'Father' To Marry 'Son' In Bucks County (PA) -- With Court's Blessing

[Iceweasel]

It is totally irrelevant whether gays are born that way or not. You don't have to be born in some certain way in order to have rights.
No one for example has to be born Catholic in order to have the right to practice Catholicism.

What is relevant is that a homosexual relationship isn't a person. You have the right to go to a Catholic church or sodomize a man but there's no Constitutional right to a marriage. Incest and racial laws were put in place because of reproduction (it's a birds and bees thing, you wouldn't understand) so the whole gay marriage schtick is to mimic traditional marriages while condemning tradition.

So the traditional ban on interracial marriage should be brought back.

whoa. The old racism pops up again.

I didn't say so, your hollowed out brain thought I did. Get some air.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

Hey, speak for your own marriage.

Seriously, you sicko wing nuts need to just get it through your thick heads that just because you're dysfunctional and crippled, doesn't mean the rest of us are.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It is totally irrelevant whether gays are born that way or not. You don't have to be born in some certain way in order to have rights.
No one for example has to be born Catholic in order to have the right to practice Catholicism.

What is relevant is that a homosexual relationship isn't a person. You have the right to go to a Catholic church or sodomize a man but there's no Constitutional right to a marriage. Incest and racial laws were put in place because of reproduction (it's a birds and bees thing, you wouldn't understand) so the whole gay marriage schtick is to mimic traditional marriages while condemning tradition.

So the traditional ban on interracial marriage should be brought back.

whoa. The old racism pops up again.

I didn't say so, your hollowed out brain thought I did. Get some air.

I guess you don't remember making a reference to racial laws in that post. It's still there in plain sight.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

 

[bripat9643]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

Hey, speak for your own marriage.

Seriously, you sicko wing nuts need to just get it through your thick heads that just because you're dysfunctional and crippled, doesn't mean the rest of us are.

You're obviously logic and truth challenged.

 

[bripat9643]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

hmmmm . . . yeah, 95% of the public is a "select few."

How may times do you have to prove that you're a retard and a buffoon?

 

[Harry Dresden]

It's beginning: the first step on the road to legalized incest:

Father To Marry Son In Bucks County -- With Court s Blessing Doylestown-Buckingham-New Britain PA Patch​

This week, Bill Novak and Norman MacArthur will go from being father and son to a married couple.

Before you jump to conclusions, consider this: Novak and MacArthur are not father and son biologically. Rather, their relationship through adoption was solely a technicality to enable the rights they desperately wanted but were not legally able to attain as a married couple.

The same-sex couple, who have been together for more than 50 years, registered as domestic partners in New York City in 1994. After moving to Bucks County, they learned that Pennsylvania law does not recognize domestic partners and prohibits same sex marriages.​

“The time came about to do estate planning,” MacArthur said. “We were told at that time ‘hell would freeze over before Pennsylvania approves same sex marriage’.”

They were advised by a lawyer that the only avenue to becoming legally related was through adoption. “It was the only legal method we could use in Pennsylvania to give underpinning to our relationship,” MacArthur said.​

Bri come on.....how often does something like this happen?....i want to know why would they move someplace without checking on the states laws before moving there....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Are gays ‘born that way’? Most Americans now say yes, but science says no

PRINCETON, NJ, May 20, 2015 -- For the first time, a majority of Americans say that homosexuals are "born that way."

According to the latest Gallup poll, 51 percent of Americans say that people are born gay or lesbian, while only 30 percent say outside factors such as upbringing and environment determine sexual orientation.

However, science would not bear that out. No fewer than eight major studies from around the world have found homosexuality is not a genetic condition.

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council says that these numerous, rigorous studies of identical twins have now made it impossible to argue that there is a "gay gene." If homosexuality were inborn and predetermined, then when one identical twin is homosexual, the other should be, as well.

Yet one study from Yale and Columbia Universities found homosexuality common to only 6.7 percent of male identical twins and 5.3 percent of female identical twins.

The low rate of common homosexuality in identical twins – around six percent – is easily explained by nurture, not nature.

Are gays born that way Most Americans now say yes but science says no News LifeSite

i dont think its genetic....i believe something happened to the mom,what?,who knows?.....but something happened to the mother during the part of development when the sex is dealt out....and you get a guy trapped in a womens body or vise-versa....hey prove me wrong....choice is being a bi-sexual.....the Metro standing next to you may be Bi......

 

[Pop23]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

So I guess incest is now open for redefinition and the slippery slope falicy is busted.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

So I guess incest is now open for redefinition and the slippery slope falicy is busted.

There was never a rational reason to criminalize incestuous marriage. On what grounds? Genetics? We don't ban two hemophiliacs from getting married do we? Even if it's highly likely they'll have hemophiliac children...

 

[NYcarbineer]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

hmmmm . . . yeah, 95% of the public is a "select few."

How may times do you have to prove that you're a retard and a buffoon?

When are you getting divorced? You said same sex marriage was going to destroy your marriage.

Were you just spewing shit?

 

[bripat9643]

It's beginning: the first step on the road to legalized incest:

Father To Marry Son In Bucks County -- With Court s Blessing Doylestown-Buckingham-New Britain PA Patch​

This week, Bill Novak and Norman MacArthur will go from being father and son to a married couple.

Before you jump to conclusions, consider this: Novak and MacArthur are not father and son biologically. Rather, their relationship through adoption was solely a technicality to enable the rights they desperately wanted but were not legally able to attain as a married couple.

The same-sex couple, who have been together for more than 50 years, registered as domestic partners in New York City in 1994. After moving to Bucks County, they learned that Pennsylvania law does not recognize domestic partners and prohibits same sex marriages.​

“The time came about to do estate planning,” MacArthur said. “We were told at that time ‘hell would freeze over before Pennsylvania approves same sex marriage’.”

They were advised by a lawyer that the only avenue to becoming legally related was through adoption. “It was the only legal method we could use in Pennsylvania to give underpinning to our relationship,” MacArthur said.​

Bri come on.....how often does something like this happen?....i want to know why would they move someplace without checking on the states laws before moving there....

What difference does it make? The legal precedent has been set.

 

[bripat9643]

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

hmmmm . . . yeah, 95% of the public is a "select few."

How may times do you have to prove that you're a retard and a buffoon?

When are you getting divorced? You said same sex marriage was going to destroy your marriage.

Were you just spewing shit?

I never said that, you blithering idiot.

 

[bripat9643]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

So I guess incest is now open for redefinition and the slippery slope falicy is busted.

It's hard to believe he's actually defending incest. At least he's consistent.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

hmmmm . . . yeah, 95% of the public is a "select few."

How may times do you have to prove that you're a retard and a buffoon?

When are you getting divorced? You said same sex marriage was going to destroy your marriage.

Were you just spewing shit?

I never said that, you blithering idiot.

So now you admit that same sex marriage will have NO adverse affect on your marriage, or anyone else's?

State that for the record, please.

 

[BULLDOG]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

No it's not.

 

[Silhouette]

You asked "If a parent can marry his adopted child, then how can anyone argue against allowing a parent to marry his biological child? What's the legal distinction?"

ADOPTED does not mean the same thing as BIOLOGICAL.

Look it up.

Adopted children and natural children are indistinguishable legally as to the parent/child relationship. Therefore, if an adoptive father marries his adopted son, it is legally precisely the same as a natural father marrying his natural son. That is because what a parent means to a child is so very vital, that there cannot be "philosophical exceptions"

 

[bripat9643]

So let's see, they're a couple for 50 years who wanted to be able to visit each other in the hospital and help each other in case of an emergency but they couldn't because the law prevented them; so they used adoption as a loophole.

I'm happy for them

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

No it's not.

ROFL! Here's a clue for you: "Nuh uhn!" isn't a convincing argument.

 

[bripat9643]

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

hmmmm . . . yeah, 95% of the public is a "select few."

How may times do you have to prove that you're a retard and a buffoon?

When are you getting divorced? You said same sex marriage was going to destroy your marriage.

Were you just spewing shit?

I never said that, you blithering idiot.

So now you admit that same sex marriage will have NO adverse affect on your marriage, or anyone else's?

State that for the record, please.

It will have an adverse affect on the institution as a whole, and it will especially have an adverse effect on children.

 

[Pop23]

It's a legal basis for justifying incestuous marriages.

If you base incest in the classical, traditional way, but soon it will have to be redefined as is being done with marriage.

Seems to me, when you strip away everything from a civil marriage, you must.....

Love: the government can't mandate, nor test for love

Sex: the government can't mandate sexual intimacy

Faithfulness: a traditional value that the government can't mandate.

So marriage is simply a new financial tool open to 10's of millions for lower taxes and better employer benefits.

I find it funny that gays think this is about them, when there are far more straight same sex couples that can/will seek a $50.00 marriage license to save a pot load of money.

Marriage simply becomes an IRA or 401k, and the couple ....an LLC or S corp.

Hell, gays could possibly be a small minority of same sex marriage.

Why should same sex siblings be denied the right to marry SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN THAT WAY.

Yep, marriage is now fundamentally no different in character than a 401K. It's just another government benefit open to all.

So it was better as a government benefit only available to a select group?

So I guess incest is now open for redefinition and the slippery slope falicy is busted.

There was never a rational reason to criminalize incestuous marriage. On what grounds? Genetics? We don't ban two hemophiliacs from getting married do we? Even if it's highly likely they'll have hemophiliac children...

Ok, so the slippery slope falicy was a joke after all?

And those opposed were laughed at, correct?

I might agree that it MUST be redefined (incest) even though I find it objectionable.

Why the fight then?

Equality in any shape or form, right?

And, at any cost.