a marriage he did not support.

Can anyone figure this incoherent stance out?

Looks like he's acting like a politician and trying to cover all the bases.

 

[Iceweasel]

What's incoherent? He might have had a gay friend, likely if he was invited to the wedding. So he showed up instead of making a political statement like most people do. I don't understand why dirt needs to be thrown around, if one disagrees with someone just disagree.

 

[The VOR]

Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice

According to Rubio, he does not think that being gay is a choice

He probably doesn't just think it isn't a choice. He most likely knows it first hand.

 

[TNHarley]

Jesus Christ. That was not Rubio.
I don't like him either but damn..

 

[Disgruntled_American]

Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice

According to Rubio, he does not think that being gay is a choice but also thinks that marriage should remain between a man and a woman. He even attended a gay marriage even though he said that he did not support the decision.

This is interesting in light of recent allegations that the Senator attended bath houses in Miami in his early days. If it's true, then he is either bisexual or currently living al lie. It is also interesting that he would attend a marriage he did not support.

Can anyone figure this incoherent stance out?

I don't really care about rumors or gossip when it comes to a candidate, I think 90% of the time it is complete bullshit and about 9-10% of it out of context.

That being said I have many Christian friends that believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, however, they do not believe the state or federal government should be involved.

People can be against something but not believe the government should be involved in prohibiting it. I personally am against abortion and would NEVER ask a woman to have one, but I don't believe the government should prohibit it.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice

According to Rubio, he does not think that being gay is a choice but also thinks that marriage should remain between a man and a woman. He even attended a gay marriage even though he said that he did not support the decision.

This is interesting in light of recent allegations that the Senator attended bath houses in Miami in his early days. If it's true, then he is either bisexual or currently living al lie. It is also interesting that he would attend a marriage he did not support.

Can anyone figure this incoherent stance out?

Allegations? If you are calling those pictures as proof, you should never be on a jury. The judge should throw you out for being a dope.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Can anyone figure this incoherent stance out?

Yes, I can figure out Votto's absolute fascination with gay sexuality.

I imagine many others can, too.

 

[Dale Smith]

Having this corporate entity bless ANY union by permitting you to "wed" and have that union recognized by the state is a joke in of it's self. According to Black's Law Dictionary, the word license is defined as "Permission by competent authority to do an act which without such permission would be illegal". In other words, "da gubermint" makes something that was lawful to do, illegal. They then charge a fee (which is a bribe) to turn their backs and give you a permit that allows you to break the law that they just said was illegal to do. This is contract law which is what we operate under. It's not Common Law but rather contract in accordance with the UCC (universal contract code). They are forcing you to "contract" with them by purchasing a license
In Civil Law under UCC, the marriage is considered to be a for-profit venture because you have made USA.INC a third party in that union. Another way to look as the marriage license contract with the State is as a contract of adhesion, a contract between two disparate, unequal parties. Again, a flawed "contract." This contract with the State is said to be a "specific performance" contract as to the privileges, duties and responsibilities that are attached to it. Consideration on the part of the husband/husband, wife/wife, husband and wife is the actual fee paid and makes all parties concerned subject to the acts, statutes and codes as it is related to marriage law, family law, children and property.

It should be emphasized that this contractual consideration places the bride and groom in an inferior position (as defined-by-law) and makes them subject to the State. Very few people realize this. It is very important to understand that children born to the marriage are considered by law as "the contract bearing fruit" which means the children basically belong to the State and you are only allowed to care for them as long as (you guessed it) follow their acts, statutes and codes because when you registered your child with the birth certificate you basically gave up ownership....look up what "register" means in Black's Law dictionary...you will be amazed and stunned.

"This was established in the US in the 1930's by two doctrines. The first is the Doctrine of Parens Patriae. The second is the Doctrine of In Loco Parentis. Parens Patriae means literally "the parent of the country" or to put it more bluntly - the State is the undisclosed true parent. Along this line, a 1930's Arizona Supreme Court case states that parents have no property right in their children, and have custody of their children during good behavior at the sufferance of the State". This means you get to keep your kids as long as you don't piss off the State. If parents do something that displeases the State, they can come in and take control of the children. Parents are only conditional caretakers (thus the Doctrine of In Loco Parentis)
The marriage license is simply an ongoing contractual relationship between the husband, wife and state. It's a trinity, just like a pyramid, with the State on top. Technically, a marriage license is nothing but the merging of two corporate entities merging into one because under UCC and your all-caps strawman fiction that was created when your parents signed the birth certificate, you are a corporation.

"The "divorce" is merely a contractual dissolution or amendment of the terms and conditions of the contract. Jurisdiction over the marriage, husband and wife, by the state, now separated, continues over all aspects of the marriage, including over marital property and the children brought into the marriage. That is why Family Law and the Domestic Relations court calls "divorce" a dissolution of the marriage, because the contract continues in operation but in amended or modified form. The marriage license contract is one of the strongest, most binding contractual relationships the State has on people.This is why time and time again CPS feels that they can just come in and take over your children, because according to the marriage license (along with numerous other unrevealed contracts), they have legal jurisdiction over your children without you really knowing or understanding why. Much of this also goes back to the 14th amendment, your all capitalized name and each persons name being incorporated, thus giving the states and Feds authority over you." This is just another chapter of how we became enslaved via the 13th amendment and how we have all become enslaved once again, by these dangerous and hidden adhesion contracts because we are not under Common Law but rather Admiralty law.
.

 

[Dovahkiin]

Do people really care if he's gay or not?

 

[mdk]

Votto is swiftly becoming the forum's TMZ correspondent. lol

 

[Eaglewings]

What's incoherent? He might have had a gay friend, likely if he was invited to the wedding. So he showed up instead of making a political statement like most people do. I don't understand why dirt needs to be thrown around, if one disagrees with someone just disagree.

Saving this for when Iceweasle posts about Obama...lol

 

[Iceweasel]

What's incoherent? He might have had a gay friend, likely if he was invited to the wedding. So he showed up instead of making a political statement like most people do. I don't understand why dirt needs to be thrown around, if one disagrees with someone just disagree.

Saving this for when Iceweasle posts about Obama...lol

I attack his policies, ass stain. Not everyone is a clone of you.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Do people really care if he's gay or not?

Should we assume you mean besides Votto?

In another thread he posted a pic purporting to be a young, buff Rubio in some sort of gay revue. Interestingly enough, the one selected to be Rubio was the hunkiest of the partially clad gay latin stallions in question.

Coincidence? I don't thinbk so!

 

[Tom Horn]

Votto has a stiffy for Rubio and thinks that's Marco's fault.

 

[Bonzi]

Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice

According to Rubio, he does not think that being gay is a choice but also thinks that marriage should remain between a man and a woman. He even attended a gay marriage even though he said that he did not support the decision.

This is interesting in light of recent allegations that the Senator attended bath houses in Miami in his early days. If it's true, then he is either bisexual or currently living al lie. It is also interesting that he would attend a marriage he did not support.

Can anyone figure this incoherent stance out?

Yes, it means people make mistakes and can be inconsistent.
It's weird, and hurts his credibility no doubt.

 

[Votto]

Votto is swiftly becoming the forum's TMZ correspondent. lol

The reason I started another thread is because my last one got nixed. Nothing pisses me off more.

 

[mdk]

Votto is swiftly becoming the forum's TMZ correspondent. lol

The reason I started another thread is because my last one got nixed. Nothing pisses me off more.

I know. I was having a good time in the other thread as well.

 

[Votto]

Do people really care if he's gay or not?

Yes, people care. Rubio is trying to win the votes of Evangelicals, so he is selling them a bill of goods I think.

But what has already been said is important to note, why do we care what these people think about sex? It is important because they are empowering certain segments of society based on their sexuality. We have leaders that divide and conquer segments of the population based upon what they think of peoples sexuality. Why is a secular state involved in such matters?

Do we want a President who calls up a famous NBA player and congratulating him for coming out and saying he likes to take a schlong up his rear?

 

[Votto]

Votto is swiftly becoming the forum's TMZ correspondent. lol

The reason I started another thread is because my last one got nixed. Nothing pisses me off more.

I know. I was having a good time in the other thread as well.

Why in the hell was it snuffed out?