Is gay marriage the most important issue in the USA?

[bripat9643]

Then you should support changing the law to allow a man to marry his sister.

I do. None of my fuckin' business.

You have never complained once that the law doesn't allow it. In fact, you have admitted time and again that you don't give a crap.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Nope...nor blacks not being property or women having the right to vote...but they planned for possibilities.

Then you look pretty stupid citing the Founding Fathers as support for gay marriage.

Not at all.


"As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Bottom line: None of the Founding Fathers would have approved of gay marriage. Hell, 30 years ago almost no Democrats would have approved of it.

Who gives a ****? They approved of owning slaves, and raping them. For all we know they would have hated Internet porn and microwave ovens. I couldn't care less.

You can't seem to make up your mind whether the Founding Fathers would authorities on gay marriage or not.

Got that in English? The Founding Fathers were just that, founders. We've moved beyond them, on dozens of issues.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Then you should support changing the law to allow a man to marry his sister.

I do. None of my fuckin' business.

You have never complained once that the law doesn't allow it. In fact, you have admitted time and again that you don't give a crap.

My position has never changed, any two adults. The law will catch up, eventually.

 

[Pop23]

But in only CERTAIN cases do we require that they can't. And we deny rights to those that can.

Doesn't work well with the whole SSM argument does it?

Incest is a dog that won't hunt Pop, let it go.

Same sex sibling marriage is a dog that hunts and catches prey. Just check out this thread.

Got the best of Ya running for cover.

And again with your bizarre obsession with incest. No thanks. I'll stick with the gay marriage. debate.

You know.....the issue you lost so utterly on that you can't even discuss it any longer. That same sex marriage.

Funny, I'm actually being inclusive and you get pissy

The paradox continues......

You're actually running from the topic of gay marriage like it were on fire, conceding the argument and refusing to discuss the topic.

Good. You can be taught.

FYI: it's same sex marriage.

 

[Seawytch]

All you incest fans need to get adult incest decriminalized first. Small steps. Best of luck in your endeavors.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

All you incest fans need to get adult incest decriminalized first. Small steps. Best of luck in your endeavors.

Yeah, that one has an icky factor of 22, on a the same scale that has gay sex at 6, and grandma sex at 8. That will take some doing.

 

[Seawytch]

Liberal Elitist, like the Founders of this nation, actually.

The Founding Fathers believed queers could marry?

Nope...nor blacks not being property or women having the right to vote...but they planned for possibilities.

Then you look pretty stupid citing the Founding Fathers as support for gay marriage.

Not at all.


"As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Bottom line: None of the Founding Fathers would have approved of gay marriage. Hell, 30 years ago almost no Democrats would have approved of it.

They would not have approved of non white, non landowning, non males voting either. And?

 

[Pop23]

Since marriage is the result of law, they are all my business, you ******* Nazi moron. Only a fascist would tell me the law is none of my business. I can't imagine a statement that is more blatantly fascist.

Liberal Elitist, like the Founders of this nation, actually.

The Founding Fathers believed queers could marry?

Nope...nor blacks not being property or women having the right to vote...but they planned for possibilities.

Then you look pretty stupid citing the Founding Fathers as support for gay marriage.

Not at all.


"As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." ~ Thomas Jefferson

I somehow don't think TJ was aware the the Supreme Court would actually consider rendering a ruling that opened the door to same sex sibling marriage.

You?

 

[Seawytch]

Liberal Elitist, like the Founders of this nation, actually.

The Founding Fathers believed queers could marry?

Nope...nor blacks not being property or women having the right to vote...but they planned for possibilities.

Then you look pretty stupid citing the Founding Fathers as support for gay marriage.

Not at all.


"As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." ~ Thomas Jefferson

I somehow don't think TJ was aware the the Supreme Court would actually consider rendering a ruling that opened the door to same sex sibling marriage.

You?

You mean when they ruled on Loving in the 60s?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Red Minnow will be disappointed to find out his fellow incest/polygamy travelers will have to build their own legal cases to make their desires legal.

Odd isn't it that people claiming to be filled with moral sanctity are arguing for incest, plural marriages, and sex with children if consenting adults of the same sex are allowed to marry. Really odd.

You idiot, I am opposed to those things, but I understand that you revert to insults when you have lost the debate to a logical, reasoned, intelligent response.

I am not going to go back and forth with you on this. Time will prove me right.

No, time won't prove that being gay is the same as raping a child.

no one ever said it would. parent/child marriage when both are over the age of majority is not rape, but it could become legal if gay marriage becomes legal.

deny it all you want, but we are on a legal slippery slope.

They always bring up that straw man because they have no valid arguments against it. If you look at all the arguments supporting gay marriage, they are all based on one logical fallacy or another.

there is no logical fallacy in supporting equal rights and if there is it is lodged in your tiny little retarded brain. Only those who claim liberty as their cause take away the rights of others - to marry, to form unions, to vote.

Have you or any other member of the Crazy Right Wing rewritten the DoI, and eliminated this phrase:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Liberal Elitist, like the Founders of this nation, actually.

The Founding Fathers believed queers could marry?

Nope...nor blacks not being property or women having the right to vote...but they planned for possibilities.

Then you look pretty stupid citing the Founding Fathers as support for gay marriage.

Not at all.


"As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." ~ Thomas Jefferson

I somehow don't think TJ was aware the the Supreme Court would actually consider rendering a ruling that opened the door to same sex sibling marriage.

You?

He wouldn't have imagined what we are doing now, sitting around in our underwear in front of a computer screen arguing about gay marriage and incest.

 

[Pop23]

All you incest fans need to get adult incest decriminalized first. Small steps. Best of luck in your endeavors.

Yeah, that one has an icky factor of 22, on a the same scale that has gay sex at 6, and elderly sex at 8. That will take some doing.

Not when you guys provided all the ammunition needed, by the way, you do realize that sex is not a requirement for a marriage license. Right? You knew that, Right?

You both are so old fashioned.

Marriage today is simply a financial arrangement.

You traditionalists crack me up.

 

[RKMBrown]

Nonsense. You wouldn't know legal precedent from a hole the ground. Gay marriage between TWO CONSENTING ADULTS is not the same as incest, plural marriage, or sex with children. OMFG

Bullshit, if the SC rules that gay marriage is to be sanctioned in every state, that ruling would set a valid legal precedent for all forms of marriage.

For you information, the ACLU is already working on taking polygamy to the SC using gay marriage as precedent.

You, my friend, know nothing about how our legal system works.

Bullshit. Apparently, I know a helluva lot more about our legal system than you do. Anyone can make any argument, that does not mean the court will hear or agree with their argument.

Reasons for approving gay marriage:
equality
freedom to marry who you love
fairness
discrimination

those exact same arguments can, and will, be made for all forms of marriage, using gay marriage as a valid binding legal precedent.

I don't care if you agree, it is already in the works.
Time will prove me right, and you wrong
Watch.

With plural marriages, yes. That argument can be used.
However, with incest and sex with children harm is done to the children, thus the argument does not hold any weight.

I never said anything about under age children. I said consenting adults.

Ok then explain what you meant by "parent/child marriages." Note you appeared to be defending pop23 who is talking about marrying underage children.

 

[Pop23]

Odd isn't it that people claiming to be filled with moral sanctity are arguing for incest, plural marriages, and sex with children if consenting adults of the same sex are allowed to marry. Really odd.

You idiot, I am opposed to those things, but I understand that you revert to insults when you have lost the debate to a logical, reasoned, intelligent response.

I am not going to go back and forth with you on this. Time will prove me right.

No, time won't prove that being gay is the same as raping a child.

no one ever said it would. parent/child marriage when both are over the age of majority is not rape, but it could become legal if gay marriage becomes legal.

deny it all you want, but we are on a legal slippery slope.

They always bring up that straw man because they have no valid arguments against it. If you look at all the arguments supporting gay marriage, they are all based on one logical fallacy or another.

there is no logical fallacy in supporting equal rights and if there is it is lodged in your tiny little retarded brain. Only those who claim liberty as their cause take away the rights of others - to marry, to form unions, to vote.

Have you or any other member of the Crazy Right Wing rewritten the DoI, and eliminated this phrase:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

You realize you just made another argument for same sex sibling marriage, right? You're not stoopid enough to think you didn't.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

All you incest fans need to get adult incest decriminalized first. Small steps. Best of luck in your endeavors.

Yeah, that one has an icky factor of 22, on a the same scale that has gay sex at 6, and elderly sex at 8. That will take some doing.

Not when you guys provided all the ammunition needed, by the way, you do realize that sex is not a requirement for a marriage license. Right? You knew that, Right?

You both are so old fashioned.

Marriage today is simply a financial arrangement.

You traditionalists crack me up.

How many times do I have to say Any Two Adults? Your dog doesn't hunt, move along.

When incest becomes legal then you can argue for marriage equality, not before.

 

[Wry Catcher]

The Founding Fathers believed queers could marry?

Nope...nor blacks not being property or women having the right to vote...but they planned for possibilities.

Then you look pretty stupid citing the Founding Fathers as support for gay marriage.

Not at all.


"As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." ~ Thomas Jefferson

I somehow don't think TJ was aware the the Supreme Court would actually consider rendering a ruling that opened the door to same sex sibling marriage.

You?

You mean when they ruled on Loving in the 60s?

"I somehow don't think" is the most honest post ever by POP23.

 

[Pop23]

Bullshit, if the SC rules that gay marriage is to be sanctioned in every state, that ruling would set a valid legal precedent for all forms of marriage.

For you information, the ACLU is already working on taking polygamy to the SC using gay marriage as precedent.

You, my friend, know nothing about how our legal system works.

Bullshit. Apparently, I know a helluva lot more about our legal system than you do. Anyone can make any argument, that does not mean the court will hear or agree with their argument.

Reasons for approving gay marriage:
equality
freedom to marry who you love
fairness
discrimination

those exact same arguments can, and will, be made for all forms of marriage, using gay marriage as a valid binding legal precedent.

I don't care if you agree, it is already in the works.
Time will prove me right, and you wrong
Watch.

With plural marriages, yes. That argument can be used.
However, with incest and sex with children harm is done to the children, thus the argument does not hold any weight.

I never said anything about under age children. I said consenting adults.

Ok then explain what you meant by "parent/child marriages." Note you appeared to be defending pop23 who is talking about marrying underage children.

STOOPID: look for the word marriage above. Soon it won't, but for now it actually has meaning.

 

[RKMBrown]

Nonsense. You wouldn't know legal precedent from a hole the ground. Gay marriage between TWO CONSENTING ADULTS is not the same as incest, plural marriage, or sex with children. OMFG

Red Minnow will be disappointed to find out his fellow incest/polygamy travelers will have to build their own legal cases to make their desires legal.

Odd isn't it that people claiming to be filled with moral sanctity are arguing for incest, plural marriages, and sex with children if consenting adults of the same sex are allowed to marry. Really odd.

You idiot, I am opposed to those things, but I understand that you revert to insults when you have lost the debate to a logical, reasoned, intelligent response.

I am not going to go back and forth with you on this. Time will prove me right.

No, time won't prove that being gay is the same as raping a child.

no one ever said it would. parent/child marriage when both are over the age of majority is not rape, but it could become legal if gay marriage becomes legal.

deny it all you want, but we are on a legal slippery slope.

Nonsense. Gays are not screwing their children.

 

[RKMBrown]

Red Minnow will be disappointed to find out his fellow incest/polygamy travelers will have to build their own legal cases to make their desires legal.

Odd isn't it that people claiming to be filled with moral sanctity are arguing for incest, plural marriages, and sex with children if consenting adults of the same sex are allowed to marry. Really odd.

You idiot, I am opposed to those things, but I understand that you revert to insults when you have lost the debate to a logical, reasoned, intelligent response.

I am not going to go back and forth with you on this. Time will prove me right.

No, time won't prove that being gay is the same as raping a child.

no one ever said it would. parent/child marriage when both are over the age of majority is not rape, but it could become legal if gay marriage becomes legal.

deny it all you want, but we are on a legal slippery slope.

They always bring up that straw man because they have no valid arguments against it. If you look at all the arguments supporting gay marriage, they are all based on one logical fallacy or another.

What kind of drugs are you on? The strawman was that gay marriage will lead to child rape and incest.

 

[Pop23]

All you incest fans need to get adult incest decriminalized first. Small steps. Best of luck in your endeavors.

Yeah, that one has an icky factor of 22, on a the same scale that has gay sex at 6, and elderly sex at 8. That will take some doing.

Not when you guys provided all the ammunition needed, by the way, you do realize that sex is not a requirement for a marriage license. Right? You knew that, Right?

You both are so old fashioned.

Marriage today is simply a financial arrangement.

You traditionalists crack me up.

How many times do I have to say Any Two Adults? Your dog doesn't hunt, move along.

When incest becomes legal, then you can argue for marriage equality, not before.

PMH thinks only his/it's opinion matters!

Bigot much.