Gay statists strike again...you will submit!!!!

[Silhouette]

All a moot argument anyway. Windsor said states have the unquestioned authority on the topic of gay marriage and always have had. So plug in the legality and say hello to Prop 8 and all the others like it.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

Actually what the LGBT cult is really looking for is undeniable equal access to adopt children via the loophole of "legal marriage".

And they will stop at nothing to get at that goal. Hence the bitching, alternating with threats, milking sympathy, blackmail, hubris, legal manipulation and on and on. Very much like an overweening preschooler who wants at that cookie jar!!

True, thats part of their agenda to get the government to mandate societal acceptance of their deviant lifestyle. They want the government to demand that everyone believe that homosexuality is a normal human condition and that young people can simply choose to be straight or gay.

Their push for gay marriage is not about equality or fairness. A gay civil union would be equal and fair. The word "marriage" is mandatory for their cause.

We need to face the reality that if gay "marriage" is made legal, then there is no viable legal defense that can ever be brought against bigamy and all forms of polygamy. Thats the society that the left is pushing for-----anything goes, no rules, no limits-----------------------no civilization.

Question. Why would you possibly care if 20 guys wanted to call themselves married to each other? I mean for me that would be a great sense of laughter , but that's about it.

how many lawyers would get rich when one or two of them wanted a divorce?

So what? As long as I don't have to foot the bill.

Is the court system supported by your taxes? You would be footing the bill, or at least part of it.

no offense, but that is a stupid, and tenuous , objection. How much court time is wasted on gun crimes? Do you suggest we ban guns to save that money? Of course not.

 

[WorldWatcher]

But the Court has already held that overly intrusive Public Accommodation is unconstitutional for the federal government, though the Court has thus far allowed it to be asserted by the several states.

Please site the case you say exists, I'd like to review it. (And not it's not the Hobby Lobby case as that wasn't a Public Accommodation law case.)



Thanks,



>>>>

 

[Seawytch]

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

I'm not bitching at them, I'm laughing at them. The people that say "get the government out of marriage" only started saying it when the gays started getting the cash and prizes too.

Fill the pool so the black kids can't swim in it.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

I'm not bitching at them, I'm laughing at them. The people that say "get the government out of marriage" only started saying it when the gays started getting the cash and prizes too.

Fill the pool so the black kids can't swim in it.

well duh stupid. When else would they have said it? I mean between Loving and the current debate over gay marriage what happened that would lead anyone to comment on government sanctioned marriage? Oh that's right, nothing.

Growing up in the 80s I can't remember any gays being overly vocal about wanting to marry either, does that mean that until the last 6 years or so gays didn't want to marry? I mean since they weren't speaking out about it.

See what illogical , stupid rants get you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Nice excuse. So what you're saying is that your idea wouldn't be very popular then? And why wouldn't Ms Pelosi entertain your notion, it wouldn't effect California's Public Accommodation laws.

Did I say that? When? Where?

 

[Silhouette]

I argue that gays started wanting to marry en masse precisely the time they became uncomfortably aware that civil unions wouldn't suffice to automatically allow them to adopt vulnerable orphans...

Then all of a sudden, marriage became a "civil right necessity". Given what they do in pride parades soberly anticipating and hoping kids will be watching, we'd better act on civil rights all right. The civil rights of children to be protected from anticipated harm. Imagine what they're "proud" of behind closed doors in front of kids?

 

[Redfish]

c

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

Actually what the LGBT cult is really looking for is undeniable equal access to adopt children via the loophole of "legal marriage".

And they will stop at nothing to get at that goal. Hence the bitching, alternating with threats, milking sympathy, blackmail, hubris, legal manipulation and on and on. Very much like an overweening preschooler who wants at that cookie jar!!

True, thats part of their agenda to get the government to mandate societal acceptance of their deviant lifestyle. They want the government to demand that everyone believe that homosexuality is a normal human condition and that young people can simply choose to be straight or gay.

Their push for gay marriage is not about equality or fairness. A gay civil union would be equal and fair. The word "marriage" is mandatory for their cause.

We need to face the reality that if gay "marriage" is made legal, then there is no viable legal defense that can ever be brought against bigamy and all forms of polygamy. Thats the society that the left is pushing for-----anything goes, no rules, no limits-----------------------no civilization.

Question. Why would you possibly care if 20 guys wanted to call themselves married to each other? I mean for me that would be a great sense of laughter , but that's about it.

how many lawyers would get rich when one or two of them wanted a divorce?

So what? As long as I don't have to foot the bill.

Is the court system supported by your taxes? You would be footing the bill, or at least part of it.

no offense, but that is a stupid, and tenuous , objection. How much court time is wasted on gun crimes? Do you suggest we ban guns to save that money? Of course not.

No its not. Its a real potential problem. Lets see, Tom, Jim, Bob, and Gary are married to Mary, Cindy, and Louise. They have 6 kids amoung them. Mary, Cindy, and Louise each have 2 and they have no idea who the fathers are since every one is screwing everyone. They co-own a $300,000 house and 4 cars.

Gary and Louise decide to divorce the others and marry each other. How long do you think the property settlements and child custody settlements would tie up the court system? How many lawyers and judges would be involved? This is exactly where gay marriage will take us. WAKE UP!

 

[Redfish]

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

I'm not bitching at them, I'm laughing at them. The people that say "get the government out of marriage" only started saying it when the gays started getting the cash and prizes too.

Fill the pool so the black kids can't swim in it.

your pool comment is racist

a civil union would give you all of the same cash and prizes. But cash and prizes is not what this is about and you know it.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

c

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

Actually what the LGBT cult is really looking for is undeniable equal access to adopt children via the loophole of "legal marriage".

And they will stop at nothing to get at that goal. Hence the bitching, alternating with threats, milking sympathy, blackmail, hubris, legal manipulation and on and on. Very much like an overweening preschooler who wants at that cookie jar!!

True, thats part of their agenda to get the government to mandate societal acceptance of their deviant lifestyle. They want the government to demand that everyone believe that homosexuality is a normal human condition and that young people can simply choose to be straight or gay.

Their push for gay marriage is not about equality or fairness. A gay civil union would be equal and fair. The word "marriage" is mandatory for their cause.

We need to face the reality that if gay "marriage" is made legal, then there is no viable legal defense that can ever be brought against bigamy and all forms of polygamy. Thats the society that the left is pushing for-----anything goes, no rules, no limits-----------------------no civilization.

Question. Why would you possibly care if 20 guys wanted to call themselves married to each other? I mean for me that would be a great sense of laughter , but that's about it.

how many lawyers would get rich when one or two of them wanted a divorce?

So what? As long as I don't have to foot the bill.

Is the court system supported by your taxes? You would be footing the bill, or at least part of it.

no offense, but that is a stupid, and tenuous , objection. How much court time is wasted on gun crimes? Do you suggest we ban guns to save that money? Of course not.

No its not. Its a real potential problem. Lets see, Tom, Jim, Bob, and Gary are married to Mary, Cindy, and Louise. They have 6 kids amoung them. Mary, Cindy, and Louise each have 2 and they have no idea who the fathers are since every one is screwing everyone. They co-own a $300,000 house and 4 cars.

Gary and Louise decide to divorce the others and marry each other. How long do you think the property settlements and child custody settlements would tie up the court system? How many lawyers and judges would be involved? This is exactly where gay marriage will take us. WAKE UP!

LOL I've seen conventional divorces take YEARS to work there way through the court room as well. IF that is your concern, why not outlaw divorce?

Oh BTW - following MY plan of no government recognition of marriage PERIOD, ALL those people would have to hire private arbitrators to work through a divorce. No public courtrooms would be tied up.

See what logic can bring?

 

[Redfish]

c

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

Actually what the LGBT cult is really looking for is undeniable equal access to adopt children via the loophole of "legal marriage".

And they will stop at nothing to get at that goal. Hence the bitching, alternating with threats, milking sympathy, blackmail, hubris, legal manipulation and on and on. Very much like an overweening preschooler who wants at that cookie jar!!

True, thats part of their agenda to get the government to mandate societal acceptance of their deviant lifestyle. They want the government to demand that everyone believe that homosexuality is a normal human condition and that young people can simply choose to be straight or gay.

Their push for gay marriage is not about equality or fairness. A gay civil union would be equal and fair. The word "marriage" is mandatory for their cause.

We need to face the reality that if gay "marriage" is made legal, then there is no viable legal defense that can ever be brought against bigamy and all forms of polygamy. Thats the society that the left is pushing for-----anything goes, no rules, no limits-----------------------no civilization.

Question. Why would you possibly care if 20 guys wanted to call themselves married to each other? I mean for me that would be a great sense of laughter , but that's about it.

how many lawyers would get rich when one or two of them wanted a divorce?

So what? As long as I don't have to foot the bill.

Is the court system supported by your taxes? You would be footing the bill, or at least part of it.

no offense, but that is a stupid, and tenuous , objection. How much court time is wasted on gun crimes? Do you suggest we ban guns to save that money? Of course not.

No its not. Its a real potential problem. Lets see, Tom, Jim, Bob, and Gary are married to Mary, Cindy, and Louise. They have 6 kids amoung them. Mary, Cindy, and Louise each have 2 and they have no idea who the fathers are since every one is screwing everyone. They co-own a $300,000 house and 4 cars.

Gary and Louise decide to divorce the others and marry each other. How long do you think the property settlements and child custody settlements would tie up the court system? How many lawyers and judges would be involved? This is exactly where gay marriage will take us. WAKE UP!

LOL I've seen conventional divorces take YEARS to work there way through the court room as well. IF that is your concern, why not outlaw divorce?

Oh BTW - following MY plan of no government recognition of marriage PERIOD, ALL those people would have to hire private arbitrators to work through a divorce. No public courtrooms would be tied up.

See what logic can bring?

So your solution is out-of-court settlements of all divorces???? Really? I am going to go out and buy a unicorn and use him to keep my lawn trimmed. We can all use our imaginations

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

c

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

Actually what the LGBT cult is really looking for is undeniable equal access to adopt children via the loophole of "legal marriage".

And they will stop at nothing to get at that goal. Hence the bitching, alternating with threats, milking sympathy, blackmail, hubris, legal manipulation and on and on. Very much like an overweening preschooler who wants at that cookie jar!!

True, thats part of their agenda to get the government to mandate societal acceptance of their deviant lifestyle. They want the government to demand that everyone believe that homosexuality is a normal human condition and that young people can simply choose to be straight or gay.

Their push for gay marriage is not about equality or fairness. A gay civil union would be equal and fair. The word "marriage" is mandatory for their cause.

We need to face the reality that if gay "marriage" is made legal, then there is no viable legal defense that can ever be brought against bigamy and all forms of polygamy. Thats the society that the left is pushing for-----anything goes, no rules, no limits-----------------------no civilization.

Question. Why would you possibly care if 20 guys wanted to call themselves married to each other? I mean for me that would be a great sense of laughter , but that's about it.

how many lawyers would get rich when one or two of them wanted a divorce?

So what? As long as I don't have to foot the bill.

Is the court system supported by your taxes? You would be footing the bill, or at least part of it.

no offense, but that is a stupid, and tenuous , objection. How much court time is wasted on gun crimes? Do you suggest we ban guns to save that money? Of course not.

No its not. Its a real potential problem. Lets see, Tom, Jim, Bob, and Gary are married to Mary, Cindy, and Louise. They have 6 kids amoung them. Mary, Cindy, and Louise each have 2 and they have no idea who the fathers are since every one is screwing everyone. They co-own a $300,000 house and 4 cars.

Gary and Louise decide to divorce the others and marry each other. How long do you think the property settlements and child custody settlements would tie up the court system? How many lawyers and judges would be involved? This is exactly where gay marriage will take us. WAKE UP!

LOL I've seen conventional divorces take YEARS to work there way through the court room as well. IF that is your concern, why not outlaw divorce?

Oh BTW - following MY plan of no government recognition of marriage PERIOD, ALL those people would have to hire private arbitrators to work through a divorce. No public courtrooms would be tied up.

See what logic can bring?

So your solution is out-of-court settlements of all divorces???? Really? I am going to go out and buy a unicorn and use him to keep my lawn trimmed. We can all use our imaginations

What?

It's simple. "Marriage" becomes a civil contract and as part of that contract each party agrees to a mediator in case the relationship dissolves

You've never been in any business have you.

 

[Seawytch]

your pool comment is racist

a civil union would give you all of the same cash and prizes. But cash and prizes is not what this is about and you know it.

No, my pool comment hits too close to home, makes you uncomfortable.

Civil unions are fine, as you well know, as long as they apply to everyone.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

your pool comment is racist

a civil union would give you all of the same cash and prizes. But cash and prizes is not what this is about and you know it.

No, my pool comment hits too close to home, makes you uncomfortable.

Civil unions are fine, as you well know, as long as they apply to everyone.

So basically, you're jealous.

And angry

And dishonest

And shall we say intelligence impaired.

 

[Seawytch]

well duh stupid. When else would they have said it? I mean between Loving and the current debate over gay marriage what happened that would lead anyone to comment on government sanctioned marriage? Oh that's right, nothing.

Growing up in the 80s I can't remember any gays being overly vocal about wanting to marry either, does that mean that until the last 6 years or so gays didn't want to marry? I mean since they weren't speaking out about it.

See what illogical , stupid rants get you?

I'll bet in the 30s you didn't have a lot of blacks talking about wanting to marry whites either. Did that mean before the 50s and 60s, no interracial relationships took place and those folks didn't wanted to marry?

 

[Seawytch]

So basically, you're jealous.

And angry

And dishonest

And shall we say intelligence impaired.

How do you get that from not wishing to be 2nd class citizens?

I have said over and over that civil unions FOR ALL would be fine. What is not acceptable is marriage for straights, civil unions for gays.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

well duh stupid. When else would they have said it? I mean between Loving and the current debate over gay marriage what happened that would lead anyone to comment on government sanctioned marriage? Oh that's right, nothing.

Growing up in the 80s I can't remember any gays being overly vocal about wanting to marry either, does that mean that until the last 6 years or so gays didn't want to marry? I mean since they weren't speaking out about it.

See what illogical , stupid rants get you?

I'll bet in the 30s you didn't have a lot of blacks talking about wanting to marry whites either. Did that mean before the 50s and 60s, no interracial relationships took place and those folks didn't wanted to marry?

Uh what?

My God you are stupid.

YOU and Bodecea are the ones arguing that if no one was en masse clamoring for something 20 years ago that means it isn't really important to those who are today, not me.

 

[WorldWatcher]

LOL I've seen conventional divorces take YEARS to work there way through the court room as well. IF that is your concern, why not outlaw divorce?

Oh BTW - following MY plan of no government recognition of marriage PERIOD, ALL those people would have to hire private arbitrators to work through a divorce. No public courtrooms would be tied up.

See what logic can bring?

Yes it bring about the requirement that fathers would have to adopt their own children at a cost of hundreds to thousands of dollars. Currently every state in the union has what are called "assumed parentage" laws. That means if a child is born to a Civilly Married couple that the mother automatically is a legal parent because of the birth, the father in such a situation is legally the parent under the law.

Without government recognition of the family relationship between the spouses (i.e. no Civil Marrige) - then fathers would have to adopt their own children to be the legal parent.


Ya, that's going to be real popular.



>>>>

 

[Redfish]

c

See this is how stupid and dishonest you are. You even ***** about the people who say "government out of marriage" you aren't looking for equality, you're just looking to *****.

Actually what the LGBT cult is really looking for is undeniable equal access to adopt children via the loophole of "legal marriage".

And they will stop at nothing to get at that goal. Hence the bitching, alternating with threats, milking sympathy, blackmail, hubris, legal manipulation and on and on. Very much like an overweening preschooler who wants at that cookie jar!!

True, thats part of their agenda to get the government to mandate societal acceptance of their deviant lifestyle. They want the government to demand that everyone believe that homosexuality is a normal human condition and that young people can simply choose to be straight or gay.

Their push for gay marriage is not about equality or fairness. A gay civil union would be equal and fair. The word "marriage" is mandatory for their cause.

We need to face the reality that if gay "marriage" is made legal, then there is no viable legal defense that can ever be brought against bigamy and all forms of polygamy. Thats the society that the left is pushing for-----anything goes, no rules, no limits-----------------------no civilization.

Question. Why would you possibly care if 20 guys wanted to call themselves married to each other? I mean for me that would be a great sense of laughter , but that's about it.

how many lawyers would get rich when one or two of them wanted a divorce?

So what? As long as I don't have to foot the bill.

Is the court system supported by your taxes? You would be footing the bill, or at least part of it.

no offense, but that is a stupid, and tenuous , objection. How much court time is wasted on gun crimes? Do you suggest we ban guns to save that money? Of course not.

No its not. Its a real potential problem. Lets see, Tom, Jim, Bob, and Gary are married to Mary, Cindy, and Louise. They have 6 kids amoung them. Mary, Cindy, and Louise each have 2 and they have no idea who the fathers are since every one is screwing everyone. They co-own a $300,000 house and 4 cars.

Gary and Louise decide to divorce the others and marry each other. How long do you think the property settlements and child custody settlements would tie up the court system? How many lawyers and judges would be involved? This is exactly where gay marriage will take us. WAKE UP!

LOL I've seen conventional divorces take YEARS to work there way through the court room as well. IF that is your concern, why not outlaw divorce?

Oh BTW - following MY plan of no government recognition of marriage PERIOD, ALL those people would have to hire private arbitrators to work through a divorce. No public courtrooms would be tied up.

See what logic can bring?

So your solution is out-of-court settlements of all divorces???? Really? I am going to go out and buy a unicorn and use him to keep my lawn trimmed. We can all use our imaginations

What?

It's simple. "Marriage" becomes a civil contract and as part of that contract each party agrees to a mediator in case the relationship dissolves

You've never been in any business have you.

LOL, much more than you can imagine. And my businesses were very successful.

Do you understand what the words "mediator" or "mediation" mean?

You may mean binding arbitration, which is totally different from mediation. Do you also understand that mediators and arbitrators get paid? A lot. If, as you say, marriage is a civil contract then that contract is subject to the statutes of the state in which it was executed. There is no way that a polygamous marriage would not end up in court if one of the members wanted a divorce.

your naivte is amusing.

 

[Redfish]

your pool comment is racist

a civil union would give you all of the same cash and prizes. But cash and prizes is not what this is about and you know it.

No, my pool comment hits too close to home, makes you uncomfortable.

Civil unions are fine, as you well know, as long as they apply to everyone.

They should, but marriage only applies to one man and one woman. Simple, biologically correct, and historically accurate.

I want you and your partner to have the same rights and priviledges as a married man and woman. But your union is not a marriage no matter how many times you try to make that claim.