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

[Faun]

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.

Then come up with a new name for marriage for straight couples. What are ya gonna call it?

I think they call it “hitched”

Can't use that. That doesn't sound superior than "marriage."

Unification's gonna have to do better than that.

I just call it natural marriage, or true marriage, or something.

Not important, but point is it give special benefits to people who choose to have straight marriages which lead to healthly procreation.

Sadly for you, the 14th Amendment prevents the law from treating some marriages unequal to others.

So you're stuck with just the name. Those don't grab me personally, you'll have to do better than that if you want it to catch on.

 

[Unification]

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.

Then come up with a new name for marriage for straight couples. What are ya gonna call it?

I think they call it “hitched”

Can't use that. That doesn't sound superior than "marriage."

Unification's gonna have to do better than that.

I just call it natural marriage, or true marriage, or something.

Not important, but point is it give special benefits to people who choose to have straight marriages which lead to healthly procreation.

Sadly for you, the 14th Amendment prevents the law from treating some marriages unequal to others.

So you're stuck with just the name. Those don't grab me personally, you'll have to do better than that if you want it to catch on.

Nope, they can create new right only for straight couples or those who naturally make children, and then I think Supreme Court will rule this is fine just as they ruled in case of baker

 

[Faun]

Then come up with a new name for marriage for straight couples. What are ya gonna call it?

I think they call it “hitched”

Can't use that. That doesn't sound superior than "marriage."

Unification's gonna have to do better than that.

I just call it natural marriage, or true marriage, or something.

Not important, but point is it give special benefits to people who choose to have straight marriages which lead to healthly procreation.

Sadly for you, the 14th Amendment prevents the law from treating some marriages unequal to others.

So you're stuck with just the name. Those don't grab me personally, you'll have to do better than that if you want it to catch on.

Nope, they can create new right only for straight couples or those who naturally make children, and then I think Supreme Court will rule this is fine just as they ruled in case of baker

I think you slept through it -- the Supreme Court already ruled on it and decided marriage between two men or between two women is protected by the Constitution just as marriage between one man and one woman.

 

[Norman]

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

Does the sodomite rule apply to homosexuals only? You would not want to be homophobic, would you?

You were quite obsessed with the booty on a other thread, just saying.

 

[King Dean]

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

Or we can let people marry whoever the hell they want to marry and let people do whatever the hell they want in the privacy of their own homes as long as they are consenting adults. If you are so angered by gay people getting married then move out of the country. Also, who are you to define what makes one marriage superior to another marriage? To me, it sounds like you hate your own marriage or you're angry no one wants to marry you so he he he don't take it out on gay people...he he.he.

 

[Wolfstrike]

the only way is to get government out of marriage completely

 

[SweetSue92]

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.

The OP is junk but your posts are enlightening. Trump has dug a well so deep in your brain I'm not sure rational thought is possible. You think the "other side" is not even capable of love. That's a really bad danger sign for you, but odds are you can't even see it.

Oh well, another day in America 2018

 

[bodecea]

I suspect the OP has had his wife leave him for another woman. Totally understandable.dd

Oh, you say I beat my wife into becoming lesbian, how quaint, he he

I never said anything about you beating your wife....is there something you want to tell us?

 

[Crepitus]

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

You may be the most bigoted person in the board, and they saying some.

I point out facts.

Cannot have electric circuit from two outlets or two plugs - only way to have circuit is 1 outlet and 1 plug, so saying 2 women or 2 men is 'marriage" is also non-logical, you just have problem with reality and common sense.

You aren't pointing out anything except that you are one seriously fucked up individual.

 

[deanrd]

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.

Wrong. Republicans hate gays even more than blacks, Hispanics or Muslims.

Worse, they believe God is on their side. Whispers they get from Satan.

 

[Votto]

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

Here is a thought, let's remove all state perks for marriage and treat everyone the same, even if they are single.

Sound's crazy, I know, but we have to divide and conquer, it's what politics is all about.

Just so long as polygamy continues to seem yucky and singles don't rise up for their rights I reckon it will be OK.

 

[deanrd]

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.

judgemental much?

I wonder how close you are to your ideal of purity.

I've found people like you to be the most evil.

 

[Skylar]

the only way is to get government out of marriage completely

So we invalidate the marriage certificates of everyone......so gays and lesbians can be excluded?

I've got a better idea; what we have right now.

 

[Skylar]

Then come up with a new name for marriage for straight couples. What are ya gonna call it?

I think they call it “hitched”

Can't use that. That doesn't sound superior than "marriage."

Unification's gonna have to do better than that.

I just call it natural marriage, or true marriage, or something.

Not important, but point is it give special benefits to people who choose to have straight marriages which lead to healthly procreation.

Sadly for you, the 14th Amendment prevents the law from treating some marriages unequal to others.

So you're stuck with just the name. Those don't grab me personally, you'll have to do better than that if you want it to catch on.

Nope, they can create new right only for straight couples or those who naturally make children, and then I think Supreme Court will rule this is fine just as they ruled in case of baker

No state requires children or the ability to have them in order to be married. We'd be making up a 'new right' for something that isn't a requirement of anyone.

That dog won't hunt.

 

[Skylar]

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.

Then come up with a new name for marriage for straight couples. What are ya gonna call it?

I think they call it “hitched”

Can't use that. That doesn't sound superior than "marriage."

Unification's gonna have to do better than that.

I just call it natural marriage, or true marriage, or something.

Not important, but point is it give special benefits to people who choose to have straight marriages which lead to healthly procreation.

Its just a name change. Changing the name of a right doesn't eliminate it. And again no one is required to have children or be able to in order to be married.

So even the supposed purpose of your name change is extra-legal.

The holes in your legal theory are varied and vast.

 

[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

You may be the most bigoted person in the board, and they saying some.

I point out facts.

Cannot have electric circuit from two outlets or two plugs - only way to have circuit is 1 outlet and 1 plug, so saying 2 women or 2 men is 'marriage" is also non-logical, you just have problem with reality and common sense.

You aren't pointing out anything except that you are one seriously fucked up individual.

Ha, I fucked up?

I argue that 2 plugs and 2 sockets does not make electrical circuit, so of course 2 penises and 2 vaginas not make a "marriage" - this is just reality and common sense, anything other than that is just insane and out of harmony with nature.

 

[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

You may be the most bigoted person in the board, and they saying some.

I point out facts.

Cannot have electric circuit from two outlets or two plugs - only way to have circuit is 1 outlet and 1 plug, so saying 2 women or 2 men is 'marriage" is also non-logical, you just have problem with reality and common sense.

You aren't pointing out anything except that you are one seriously fucked up individual.

Ha, I fucked up?

I argue that 2 plugs and 2 sockets does not make electrical circuit, so of course 2 penises and 2 vaginas not make a "marriage" - this is just reality and common sense, anything other than that is just insane and out of harmony with nature.

That's not a legal argument. You've essentially abandoned the entire premise of your thread.

 

[rightwinger]

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

No 14th amendment for you

Why don’t you bring back Jim Crow while you are at it?

 

[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

No 14th amendment for you

Why don’t you bring back Jim Crow while you are at it?

Ha ha, black community not tolerate sodomite marriage that much, that be irony.

Would be better in interest of sodomite proponents to have Jim Crow back, since is manly just weird white baby boomers who into that stuff anyway.

 

[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

No 14th amendment for you

Why don’t you bring back Jim Crow while you are at it?

Ha ha, black community not tolerate sodomite marriage that much, that be irony.

Would be better in interest of sodomite proponents to have Jim Crow back, since is manly just weird white baby boomers who into that stuff anyway.

So since you've abandoned your entire 'legal' argument, it seems you have your answer on whether or not your 'easy way to eliminate same sex marriage' would work legally.

It wouldn't.