Easy way to eliminate same-sex marriage "equality" and affirm superiority of strait marriage

[dave p]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

Funny Republicans also want to assert the superiority of the white race.
The problem is Republicans are the least superior people on the planet.

You’re an idiot. What does that have to do with same sex marriage. Go back to Nurse Ratched and get your meds.

 

[g5000]

Nay, job of governments is to legislate national and statewide morality of Judeo-Christian variety on people, this is proper role of all governments.

Sorry. This hoax isn't going to work on me.

 

[deanrd]

I'm not sure any USMB Republican actually feels love. Seems they get married because they are told to. Not because love means something to them.

 

[Unification]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

So you want government intervention in our private lives. What's more, you want government gifts for not being gay! You realize this means you are not a conservative, right? You are a leech.

And you can't even spell straight correctly.

Nay, job of governments is to legislate national and statewide morality of Judeo-Christian variety on people, this is proper role of all governments. Only people who are moral and answer to higher power have autonomy and authority to self-govern without oversight of moral rulers, not immoral and materialistic individuals who embrace degeneracy and evils.

State should not be theocratic necessarily, as in ruled by the Priestly class directly, but should be quasi-theocratic and have sole purpose of legislating morality and punishing degeneracy that we see in modern Rome.

Regulation of moral degeneracy is allowed under common law, such as how state obscenity laws could be used to ban pornography if they were enforced, or how states have authority to govern behavior of adults regardless of "consent" if it for the greater good of the moral and virtuous - but sadly many laws not enforced as they should be more strictly.

"job of government is to legislate national and statewide morality of Judeo-Christian variety on people"....I have my copy of the U.S. Constitution handy.....point out where it says that in either the Articles or Amendments.

The 10th Amendment bestowed authority of legislating most moral issues upon the states via Common Law, rather than on Federal Government.

1st Amendment merely means that states cannot force a person to be Catholic, or Baptist, or Lutheran - but of course states are appointed to be non-demoninational moral legislators.

This of course is why states under Constitution to ban immorality such as murder, littering, drug addiction, rape, prositution, and other crimes and sins which are considered religiously immoral non-denominationally.

So yes, Founders of course wanted theocracy-lite, where states enforce non-denominational morality, as opposed to only allowing one religious denomination to dominate all others, but obviously never would have tolerated the existence of degenerate atheists and materialists such as Marquis Sade who believe in legalisation of ills such as rape, bestiality, sodomy, and whatnot.

No reason any society should allow those of that low moral to exist, or pretend they are equal to more humans, or maybe even healthy animals like good race horse, when maybe they share more in common with rabid and ill dog looking to be put down?

 

[Unification]

I'm not sure any USMB Republican actually feels love. Seems they get married because they are told to. Not because love means something to them.

Love is a spiritual concept, something of course which only the spiritually enlightened can understand.

Obviously a sodomite can't understand love or spiritual things anymore than a rabid dog or beast can, is very sad because the ill and miserable think the closest to "love" they can get is something that would make most beasts puke.

 

[Unification]

By virtue of being an atheist or other moral reprobate, one damns themselves to never be able to understand love, truth, beauty, or any concept reserved only for the spiritual and enlightenened - perhaps this be why they have such meaningless lives and commit suicide in such large numbers, having nothing to satisfy their futile existences other than drugs, unsastifying sex and sodomy, porn, fast food, and other ills fit for animals rather than men.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The whole reason "gay marriage" is even an issue is because of government gifts. If the government was not involved in our marriages, then it wouldn't matter which adult you married. It would be between you and your church or whatever.

But pseudocons want to have all these government cash and prizes for their marriages, and don't want anyone else to have the equal protection of those laws which bestow those government cash and prizes on them.

You think removing child tax credits wouldn’t rule the crap out of the left? A marriage is simply a contract between two people. One can get a church blessing one can’t and why should the government care. On that we agree. But on the tax credits there’s no way the libs would let that cut go away. They’re claim we all hate kids.

 

[Unification]

The whole reason "gay marriage" is even an issue is because of government gifts. If the government was not involved in our marriages, then it wouldn't matter which adult you married. It would be between you and your church or whatever.

But pseudocons want to have all these government cash and prizes for their marriages, and don't want anyone else to have the equal protection of those laws which bestow those government cash and prizes on them.

Nay, I be fine with either or.

If states would eliminate marriage benefits entirely, and leave it solely as sacrament regulated by churches, or would go through with this proposal and create a superior "rank" of marriage only for natural couples rather than degenerate forms such as sodomy and lesbianism, i would be good with that.

Either way, it would eliminate the fallacious notion of marriage "equality" applying to unnatural unions such as sodomy and lesbianism, and would work for me.

Ideally state would have prevented measures to prevent debased couples of straight persuasion from getting married as well - such as banning it for porn stars or others who lead degenerate lifestyles, but that be another story.

Bar is really too low in banning it only for sodomy, and ideally should be raised so that other forms of degeneracy are not tolerated either.

 

[Unification]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

Your idocracy is screaming in that OP. So it’s the sodmite marriages that you object to huh? That means heterosexual marriages and lesbian marriages are cool. Right? What about the wives that like to take it up the butt? Shall we do rectal exams before each ceremony?

Thanks for the laugh.

Nay, lesbian marriage is not legitimate, may be less harmful than sodomy since it not involve acts related to human dung and spread associated diseases, but lesbian is usually result of woman being in relationship with abusive cad, and developing phobia of men so she need woman for companionship.

Likely if there was way of getting modern males to "man" up and stop being such cads and dogs, we could eliminate the problem of lesbians, since they would get to experience real man.

Youre the last person who should be explaining how lesbians think... what in the world makes you think you’re qualified to do that?! Regardless, there are still lesbian marriages and your idiotic OP seems to qualify those marriges as legit. Oops, didn’t really think that one through did ya?

This why state should create superior version of marriage only for natural and straight couples, and promote it as superior to degenerate variety of "marriage" open to those of lesser persuasion such as sodomy, lesbianism, and other disorders of the mind and nature.

You go ahead and keep promoting that. haha

I can tell you right now people are just gonna laugh at you. Good luck on your mission

Moot point what you think, point is that it states have right to do it, and I predict Supreme Court would rule it as Constitutional given their recent history, so all states do is have to get busy and act on it.

 

[deanrd]

I'm not sure any USMB Republican actually feels love. Seems they get married because they are told to. Not because love means something to them.

Love is a spiritual concept, something of course which only the spiritually enlightened can understand.

Obviously a sodomite can't understand love or spiritual things anymore than a rabid dog or beast can, is very sad because the ill and miserable think the closest to "love" they can get is something that would make most beasts puke.

If you have to qualify love, then you don't understand it.

What is more unnatural? Homophobes like you or same sex pairings in Nature's Kingdom?

sames sex animals - YouTube

 

[Skylar]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

The likelihood of the Supreme Court overturning itself on same sex marriage is quite unlikely.

 

[Skylar]

Your idocracy is screaming in that OP. So it’s the sodmite marriages that you object to huh? That means heterosexual marriages and lesbian marriages are cool. Right? What about the wives that like to take it up the butt? Shall we do rectal exams before each ceremony?

Thanks for the laugh.

Nay, lesbian marriage is not legitimate, may be less harmful than sodomy since it not involve acts related to human dung and spread associated diseases, but lesbian is usually result of woman being in relationship with abusive cad, and developing phobia of men so she need woman for companionship.

Likely if there was way of getting modern males to "man" up and stop being such cads and dogs, we could eliminate the problem of lesbians, since they would get to experience real man.

Youre the last person who should be explaining how lesbians think... what in the world makes you think you’re qualified to do that?! Regardless, there are still lesbian marriages and your idiotic OP seems to qualify those marriges as legit. Oops, didn’t really think that one through did ya?

This why state should create superior version of marriage only for natural and straight couples, and promote it as superior to degenerate variety of "marriage" open to those of lesser persuasion such as sodomy, lesbianism, and other disorders of the mind and nature.

You go ahead and keep promoting that. haha

I can tell you right now people are just gonna laugh at you. Good luck on your mission

Moot point what you think, point is that it states have right to do it, and I predict Supreme Court would rule it as Constitutional given their recent history, so all states do is have to get busy and act on it.

The right to marry is a constitutionally recognized right. Creating an imaginary 'super marriage' for the express purpose of excluding gays seems unlikely to pass constitutional muster.

 

[Unification]

I'm not sure any USMB Republican actually feels love. Seems they get married because they are told to. Not because love means something to them.

Love is a spiritual concept, something of course which only the spiritually enlightened can understand.

Obviously a sodomite can't understand love or spiritual things anymore than a rabid dog or beast can, is very sad because the ill and miserable think the closest to "love" they can get is something that would make most beasts puke.

If you have to qualify love, then you don't understand it.

What is more unnatural? Homophobes like you or same sex pairings in Nature's Kingdom?

sames sex animals - YouTube

Is of lower nature silly willy:

Male Sexual Aggression: What Chimps Can Reveal About People

An aggressive male chimpanzee looks on from behind a bush. A 2014 study has found that male chimpanzees that are more aggressive to females sire more offspring, suggesting that the trait may have an evolutionary basis.

Rape is also natural in lower nature of animals and humans, but not in higher nature - so are you like that Roosh V fellow who thinks rape should be legal since animals do it? Or are you ashamed to admit this? He he

 

[Unification]

Nay, lesbian marriage is not legitimate, may be less harmful than sodomy since it not involve acts related to human dung and spread associated diseases, but lesbian is usually result of woman being in relationship with abusive cad, and developing phobia of men so she need woman for companionship.

Likely if there was way of getting modern males to "man" up and stop being such cads and dogs, we could eliminate the problem of lesbians, since they would get to experience real man.

Youre the last person who should be explaining how lesbians think... what in the world makes you think you’re qualified to do that?! Regardless, there are still lesbian marriages and your idiotic OP seems to qualify those marriges as legit. Oops, didn’t really think that one through did ya?

This why state should create superior version of marriage only for natural and straight couples, and promote it as superior to degenerate variety of "marriage" open to those of lesser persuasion such as sodomy, lesbianism, and other disorders of the mind and nature.

You go ahead and keep promoting that. haha

I can tell you right now people are just gonna laugh at you. Good luck on your mission

Moot point what you think, point is that it states have right to do it, and I predict Supreme Court would rule it as Constitutional given their recent history, so all states do is have to get busy and act on it.

The right to marry is a constitutionally recognized right. Creating an imaginary 'super marriage' for the express purpose of excluding gays seems unlikely to pass constitutional muster.

Correct, but given that only straight couples can actually marry to begin with, then what needs to be done is just create a superior title affirming that straight-only marriage is the only "real" marriage, and that marriage which includes homo "couples" is merely an inferior from of union.

Saying that a homo couple can marry is silly, since that would be like saying that two light sockets, or that two electrical plugs can "couple together" - when in reality of course, only a plug can "couple" or marry with a socket.

 

[Skylar]

Youre the last person who should be explaining how lesbians think... what in the world makes you think you’re qualified to do that?! Regardless, there are still lesbian marriages and your idiotic OP seems to qualify those marriges as legit. Oops, didn’t really think that one through did ya?

This why state should create superior version of marriage only for natural and straight couples, and promote it as superior to degenerate variety of "marriage" open to those of lesser persuasion such as sodomy, lesbianism, and other disorders of the mind and nature.

You go ahead and keep promoting that. haha

I can tell you right now people are just gonna laugh at you. Good luck on your mission

Moot point what you think, point is that it states have right to do it, and I predict Supreme Court would rule it as Constitutional given their recent history, so all states do is have to get busy and act on it.

The right to marry is a constitutionally recognized right. Creating an imaginary 'super marriage' for the express purpose of excluding gays seems unlikely to pass constitutional muster.

Correct, but given that only straight couples can actually marry to begin with, then what needs to be done is just create a superior title affirming that straight-only marriage is the only "real" marriage, and that marriage which includes homo "couples" is merely an inferior from of union.

Renaming marriage doesn't change the right to it. Again, the right to marry is a constitutional right. Your argument is akin to renaming firearms 'boom sticks' and then insisting that the 2nd amendment no longer applies.

That doesn't work.

 

[EGR one]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

Funny Republicans also want to assert the superiority of the white race.
The problem is Republicans are the least superior people on the planet.

I doubt many Republicans consider the White race to be superior. And, if Republicans are the least superior, then the idiotic concept of White advantage is garbage. Either that, or you are the dumbest individual in the Democrat party. I vote all of the above.

 

[Timmy]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

Why do you hate freedom?

 

[Unification]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

Why do you hate freedom?

Reality is that freedom is a right only for religious or spiritual people, since only people who are above moral degenerates which lead to suffering are capable of appreciating freeness.

If individuals reject reality of God or higher power, then they are too un-enlightened to understand freedom, so they settle for beastly pleasures such as addiction to sodomy, drunkness, and gluttony - which lead not to freedom, but to living as feral beast in zoo cage.

How free is obese person who become 600 lbs overweight as result of lifestyle of gluttony? He cannot even move his own left-leg without straining himself, so not very "free" is he? Ha ha.

So altrusitic thing would be for the spiritual people to educate the immoral into changing their hamful lifestyle practices, so they can enjoy spiritual freedom rather than suffering and damnation, no?

 

[Skylar]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

Why do you hate freedom?

Reality is that freedom is a right only for religious or spiritual people, since only people who are above moral degenerates which lead to suffering are capable of appreciating freeness.

That particular opinion doesn't have much relevance to our actual laws. The constitution makes no such requirement for rights. And there is no such pre-requisite for the right to marry.

Your argument is becoming increasingly....pseudo-legal. Hopelessly dependent on non-existent 'legal' principles such as rights only existing for the religious.

Which is very unlikely to have much relevance in an actual court room.

 

[Timmy]

Easy way to do this, is to create a new state law allowing a superior version of "marriage" only for non-sodomite couples with special rights which sodomite marriage does not get, such as better tax benefits or subsides to help with natural procreation of children.

Then straight-only marriage becomes the new defacto from of "marriage", while the inferior form of marriage which open to sodomite lifestyle becomes reduced to the new "civil union", and its inequality is affirmed by the state in law.

If we do this, most likely if lawsuit was filed against it, and it made its way to Supreme Court, the Supreme Court would rule in favor of it as Constitutional within the bounds of the 14th Amendment, much as they ruled in favor of the Baker in the recent case.

Then sodomite marriage "equality" would be eliminated and go away like it never existed, and the only way to change it at this point would be to repeal the entire 14th Amendment itself... and good luck with that.

So this should be idea that states get on board with, he he

Why do you hate freedom?

Reality is that freedom is a right only for religious or spiritual people, since only people who are above moral degenerates which lead to suffering are capable of appreciating freeness.

If individuals reject reality of God or higher power, then they are too un-enlightened to understand freedom, so they settle for beastly pleasures such as addiction to sodomy, drunkness, and gluttony - which lead not to freedom, but to living as feral beast in zoo cage.

How free is obese person who become 600 lbs overweight as result of lifestyle of gluttony? He cannot even move his own left-leg without straining himself, so not very "free" is he? Ha ha.

So altrusitic thing would be for the spiritual people to educate the immoral into changing their hamful lifestyle practices, so they can enjoy spiritual freedom rather than suffering and damnation, no?

The facts are being able to marry either sex is more freedom than just being able to marry the opposite sex.

And why do you care ? It doesn’t effect you.

Look, I think neck tattoos are terrible. I wouldn’t get one . But I don’t think they should be illegal .