Bevin: Same-Sex Marriage Will Lead To Parent-Child Marriage

[NYcarbineer]

There is no good reason for homosexuality not to be acceptable.

I support the legalization of drugs. I support the legalization of prostitution and gambling. It is not the right of a society to impose restrictions on behaviors that do not injure uninvolved parties.

If a man wants to pay for sex, and a person is willing to accept payment, this is no ones business save the two involved.

But to try and peddle this as "normal and healthy" is a perversion of reality.

The same is true in regard to homosexuality. It is a vice, a victimless activity that is the business of no one save those engaging in it. But it is not, nor will it ever be, the equivalent to a legitimate family structure.

Now what is your reason for denying the right to marry to a brother and sister over that age of 18? How does that differ from arguments that homosexuals have their relationships honored?

What is unhealthy about 2 people of the same sex getting married?

 

[DriftingSand]

Bevin: Same-Sex Marriage Will Lead To Parent-Child Marriage | Right Wing Watch


Sen. Mitch McConnell’s Tea Party-aligned primary challenger Matt Bevin jumped on the ruling and criticized McConnell over his ties to the judge:

I'm deeply disappointed in Judge Heyburn's decision to overturn Kentucky's right to determine the definition of marriage within its own borders. This type of judicial activism hurts America's democratic process.

It is no surprise that Judge Heyburn was Mitch McConnell's general counsel and McConnell recommended him for the federal bench. Kentucky deserves better.
Yesterday on The Janet Mefferd Show, Bevin continued to rail against “judicial activism” and told the anti-gay talk show host that he would be a strong opponent of marriage equality in the Senate.

“Where do you draw the line?” Bevin asked. “If it’s all right to have same-sex marriages, why not define a marriage — because at the end of the day a lot of this ends up being taxes and who can visit who in the hospital and there’s other repressions and things that come with it — so a person may want to define themselves as being married to one of their children so that they can then in fact pass on certain things to that child financially and otherwise. Where do you draw the line?”

Good for Bevin! A man who stands on moral principle and who truly represents his constituents.

 

[Uncensored2008]

What is unhealthy about 2 people of the same sex getting married?

What is unhealthy about a brother and sister getting married?

What is unhealthy about marrying a blow up doll, or a vibrator?

Why do you ask stupid questions?

 

[NYcarbineer]

You said in post#93 that all the examples I provided are signs of a destabilizing society. Divorcees re-marrying, single parents, having an elderly relative move in were all included.

Single parenting and divorce are indeed signs of a crumbling society. The nonsense about parents is just a straw man you have erected.

And the nuclear family is relatively new. In the 19th century, extended families were the norm so as to provide labor in an agricultural society. In anindustrialized society, the mobility of the nuclear family became the norm. And as our society evolves from industrial to service/information, the family structure evolves in kind.

You seem quite confused by terms.

The nucleus in no way excludes extension. Extended family must, by definition, build upon nuclear family structures.



Are you just reading talking points from GLAAD?

Can't you do better than utterly stupid slogans?

Marriage encourages the male to remain and raise children. The people get old does not alter this. I always found that one of the more stupid talking points - even 30 years ago when people still thought it was a "gotcha."

And the argument against the wedding of siblings is a point of law, not an opinion.

So is homosexual union. A concerted effort has been made by those with sinister motives toward the health and well being of our society to change not just the law, but the culture, to promote this.

Given that identical techniques are already deployed in the case of incest, it is difficult to claim that the move is not underway to "normalize" incest.

Fact is, incest is the new gay.

You are flailing to make a cogent point. You have not provided a legal basis for denying same sex marriage. You present straw man arguments and warped perceptions as unassailable logic. You have utterly failed to convince anyone but yourself of your narrow views and faux morality.

Oh, I've made my point quite effectively.

It's not up to homosexuals who are not brothers or sisters to argue about incest. Your rights as a homosexual are the only issue.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Outed myself, as what?

The issue of your intellectual inconsistency, which you have continued to avoid here, has nothing to do with court rulings.

You are neither intellectually or morally consistent, Steinlight.

Your own words condemn you.

You are clearly outside the boundaries of your knowledge, as are most homofascists.

Homofascist? LOL. Now to avoid your intellectual inconsistency, you are making up words to slur me. You lost the debate right there.

Yup, you are wandering in the wilderness.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What is unhealthy about 2 people of the same sex getting married?

What is unhealthy about a brother and sister getting married?

What is unhealthy about marrying a blow up doll, or a vibrator?

Why do you ask stupid questions?

If a man and woman who want the right to get married don't have to address brother/sister marriage questions,

why would two men, or two women?

Again, what is unhealthy about 2 people of the same sex getting married?

You made the claim, now support it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

All of you who love to make these slippery slope arguments about marriage, I guess you don't realize that legalizing and recognizing civil man/woman marriage is where the slippery slope was created.

It's because opposite sex marriage was made a civil institution that you now have gays wanting their equal rights to civil marriage.

It's your slippery slope, deal with it.

 

[mal]

What is unhealthy about 2 people of the same sex getting married?

What is unhealthy about a brother and sister getting married?

What is unhealthy about marrying a blow up doll, or a vibrator?

Why do you ask stupid questions?

Since Marriage is not about Sex to NYCarby and the rest the simple answer is there is NOTHING Unhealthy about a Brother and a Sister Marrying.



peace...

 

[bendog]

Well, the turtle is gonna bury Bevin so ... who cares.

 

[nodoginnafight]

What is unhealthy about 2 people of the same sex getting married?

What is unhealthy about a brother and sister getting married?

What is unhealthy about marrying a blow up doll, or a vibrator?

Why do you ask stupid questions?

You didn't answer his question.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What is unhealthy about 2 people of the same sex getting married?

What is unhealthy about a brother and sister getting married?

What is unhealthy about marrying a blow up doll, or a vibrator?

Why do you ask stupid questions?

You didn't answer his question.

He won't answer the question because there is only one correct answer and that answer effectively destroys all arguments against same sex marriage that involve any claim of a resultant harm to society that would justify the government denying gays the right to same sex marriage.

 

[mal]

What is unhealthy about a brother and sister getting married?

What is unhealthy about marrying a blow up doll, or a vibrator?

Why do you ask stupid questions?

You didn't answer his question.

He won't answer the question because there is only one correct answer and that answer effectively destroys all arguments against same sex marriage that involve any claim of a resultant harm to society that would justify the government denying gays the right to same sex marriage.

You are avoiding the Obvious.. Deliberately.

There is no more Harm in a Daughter and Son Marrying than there is for two Men to Marry.

If there is, please Illustrate it.



peace...

 

[mal]

Matt Bevin suffers cognitive dysfunctionalism.

The issue is consent of adults. Children can't consent.

Offspring... The Implication was not Children below the Age of Consent.

Plenty of Grandmothers are helping their Daughters Raise a Child without a Father.

Using EVERY Argument FOR Gay Marriage, you would have to Support a Mother and Daughter getting the same Expanded Special Rights that Gays are Demanding in Marriage.



peace...

 

[Nosmo King]

You didn't answer his question.

He won't answer the question because there is only one correct answer and that answer effectively destroys all arguments against same sex marriage that involve any claim of a resultant harm to society that would justify the government denying gays the right to same sex marriage.

You are avoiding the Obvious.. Deliberately.

There is no more Harm in a Daughter and Son Marrying than there is for two Men to Marry.

If there is, please Illustrate it.



peace...

Marriage establishes a next of kin relationship. that relationship brings benefits not available to non married, or non next of kin people.

Siblings already have a next of kin relationship. Therefore a marriage contract would establish a secondary relationship that has no need to be.

 

[mal]

He won't answer the question because there is only one correct answer and that answer effectively destroys all arguments against same sex marriage that involve any claim of a resultant harm to society that would justify the government denying gays the right to same sex marriage.

You are avoiding the Obvious.. Deliberately.

There is no more Harm in a Daughter and Son Marrying than there is for two Men to Marry.

If there is, please Illustrate it.



peace...

Marriage establishes a next of kin relationship. that relationship brings benefits not available to non married, or non next of kin people.

Siblings already have a next of kin relationship. Therefore a marriage contract would establish a secondary relationship that has no need to be.

Incorrect.

If my Mother-in-Law and Aunt Cared for our 3 Children in the event that my Wife and I passed, they would NOT have the same "Rights" Benefits and the rest that Gays are Demanding in Marriage.

Try again.



peace...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Matt Bevin suffers cognitive dysfunctionalism.

The issue is consent of adults. Children can't consent.

Offspring... The Implication was not Children below the Age of Consent.

Plenty of Grandmothers are helping their Daughters Raise a Child without a Father.

Using EVERY Argument FOR Gay Marriage, you would have to Support a Mother and Daughter getting the same Expanded Special Rights that Gays are Demanding in Marriage.



peace...

Still a non-argument but send a letter to SCOTUS about it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You didn't answer his question.

He won't answer the question because there is only one correct answer and that answer effectively destroys all arguments against same sex marriage that involve any claim of a resultant harm to society that would justify the government denying gays the right to same sex marriage.

You are avoiding the Obvious.. Deliberately.

There is no more Harm in a Daughter and Son Marrying than there is for two Men to Marry.

If there is, please Illustrate it.



peace...

You're admitting there's no harm to anyone if two men or two women marry? Then what argument do you have left?

 

[bendog]

Isn't there some kind of genetic issue with siblings?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Matt Bevin suffers cognitive dysfunctionalism.

The issue is consent of adults. Children can't consent.

Offspring... The Implication was not Children below the Age of Consent.

Plenty of Grandmothers are helping their Daughters Raise a Child without a Father.

Using EVERY Argument FOR Gay Marriage, you would have to Support a Mother and Daughter getting the same Expanded Special Rights that Gays are Demanding in Marriage.



peace...

A brother and sister wanting to get married can already argue that they fit the definition of marriage as being only between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN.

They are, in fact, ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN.

They don't need legal gay marriage to bolster any case they would make. More effectively they could argue that the ending of laws against interracial marriage 'expanded' marriage rights within the one man one woman marriage,

and that they have the right to have the same benefit of expansion for a one man one woman marriage.

 

[Nosmo King]

You are avoiding the Obvious.. Deliberately.

There is no more Harm in a Daughter and Son Marrying than there is for two Men to Marry.

If there is, please Illustrate it.



peace...

Marriage establishes a next of kin relationship. that relationship brings benefits not available to non married, or non next of kin people.

Siblings already have a next of kin relationship. Therefore a marriage contract would establish a secondary relationship that has no need to be.

Incorrect.

If my Mother-in-Law and Aunt Cared for our 3 Children in the event that my Wife and I passed, they would NOT have the same "Rights" Benefits and the rest that Gays are Demanding in Marriage.

Try again.



peace...

But they would. They would be able to claim your children as dependents, they would have hospital visitation rights as legal guardians, and, as legal guardians, they would have a next of kin relationship recognized by the state.