Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
No species is homosexual. If they were, they would have died out a long time ago. There might be mutant individuals within a species that somehow acquired a perverse instinct towards unnatural inclinations. But that does not mean anything for the species as a whole.
If it's simply a Right that Everyone has, then Siblings have the same Right...
If you southern fundies want to marry your siblings, you'll simply have to take your case to court. If no compelling state reason can be found to prevent you from marrying your sister, then you and she can run off to Vegas.
Heterosexuality and Homosexuality are Inherently NOT Equal.
Homosexuals Defy their Heterosexual Physical Design by Nature, which they are FREE to do...
Where the Line is is when you Expect the other 95% of Society to Embrace it as something it's Not... Equal.
Have a Civil Union and Smile... Feel lucky Islam isn't the Law here.
peace...
You are not required to accept or embrace, only tolerate. Homosexuality is found in hundreds of animal species (i.e. in "nature") so how do you defy nature with something found in nature?
You fundies make no sense...which is why your anti-gay rhetoric is losing in the world of public opinion...
No species is homosexual. If they were, they would have died out a long time ago.
There might be mutant individuals within a species that somehow acquired a perverse instinct towards unnatural inclinations. But that does not mean anything for the species as a whole.
No one is required to tolerate homosexuality. Any more than anyone is required to tolerate statutory rape or shoplifting.
Homosexuals have every right to marry, just like heterosexuals. They are denied nothing, except societal recognition that their perverse "lifestyle" is normal. And that's what this is really all about.
Life is sure gonna suck for you when gay marriage is a reality across the country.You are not required to accept or embrace, only tolerate. Homosexuality is found in hundreds of animal species (i.e. in "nature") so how do you defy nature with something found in nature?
You fundies make no sense...which is why your anti-gay rhetoric is losing in the world of public opinion...
No species is homosexual. If they were, they would have died out a long time ago.
There might be mutant individuals within a species that somehow acquired a perverse instinct towards unnatural inclinations. But that does not mean anything for the species as a whole.
No one is required to tolerate homosexuality. Any more than anyone is required to tolerate statutory rape or shoplifting.
Homosexuals have every right to marry, just like heterosexuals. They are denied nothing, except societal recognition that their perverse "lifestyle" is normal. And that's what this is really all about.
Posted this before... but I'll post it again...
Get government out of marriage or whatever else you wish to call a family unit of whatever kind, except for in the legal sense... I.E. where legal matters apply... inheritance, power of attorney for emergencies, taxation, etc....
Posted this before... but I'll post it again...
Get government out of marriage or whatever else you wish to call a family unit of whatever kind, except for in the legal sense... I.E. where legal matters apply... inheritance, power of attorney for emergencies, taxation, etc....
What someone else chooses to do between them as consenting adults is their business... BUT... I should not be forced by the government to accept the choices of others... I do not have to accept someone who commits crimes, or curses like a sailor, or hates dogs, or chews with their mouth open, or wears hot pants, or whatever else... in public I must tolerate the actions of others I may not agree with, BUT I should not and will not be forced to accept choices by law... even though I personally have the utmost respect for my gay friends, enjoy having them over for parties and visits, etc... I do not agree with a law that forces that acceptance upon the entire citizenry
Heterosexuality and Homosexuality are Inherently NOT Equal.
Homosexuals Defy their Heterosexual Physical Design by Nature, which they are FREE to do...
Where the Line is is when you Expect the other 95% of Society to Embrace it as something it's Not... Equal.
Have a Civil Union and Smile... Feel lucky Islam isn't the Law here.
peace...
You are not required to accept or embrace, only tolerate. Homosexuality is found in hundreds of animal species (i.e. in "nature") so how do you defy nature with something found in nature?
You fundies make no sense...which is why your anti-gay rhetoric is losing in the world of public opinion...
No species is homosexual. If they were, they would have died out a long time ago.
There might be mutant individuals within a species that somehow acquired a perverse instinct towards unnatural inclinations. But that does not mean anything for the species as a whole.
No one is required to tolerate homosexuality. Any more than anyone is required to tolerate statutory rape or shoplifting.
Homosexuals have every right to marry, just like heterosexuals. They are denied nothing, except societal recognition that their perverse "lifestyle" is normal. And that's what this is really all about.
I am of the persuasion that the approach gay activists have been taking is grossly wrong. Marriage is really just an agreement (or contract, promise, covenant; call it what you please) between two consenting adults. All individuals have the inherent right to form contractual agreements with each other.
So marriage is a right, right? Wrong. In American society, marriage is a government granted privilege. You can't get married unless the government gives you the OK. Government has taken away the right of marriage from all of us and replaced it with a privilege that it has the sole power to hand out and regulate.
Rather than call for expanding the privilege by making gay marriage legal, proponents of gay marriage (or those dislike gay marriage but still say it should be legal) should be demanding that government get out of marriage altogether. Marriage is a type of contract that has been perverted into a privilege. If you want the right to marry, repeal that perversion.
Furthermore, who needs to be convinced that gay marriage should be allowed? Social conservatives who often are in favor of smaller government everywhere else, that's who. Making the argument that marriage should be returned to the private sector and government should be reduced would probably be more persuasive than demanding that government further expand its granted privileges. The approach taken is another sad example of current societal tendencies to turn to government for answers rather than the free market.
That's my two cents.
I am of the persuasion that the approach gay activists have been taking is grossly wrong. Marriage is really just an agreement (or contract, promise, covenant; call it what you please) between two consenting adults. All individuals have the inherent right to form contractual agreements with each other.
So marriage is a right, right? Wrong. In American society, marriage is a government granted privilege. You can't get married unless the government gives you the OK. Government has taken away the right of marriage from all of us and replaced it with a privilege that it has the sole power to hand out and regulate.
Rather than call for expanding the privilege by making gay marriage legal, proponents of gay marriage (or those dislike gay marriage but still say it should be legal) should be demanding that government get out of marriage altogether. Marriage is a type of contract that has been perverted into a privilege. If you want the right to marry, repeal that perversion.
Furthermore, who needs to be convinced that gay marriage should be allowed? Social conservatives who often are in favor of smaller government everywhere else, that's who. Making the argument that marriage should be returned to the private sector and government should be reduced would probably be more persuasive than demanding that government further expand its granted privileges. The approach taken is another sad example of current societal tendencies to turn to government for answers rather than the free market.
That's my two cents.
These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888). To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.
It is a right...per at least two Supreme Court decisions...a fundamental right.
You seriously don't know the difference between a right and a privilege? Explains a lot. All marriage is a privilege. We have a right to marriage, my God.
You have the right to remain silent. The right to a court-appointed attorney. You have the right to sing the blues. You have the right to cable TV. You have the right to sublet. You have the right to paint the walls. No loud colors
Posted this before... but I'll post it again...
Get government out of marriage or whatever else you wish to call a family unit of whatever kind, except for in the legal sense... I.E. where legal matters apply... inheritance, power of attorney for emergencies, taxation, etc....
What someone else chooses to do between them as consenting adults is their business... BUT... I should not be forced by the government to accept the choices of others... I do not have to accept someone who commits crimes, or curses like a sailor, or hates dogs, or chews with their mouth open, or wears hot pants, or whatever else... in public I must tolerate the actions of others I may not agree with, BUT I should not and will not be forced to accept choices by law... even though I personally have the utmost respect for my gay friends, enjoy having them over for parties and visits, etc... I do not agree with a law that forces that acceptance upon the entire citizenry
How are you being forced to accept the choices of others? You say you have respect for your gay friends, but don't say what they're doing that you have to accept, despite saying there's a legal component involved? Heterosexual couples force things on others, lsuch as childless individuals paying for their children's education. What are same sex couples who want to get married doing that's even close to that?
I am of the persuasion that the approach gay activists have been taking is grossly wrong. Marriage is really just an agreement (or contract, promise, covenant; call it what you please) between two consenting adults. All individuals have the inherent right to form contractual agreements with each other.
So marriage is a right, right? Wrong. In American society, marriage is a government granted privilege. You can't get married unless the government gives you the OK. Government has taken away the right of marriage from all of us and replaced it with a privilege that it has the sole power to hand out and regulate.
Rather than call for expanding the privilege by making gay marriage legal, proponents of gay marriage (or those dislike gay marriage but still say it should be legal) should be demanding that government get out of marriage altogether. Marriage is a type of contract that has been perverted into a privilege. If you want the right to marry, repeal that perversion.
Furthermore, who needs to be convinced that gay marriage should be allowed? Social conservatives who often are in favor of smaller government everywhere else, that's who. Making the argument that marriage should be returned to the private sector and government should be reduced would probably be more persuasive than demanding that government further expand its granted privileges. The approach taken is another sad example of current societal tendencies to turn to government for answers rather than the free market.
That's my two cents.
i'm afraid it's you that's wrong on the bolded part and i'll direct your attention to Loving v Virginia:
These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888). To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual, and cannot be infringed by the State.
Loving v. Virginia
It's really important, when opining about constitutional issues, that one looks at the caselaw.
oh... and this has been said upteenth times, but apparently has to be repeated.... the state CANNOT get out of marriage because marriage conveys over 1,000 rights and obligations. nor should or could only religious pairings be called "marriage" because that would be discriminatory.
crickets
Posted this before... but I'll post it again...
Get government out of marriage or whatever else you wish to call a family unit of whatever kind, except for in the legal sense... I.E. where legal matters apply... inheritance, power of attorney for emergencies, taxation, etc....
Since marriage is a legal state, how do you propose doing that?
Posted this before... but I'll post it again...
Get government out of marriage or whatever else you wish to call a family unit of whatever kind, except for in the legal sense... I.E. where legal matters apply... inheritance, power of attorney for emergencies, taxation, etc....
Since marriage is a legal state, how do you propose doing that?
Simple... repeal all federal laws about marriage... hell, the government has leaped and bounded into other complex or difficult areas
I know once the government gets its hands into something, it is hard to pry all that away... and I know it is a pipe dream... but it indeed can be done... keeping family units as legal contracts... keeping it about the things that government is supposed to have dominion over, and not all this touchy feely bullshit
Since marriage is a legal state, how do you propose doing that?
Simple... repeal all federal laws about marriage... hell, the government has leaped and bounded into other complex or difficult areas
I know once the government gets its hands into something, it is hard to pry all that away... and I know it is a pipe dream... but it indeed can be done... keeping family units as legal contracts... keeping it about the things that government is supposed to have dominion over, and not all this touchy feely bullshit
So there's the lie that the gay agenda is not about threatening my marriage.
How do you adjudicate inheritance claims? Or any other?
It is a right...per at least two Supreme Court decisions...a fundamental right.
You seriously don't know the difference between a right and a privilege? Explains a lot. All marriage is a privilege. We have a right to marriage, my God.
You have the right to remain silent. The right to a court-appointed attorney. You have the right to sing the blues. You have the right to cable TV. You have the right to sublet. You have the right to paint the walls. No loud colors
