What Constitutes a "Right?"

[PubliusInfinitum]

As far as I'm concerned, individuals can do any damn thing they want, as long as what they do does not usurp the means of another to exercise their rights.

Okay...so now you are okay with gays marrying as you wouldn't want to usurp their means to exercise their rights.

We are on the same page now.

Sis... homosexuals are not capable of marriage... that requires a full biological kit and homosexuals just aren't equipped for such.

They can pretend to be married of course... and as lond as they keep it to themselves... why the hell would I care?

My only issue with the twisted fucks is where they want to celebrate their bleeding asses...

Now to the board I'd ask: isn't it cool how the advocates of such ALWAYS run to issues of privacy... 'what's it matter to you what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their homes?"

When in truth... IF they had kept it private... it wouldn't be found being discussed in public.... It's like those "SECRET PLANS" they're always touting to have knowlegde of...

LOL...






Idiots.

[

But such would be a cultural acceptance of abnormal sexual behavior as acceptable and normal... thus where individuals are coming into sexual awareness, they would be less inclined to avoid homosexuality and more likely to 'experiment' in such... thus be subject to all of the potential ramifications thereof.

That's if homosexuality is unnatural. I don't believe it is. Cultural acceptance is another thing all together. About time people grew the fuck up IMO. Nobody else's business but their own. I think homosexuality, in the western world, is well accepted except by a margin of small-minded conservatives, usually of a Christian bent.

They truly are the 'gift that keeps on giving...'

 

[Dr Grump]

They truly are the 'gift that keeps on giving...'

I know...problem is, you just don't get it. All you do is over-explain yourself, while the rest of us are laughing our arses off at your stupidity...

 

[Dr.Traveler]

If you look at the fact that taxation must be collected by force, and is obviously not voluntary, then I think you have to come to the conclusion that taxation is nothing more than theft.

You have the right to leave and find your own country.

Taxes are the price you pay to live in the community around you and to have access to the services provided therein. You make a decision on where to buy your land, and by buying land inside a community, you agree to participate and support that community.

If you do not like your taxation rate, or the services provided, you may take the opportunity to participate in those decisions by voting, or by running for elected office yourself. If you think the system as is is faulty, you have a civic duty to work towards improving it. Or leave. Those are the choices you have, as do the rest of the community.

 

[Oddball]

If you look at the fact that taxation must be collected by force, and is obviously not voluntary, then I think you have to come to the conclusion that taxation is nothing more than theft.

You have the right to leave and find your own country.

Taxes are the price you pay to live in the community around you and to have access to the services provided therein. You make a decision on where to buy your land, and by buying land inside a community, you agree to participate and support that community.

If you do not like your taxation rate, or the services provided, you may take the opportunity to participate in those decisions by voting, or by running for elected office yourself. If you think the system as is is faulty, you have a civic duty to work towards improving it. Or leave. Those are the choices you have, as do the rest of the community.

Total cop-out, since there is nowhere in America that runs their local gubmint services by any kind of free market models.

Taxes are the price we pay for gubmint that is too big, spends too much, and imposes itself into far too many lives of completely nonviolent people.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Are you actually saying that there are laws that state that a married couple must have sexual intercourse before the marriage is legally complete and fully valid?

Where are you from...the Middle Ages???

Show me a current law from any state in this country that clearly states that a marriage is not valid until the couple has sexual intercourse.

That is your assignment.

ROFLMNAO...

Well I don't know of any legal statute... but there's two relevant points here... First, my ignorance of such doesn't mean that there's not... and your standing on such is a flagrant ad ignorantum farce... Secondly, it's hilarious that you want to assert that what is legal equates to what is true and right.

...I'LL STOP RIGHT THERE AND NOT READ ANY FURTHER...

WAIT A MINUTE, BUSTER!

You are calling me out for "asserting what is legal..." when you yourself stated:

... to complete marriage: to make a marriage legally complete and fully valid by having sexual intercourse ...

YOU said that sexual intercourse is required to make a marriage legally complete.

I merely quoted Webster's Collegiate 2009... And this in repsonse to your query regarding marriage and sex as a requirement of such.

YOU said that sexual intercourse is required to make a marriage valid.

Yeah... and this based upon the principle of JOINING in Holy Matrimony... where two people join as one... for the purposes of procreation; family and the raising of children in the likeness of their progenitors... It's not a complex issue Sis...

This has NOTHING to do with "what is true and right".

False... but it does demonstrate the tedious nature of debating those who are incapable of comprehending sound principle. Debate is a function which serves to deduce what is true and right.

I stand by my statement that MARRIAGE AND SEXUAL INTERCOURSE ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE.

ROFLMNAO... Color me shocked...

Marriage is recognized by the Government. A marriage license is issued by the state.

And Potatos are on sale at Publix for 2.25 a bag; marked down from 2.99.

I don't like to think that the state is issuing license for two people to have sexual intercourse. That is why it is important to separate the two.

Well to be perfectly honest, I've noticed that you don't like to think at all. It seems to go against your very nature; so perhaps the effort is uncomfortable for you.

But Marriage is specifically, a license to JOIN... A license to engage in sexual intercourse for the purposes of procreation; where the progeny are nurtured and raised in a secure and stable household; where the JOINED progenitors are held accountable AS ONE, for their UNION and all that comes from it.

Marriage (from the perspective of the state) is a contractual joining of two individuals for legal purposes.

Yes... and those purposes noted above...

What's ironic here is that you've made it absolutely CRYSTAL clear that you oppose the principle of Marriage, except for the absolute LEAST notable functions of the license.

This thread is a clinic in the study of why Marriage as a concept has decayed to its present state; the reasoning which undermined it being paraded out in all it's debaucherous majesty...

The principles of Marriage are completely foreign to this individual... and here she is advocating for the JOINING OF TWO WHO CANNOT BE JOINED; two who cannot procreate... two who cannot nurture a family through the traits common to the respective genders...

To this Humanist Marriage is basically a short-form incorporation...

Now follow me here friends...

Recognize that as it is being presented... this member beleives that Marriage is nothing but a legal arrangement. She overtly rejects the fundamental aspects of marriage; the sanctity, the physical and metaphorical joining of two people to form one united entity...

To her, there is NO OTHER ASPECT OF MARRIAGE WHICH IS RELEVANT BUT A CIVIL LICENSE; Marriage is PURELY, wholly, solely, a legal recognition of the respective parties being legally bound and recognized by the state as one legal entity; so as to provide for the entitlement to the privileges enjoyed by such an institution.

Everyone up to speed?

Now where it has been noted, in thread after thread; on forum after forum... that such which is being described is readily available to anyone... having no standard regarding gender... as is the case in Marriage... that any two or more individuals can file application with the prerequisite fees and be united through Incorporation as one legal entity; to enjoy the benefits and privileges thereof in a matter of HOURS...

Such is rejected out of hand...

There's no sexual component, no gender component... its PURELY A LEGAL ARRANGEMENT...

EVERYTHING that has been erroneously projected as Marriage; and which they demand be recognized as the defining attributes of Marriage... RIGHT?

Except one teeny tiny little problem...

INCORPORATION DOES NOT PROVIDE THE CULTURAL VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE; AND IT DOES NOT BECAUSE INCORPORATION DOES NOT REST UPON THE SACRED PRINCIPLES UPON WHICH MARRIAGE RESTS; PRINCIPLES THAT THEY REJECT OUT OF HAND; PRINCIPLES WHICH THEY DEMAND BE STRIPPED FROM THE VERY CONCEPT OF MARRIAGE... AND PRINCIPLES, IN THE ABSENCE OF WHICH... THERE CAN BE NO POTENTIAL FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH VALIDITY; AND AS DELUDED AS IT IS, IT IS SOLELY THAT VALIDITY WHICH THEY COVET.

Lets remind ourselves of their position... Let's take another peek at the sterile interpretation of Marriage which they want to project... and recall as we do, that this projection is an ILLUSION... it is a LIE; and it is designed to delude the culture into tearing down the last fragment of cultural viability...

Sexual intercourse (from the perspective of the state) is none of their business and will not be regulated or promoted by the Government.

As position which seeks to provide for the marriage of homo-SEXUALS ...

Now is everyone up to speed?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

They truly are the 'gift that keeps on giving...'

I know...problem is, you just don't get it. All you do is over-explain yourself, while the rest of us are laughing our arses off at your stupidity...

Oh I believe that you believe that that is true...

And it's THAT which makes it so damn entertaining...

You actually believe that this issue is one which is limited to PRIVATE BEHAVIOR; even as you DEMAND PUBLIC POLICY TO ACCOMODATE THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE WOULD-BE PRIVATE BEHAVIOR!

Absolutely hysterical... in at least two contexts and on several levels.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Total cop-out, since there is nowhere in America that runs their local gubmint services by any kind of free market models.

Taxes are the price we pay for gubmint that is too big, spends too much, and imposes itself into far too many lives of completely nonviolent people.

Then leave America, or run for office and fix it yourself.

You make a decision to live in your community, which means you make a decision to abide by the laws therein. Among those are taxation laws, which provide for the goods and services the community as a whole provides.

Again, if you do not like your community, leave and find another.

 

[Intense]

If you look at the fact that taxation must be collected by force, and is obviously not voluntary, then I think you have to come to the conclusion that taxation is nothing more than theft.

You have the right to leave and find your own country.

Taxes are the price you pay to live in the community around you and to have access to the services provided therein. You make a decision on where to buy your land, and by buying land inside a community, you agree to participate and support that community.

If you do not like your taxation rate, or the services provided, you may take the opportunity to participate in those decisions by voting, or by running for elected office yourself. If you think the system as is is faulty, you have a civic duty to work towards improving it. Or leave. Those are the choices you have, as do the rest of the community.

We live under Government by the Government for the Government. Do the Math. .

We Need Reform. Oversight, Transparency, and Your favorite, ..... Accountability.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

If you look at the fact that taxation must be collected by force, and is obviously not voluntary, then I think you have to come to the conclusion that taxation is nothing more than theft.

You have the right to leave and find your own country.

Taxes are the price you pay to live in the community around you and to have access to the services provided therein. You make a decision on where to buy your land, and by buying land inside a community, you agree to participate and support that community.

If you do not like your taxation rate, or the services provided, you may take the opportunity to participate in those decisions by voting, or by running for elected office yourself. If you think the system as is is faulty, you have a civic duty to work towards improving it. Or leave. Those are the choices you have, as do the rest of the community.

We live under Government by the Government for the Government. Do the Math. .

We Need Reform. Oversight, Transparency, and Your favorite, ..... Accountability.

Again, your choices are leave or get involves. Vote, or run for office. The system we have now has methods we can utilize to demand more accountability.

If that is too hard, or if you are unhappy at the speed at which reform moves, then you can leave. It is that simple.

You make a choice to live in the community you live in. You can make a different choice.

 

[Intense]

You have the right to leave and find your own country.

Taxes are the price you pay to live in the community around you and to have access to the services provided therein. You make a decision on where to buy your land, and by buying land inside a community, you agree to participate and support that community.

If you do not like your taxation rate, or the services provided, you may take the opportunity to participate in those decisions by voting, or by running for elected office yourself. If you think the system as is is faulty, you have a civic duty to work towards improving it. Or leave. Those are the choices you have, as do the rest of the community.

We live under Government by the Government for the Government. Do the Math. .

We Need Reform. Oversight, Transparency, and Your favorite, ..... Accountability.

Again, your choices are leave or get involves. Vote, or run for office. The system we have now has methods we can utilize to demand more accountability.

If that is too hard, or if you are unhappy at the speed at which reform moves, then you can leave. It is that simple.

You make a choice to live in the community you live in. You can make a different choice.

Your Post is a Cop Out, your choices are as limited as your perspective.

When One see's Injustice, Speak Out, make a Difference. Make a Stand. I speak of Reform and You say I should move. That's pretty chicken shit. I do not advocate overthrowing the system, but amending through Rule of Law.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

We live under Government by the Government for the Government. Do the Math. .

We Need Reform. Oversight, Transparency, and Your favorite, ..... Accountability.

Again, your choices are leave or get involves. Vote, or run for office. The system we have now has methods we can utilize to demand more accountability.

If that is too hard, or if you are unhappy at the speed at which reform moves, then you can leave. It is that simple.

You make a choice to live in the community you live in. You can make a different choice.

Your Post is a Cop Out, your choices are as limited as your perspective.

When One see's Injustice, Speak Out, make a Difference. Make a Stand. I speak of Reform and You say I should move. That's pretty chicken shit. I do not advocate overthrowing the system, but amending through Rule of Law.

You can vote, you can contact your congress person, you can protest. You can even run for office yourself.

If you do not like the options legally available to you, you can move.

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

 

[Oddball]

Again, your choices are leave or get involves. Vote, or run for office. The system we have now has methods we can utilize to demand more accountability.

If that is too hard, or if you are unhappy at the speed at which reform moves, then you can leave. It is that simple.

You make a choice to live in the community you live in. You can make a different choice.

Your Post is a Cop Out, your choices are as limited as your perspective.

When One see's Injustice, Speak Out, make a Difference. Make a Stand. I speak of Reform and You say I should move. That's pretty chicken shit. I do not advocate overthrowing the system, but amending through Rule of Law.

You can vote, you can contact your congress person, you can protest. You can even run for office yourself.

If you do not like the options legally available to you, you can move.

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

Amurrica....Luv it r leave it.

 

[Oddball]

Total cop-out, since there is nowhere in America that runs their local gubmint services by any kind of free market models.

Taxes are the price we pay for gubmint that is too big, spends too much, and imposes itself into far too many lives of completely nonviolent people.

Then leave America, or run for office and fix it yourself.

You make a decision to live in your community, which means you make a decision to abide by the laws therein. Among those are taxation laws, which provide for the goods and services the community as a whole provides.

Again, if you do not like your community, leave and find another.

Repeating the cop out over and over and over again doesn't make it less of a cop out.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

You have the right to leave and find your own country.

Taxes are the price you pay to live in the community around you and to have access to the services provided therein. You make a decision on where to buy your land, and by buying land inside a community, you agree to participate and support that community.

If you do not like your taxation rate, or the services provided, you may take the opportunity to participate in those decisions by voting, or by running for elected office yourself. If you think the system as is is faulty, you have a civic duty to work towards improving it. Or leave. Those are the choices you have, as do the rest of the community.

We live under Government by the Government for the Government. Do the Math. .

We Need Reform. Oversight, Transparency, and Your favorite, ..... Accountability.

Again, your choices are leave or get involves. Vote, or run for office. The system we have now has methods we can utilize to demand more accountability.

If that is too hard, or if you are unhappy at the speed at which reform moves, then you can leave. It is that simple.

You make a choice to live in the community you live in. You can make a different choice.

Well that's fascinatin'...

Its as if engaging in public debate, wherein those very advocacies are being advanced is somehow less than 'running for office.'

Here's the thing... everyone can't run for office... but we can vote and in 2010, you'll see the effects of advocating for policy which has been rejected by a decisive majority.

The Tea-Party in DC was illustrative of such and the collapse of the Healthcare 'plan' that was on the table, that had it been brought to a vote 4 months ago, WOULD have been signed into law... but which was NOT brought to a vote because of the hue and cry from the electorate; embodied in the Tea-Parties... all of which required that to vote the bill up would have required TOTAL OWNERSHIP OF THE BILL by the Left... which would have left the LEFT ACCOUNTABLE FOR SUCH; thus it was NOT voted up and has now found itself floundering because those who DEMAND THAT THE BILL IS WIDELY EMBARACED COULD NOT CONJUR THE COURAGE TO SIMPLE TAKE TANGIBLE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR WORDS AND VOTES.

We're not leaving Doc... not by a long shot. And what's more; while we're a patient people... we're not so tolerant that there is no point where we will forcibly impart our will on those who make such absurd demands, in response to and defense of their attempt to force their will upon us.

And THAT sir, is why the Healthcare Bill is hasn't been passed...

BUT! With that said... If you disagree; if you truly feel that there is a legitimate RIGHT of the Legislature to tax us into extinction... PASS IT! And watch what happens...

The Left has a total lock on the Federal Government... with super majorities in BOTH houses... Man-UP girls... Dictate your legislative will on the sum of individuals who you've sworn to represent and test the notion that Americans really do not have the stomach to remove a standing government on the same principles which lead it into existance.

Hell you COULD BE right... and all ya have to do is to PASS YOUR SOCIALIZED HEALTHCARE BILL to find out.

Nothing to it...

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

Amurrica....Luv it r leave it.

You have legal means to try to change things. You can even work to get the ball rolling on calling a Constitutional Convention if you really want to aim big. If you are unhappy with the options available, or you are unwilling to live up to your responsibilities as a member of the community, then again, you can leave.

I'm sorry you see that as a cop out, but those are your options.

 

[Intense]

Again, your choices are leave or get involves. Vote, or run for office. The system we have now has methods we can utilize to demand more accountability.

If that is too hard, or if you are unhappy at the speed at which reform moves, then you can leave. It is that simple.

You make a choice to live in the community you live in. You can make a different choice.

Your Post is a Cop Out, your choices are as limited as your perspective.

When One see's Injustice, Speak Out, make a Difference. Make a Stand. I speak of Reform and You say I should move. That's pretty chicken shit. I do not advocate overthrowing the system, but amending through Rule of Law.

You can vote, you can contact your congress person, you can protest. You can even run for office yourself.

If you do not like the options legally available to you, you can move.

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

Wrong, Our First obligation is to an authority higher than Government. No Government has Dominion over Your Conscience.



1.Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society. Before any man can be considerd as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe: And if a member of Civil Society, do it with a saving of his allegiance to the Universal Sovereign. We maintain therefore that in matters of Religion, no man's right is abridged by the institution of Civil Society and that Religion is wholly exempt from its cognizance. True it is, that no other rule exists, by which any question which may divide a Society, can be ultimately determined, but the will of the majority; but it is also true that the majority may trespass on the rights of the minority.
2.Because Religion be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: it is limited with regard to the co-ordinate departments, more necessarily is it limited with regard to the constituents. The preservation of a free Government requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The People who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them, and are slaves. - James Madison

 

[Oddball]

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

Amurrica....Luv it r leave it.

You have legal means to try to change things. You can even work to get the ball rolling on calling a Constitutional Convention if you really want to aim big. If you are unhappy with the options available, or you are unwilling to live up to your responsibilities as a member of the community, then again, you can leave.

I'm sorry you see that as a cop out, but those are your options.

Gubmint is our servant, not our master.

Playing "if you don't like it, get out" is the attitude of a master, not a servant.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

You can vote, you can contact your congress person, you can protest. You can even run for office yourself.

If you do not like the options legally available to you, you can move.

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

Wrong, Our First obligation is to an authority higher than Government. No Government has Dominion over Your Conscience.

And should the laws of your community conflict with what you consider to be a higher obligation, you can participate to try to change things or leave.

You always have the choice to participate or leave.

 

[Intense]

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

Amurrica....Luv it r leave it.

You have legal means to try to change things. You can even work to get the ball rolling on calling a Constitutional Convention if you really want to aim big. If you are unhappy with the options available, or you are unwilling to live up to your responsibilities as a member of the community, then again, you can leave.

I'm sorry you see that as a cop out, but those are your options.

I'd prefer one amendment at a time, cannot trust those Squirrelly Schemers. Hamilton really fucked us up last time. One Issue at a time, All relevant Concerns on the Table for Discussion, with a good Dictionary on the table, to help Distinguish Intent.

 

[Oddball]

You can vote, you can contact your congress person, you can protest. You can even run for office yourself.

If you do not like the options legally available to you, you can move.

You make a choice to live in a community, which means you make a choice to agree to be bound by those laws. There are legal options available, use them. Or move.

Wrong, Our First obligation is to an authority higher than Government. No Government has Dominion over Your Conscience.

And should the laws of your community conflict with what you consider to be a higher obligation, you can participate to try to change things or leave.

You always have the choice to participate or leave.

If those are your only "choices", then you in fact have no choices.