Those that support same sex Marriage.

[RetiredGySgt]

Got a couple questions for ya.

Do you support Incestuous adult relationships and think they have the right to marry?

Do you support multiple partners and think they all have the right to get married?

 

[del]

no.

don't support people marrying their pets either.

 

[strollingbones]

supporting is one thing...thinking they should be allowed to marry is another thing...

i have no probems with adults marrying period....as far as multiple marriages that is still done ...i think the legal aspects and entanglements will always make it too complex for a 'legal' mutiple wedding. plus if you legally marriage more than one spouse the law becomes involved....it is still an illegal act to have more than one spouse...most people i know with multiple spouses just do a lot of paper work to take care of their spouses.

 

[strollingbones]

why del? not the pet issue, i got that...but why the others?

 

[del]

why del? not the pet issue, i got that...but why the others?

i guess i should clarify.

i don't support them, but i wouldn't actively oppose them, either.

i like to mind my own business about things like that, mostly.

 

[Ravi]

IMO, any two consenting adults should be able to enter a contract that benefits them in the same way as a traditional marriage benefits me.

The government shouldn't be involved in the sex lives of consenting adults.

 

[DiamondDave]

IMO, any two consenting adults should be able to enter a contract that benefits them in the same way as a traditional marriage benefits me.

The government shouldn't be involved in the sex lives of consenting adults.

But that is not marriage... that is simply a legal contract ensuring things such as inheritance, power of attorney in times of injury or emergency, joint tax return, etc....

But when 'civil unions' that do not equal marriage are brought up as alternatives, the majority of the 'gay marriage' supporters reject this

As for the sex lives part.. again that leaves out things that should be illegal such as incest... and as for gay marriage, you currently do not see the government getting involved with the sex lives part or stopping the sex lives part.. but you do see people trying to keep government out of redefining the long held definition of the institution of marriage

 

[Ravi]

IMO, any two consenting adults should be able to enter a contract that benefits them in the same way as a traditional marriage benefits me.

The government shouldn't be involved in the sex lives of consenting adults.

But that is not marriage... that is simply a legal contract ensuring things such as inheritance, power of attorney in times of injury or emergency, joint tax return, etc....

But when 'civil unions' that do not equal marriage are brought up as alternatives, the majority of the 'gay marriage' supporters reject this

As for the sex lives part.. again that leaves out things that should be illegal such as incest... and as for gay marriage, you currently do not see the government getting involved with the sex lives part or stopping the sex lives part.. but you do see people trying to keep government out of redefining the long held definition of the institution of marriage

There are no civil unions that currently receive the same benefits that traditionally married couples receive.

The word marriage should be bestowed by a private organization, not the government.

 

[DiamondDave]

IMO, any two consenting adults should be able to enter a contract that benefits them in the same way as a traditional marriage benefits me.

The government shouldn't be involved in the sex lives of consenting adults.

But that is not marriage... that is simply a legal contract ensuring things such as inheritance, power of attorney in times of injury or emergency, joint tax return, etc....

But when 'civil unions' that do not equal marriage are brought up as alternatives, the majority of the 'gay marriage' supporters reject this

As for the sex lives part.. again that leaves out things that should be illegal such as incest... and as for gay marriage, you currently do not see the government getting involved with the sex lives part or stopping the sex lives part.. but you do see people trying to keep government out of redefining the long held definition of the institution of marriage

There are no civil unions that currently receive the same benefits that traditionally married couples receive.

The word marriage should be bestowed by a private organization, not the government.

Did not say that there were.... but said when that option is brought up, it is regularly rejected by 'gay marriage' supporters...

And I have stated so many times that the government should not redefine marriage and should only be dealing with the recognition of legal domiciled family partners in terms of census, taxation, inheritance, power of attorney, etc as mentioned above

 

[Ravi]

But that is not marriage... that is simply a legal contract ensuring things such as inheritance, power of attorney in times of injury or emergency, joint tax return, etc....

But when 'civil unions' that do not equal marriage are brought up as alternatives, the majority of the 'gay marriage' supporters reject this

As for the sex lives part.. again that leaves out things that should be illegal such as incest... and as for gay marriage, you currently do not see the government getting involved with the sex lives part or stopping the sex lives part.. but you do see people trying to keep government out of redefining the long held definition of the institution of marriage

There are no civil unions that currently receive the same benefits that traditionally married couples receive.

The word marriage should be bestowed by a private organization, not the government.

Did not say that there were.... but said when that option is brought up, it is regularly rejected by 'gay marriage' supporters...

And I have stated so many times that the government should not redefine marriage and should only be dealing with the recognition of legal domiciled family partners in terms of census, taxation, inheritance, power of attorney, etc as mentioned above

The reason it is rejected by gay marriage supporters is because civil unions do not give gay couples the same benefits that married couples receive.

I don't understand why this is so difficult for you to understand.

 

[rightwinger]

Do you support Incestuous adult relationships and think they have the right to marry?

No

Do you support multiple partners and think they all have the right to get married?

I really don't care as long as they are consenting adults. If you are legally allowed to live with two women outside of marriage and have children with them, why can't you formalize your obligation to them? How does someone having two wives hurt me?
__________________

 

[DiamondDave]

There are no civil unions that currently receive the same benefits that traditionally married couples receive.

The word marriage should be bestowed by a private organization, not the government.

Did not say that there were.... but said when that option is brought up, it is regularly rejected by 'gay marriage' supporters...

And I have stated so many times that the government should not redefine marriage and should only be dealing with the recognition of legal domiciled family partners in terms of census, taxation, inheritance, power of attorney, etc as mentioned above

The reason it is rejected by gay marriage supporters is because civil unions do not give gay couples the same benefits that married couples receive.

I don't understand why this is so difficult for you to understand.

Horseshit.. what it does not give is the term marriage

When even shown the option that has all those benefits listed above.... the civil union is regularly rejected....

It is not about equal treatment under the law.... it is about forcing an agenda

I am all for civil unions for all adult citizens that the government allows into these civil unions in a family unit.... you want to file joint tax returns and make medical decisions and be listed as family by the census and all that other nifty stuff.. be my guest... that is what equality is all about... but you do not have the right to change the definition of what marriage is, just as you don't get the government to declare you a llama just because you want them to, whether you feel that deep down you are a llama or not

 

[Ravi]

You're wrong, DD, that's all there is too it.

Any couple can refer to themselves as married. Even if they aren't.

You are hung up on a word. They are hung up on not receiving the same benefits that straight people receive.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Do you support Incestuous adult relationships and think they have the right to marry?

No

Do you support multiple partners and think they all have the right to get married?

I really don't care as long as they are consenting adults. If you are legally allowed to live with two women outside of marriage and have children with them, why can't you formalize your obligation to them? How does someone having two wives hurt me?
__________________

How does an incestuous relationship between two consenting adults effect you? And if you say defects on birth, then do you support a law to bar those with KNOWN genetic defects from having children?

 

[DiamondDave]

You're wrong, DD, that's all there is too it.

Any couple can refer to themselves as married. Even if they aren't.

You are hung up on a word. They are hung up on not receiving the same benefits that straight people receive.

Can the government or should the government declare you a llama if you want to be one or if you feel you are one?

Nope... same damn thing

When offered the same legal benefits without the word.. it is regularly rejected by 'gay marriage' supporters.. which shows it is about an agenda, not legal equality

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Where are all those same sex supporters that keep using the phrases, loving couple, consenting adults, doesn't effect me, and all the other reasons same sex is ok but these are not?

I mean you have argued that the majority has no right to impose their values on the gay minority, why do they have that right to do so to Incestuous couples that are loving and adult? Why do they have the right to force their values on multiple partner families? What exactly is the difference?

 

[veritas]

A hetero incestuous marriage, as you put it, wouldn't be as hard put to get married as two gay people. Relatives not getting married is a matter of practicality and just ewww......but it wouldn't be hard to wangle yourself a new identify and make it happen.

Eying your sister are you?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A hetero incestuous marriage, as you put it, wouldn't be as hard put to get married as two gay people. Relatives not getting married is a matter of practicality and just ewww......but it wouldn't be hard to wangle yourself a new identify and make it happen.

Eying your sister are you?

Personal attacks are the usual antics of you guys. It is illegal for family members to get married, IF the argument is that the criteria is loving couples and consenting adults, followed by it has no effect on me, then what is the problem with incestuous couples marrying? And this includes cousins not just mother son, father daughter, brother sister.

As for me I am married now and have been for 26 years.

As for the ewww factor, I am afraid that applies for a lot of people on gay couples. And practicality has nothing to do with it. If the argument is gays should be able to marry explain why incestuous couples can not.

 

[JScott]

A hetero incestuous marriage, as you put it, wouldn't be as hard put to get married as two gay people. Relatives not getting married is a matter of practicality and just ewww......but it wouldn't be hard to wangle yourself a new identify and make it happen.

Eying your sister are you?

Personal attacks are the usual antics of you guys. It is illegal for family members to get married, IF the argument is that the criteria is loving couples and consenting adults, followed by it has no effect on me, then what is the problem with incestuous couples marrying? And this includes cousins not just mother son, father daughter, brother sister.

As for me I am married now and have been for 26 years.

As for the ewww factor, I am afraid that applies for a lot of people on gay couples. And practicality has nothing to do with it. If the argument is gays should be able to marry explain why incestuous couples can not.

Im all for this guy. Hes got the right answers. We should all have the right to marry our family members. He is so persuasive in his arguments that I think we should amend the constitution to allow incest. Maybe pets too....what ya say Sarge?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A hetero incestuous marriage, as you put it, wouldn't be as hard put to get married as two gay people. Relatives not getting married is a matter of practicality and just ewww......but it wouldn't be hard to wangle yourself a new identify and make it happen.

Eying your sister are you?

Personal attacks are the usual antics of you guys. It is illegal for family members to get married, IF the argument is that the criteria is loving couples and consenting adults, followed by it has no effect on me, then what is the problem with incestuous couples marrying? And this includes cousins not just mother son, father daughter, brother sister.

As for me I am married now and have been for 26 years.

As for the ewww factor, I am afraid that applies for a lot of people on gay couples. And practicality has nothing to do with it. If the argument is gays should be able to marry explain why incestuous couples can not.

Im all for this guy. Hes got the right answers. We should all have the right to marry our family members. He is so persuasive in his arguments that I think we should amend the constitution to allow incest. Maybe pets too....what ya say Sarge?

That will come right after gays get the right to marry.