Killing Homosexual Marriage

[Syriusly]

You're very confused. I've said that the Obergefell ruling never even mentions it. And that the States forbid bigamy.

You do know what a State is, right?

No problem. The Supreme Court by a ruling of 5 to 4, will just have to overturn that one as well.

Unless they don't. As you've noted, the Supreme Court has never so much as mentioned it. Let alone shown the slightest interest in protecting it as a right.

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Well then why did you ask- the Supreme Court never authorized anything.

Which they didn't.

The Supreme Court overturned unconstitutional laws- and that is exactly what they can do- and did.

 

[the_human_being]

Te
Tell me, how does it feel to be pointed out and snickered at? Do folks feel dirty when the shake your hand?

Projecting much?

The majority of Americans support the rights of Americans who happen to be gay being able to allowed to marry- like I do.

You of course want to deny Americans their rights- whether it is mixed race couples or gay couples.

Sucks to be you.

Well, apparently those in Kentucky and Alabama and a few other states don't agree with your depraved lifestyle. Aren't they Americans too?

Wait- Kentucky and Alabama don't agree with my 'depraved lifestyle'?

Which part of it don't they agree with?

• That I am educated
• That I am gainfully employed
• That I pay taxes
• That I have been married to the same woman for over 20 years
• That I am a father- and actually parent my child
• That I don't advocate the discrimination against American couples who happen to be gay?
• That I don't advocate the discrimination against American couples who are mixed race?

Tell me - which part of my 'depraved lifestyle' don't they agree with?

That you are a homosexual.

And you fantasize that I am a homosexual because........?

Because you are one.

 

[Pop23]

Link to my advocating for the state forcing sex within a marriage, since that is what you contend.

Or, advocating for incest.

Be so kind.

So you don't advocate incest marriage.....or you do? Again, you run from any question about it so often, its hard to tell.

Oh, and you were so sure I was, but can't find the link?

You could simply post a link that requires sex as a requirement to marriage and YOU WOULD HAVE ME!

Produce the post in which I advocate siblings having sex (remember, sex isn't a requirement of marriage), a law requiring married couples to have sex.

OR ADMIT YOU ARE A TROLL.

Thanks in advance
Sincerely,

Pop23

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what your argument is. As you advocate incest marriage...then abandon it as soon as its mentioned. Then declare that its what you're talking about.

If even you don't have the slightest clue what your position is, what chance do I have?

Incest is an act.

Provide the link to a law stating that Sex is an ACT required in marriage.

You may think it is, but without the link to that ACT being a requirement, you are simply being an attention whore.

Only a pervert would think that the only reason two siblings would enter into a contract is to have sex with each other.

I know many siblings that are contractually obligated to each other AND NONE HAVE EVER HAD SEX WITH EACH OTHER.

Now explain why you think marriage MUST INCLUDE SEX.

So you are advocating incest marriage or you're not? Because all you seem to talk about is siblings marrying.

Only a pervert thinks the two must be the same.

Tell me perv, can't two same sex siblings marry simply to share the economic benefits that gays say is the reason they claim they were being discriminated from?

Or is sex a requirement of marriage?

Common dude, you're not very open minded are you?

 

[the_human_being]

You started this thread for the purpose of railing against gay marriage. From the beginning you have been on a crusade to deny gays the right to marry and the benefits that go with it. It is clear that you see gays as flawed and fundamentally different, and underserving of the same rights and benefits as others.

Well, none of this is true at all, but for the sake of argument, let's assume it is... what are you going to do about that? Does Gay Marriage fix that? Do you think being a belligerent prick to me will fix that? Insulting me, ridiculing my beliefs, assassinating my character? In the end, are you not still going to feel as if you are being unfairly discriminated against by society? And what about if you somehow, through all your hate-filled ranting and insulting me, managed to change my heart and turn me into your biggest ally... rallying me to your cause and causing me to remorsefully repent and show my deepest regrets... will that change how you feel about the way gays are treated in society?

You see.... I don't think it matters. Homosexuals are actively engaged in an abnormal sexual behavior that is immoral and wrong and they know it is. So it's almost a pathological guilt complex you have that no one will ever be able to appease. We can't do enough for you to make you feel normal. And ultimately, that is what is driving all of this. Now it may not be the PC thing to tell you this but it's the truth and you know it's the truth.

OK then, none of it is true. Those were not your words? OK, let’s give you the benefit of the doubt for a second. You’re not a bigot. Oh, but wait! Fast forward to the next paragraph where you say :“Homosexuals are actively engaged in an abnormal sexual behavior that is immoral and wrong and they know it is. So it's almost a pathological guilt complex you have that no one will ever be able to appease”. Holy shit! Do you realize how you just contradicted yourself and outed yourself for what you are? It is still all about the sex and nothing about the human factor. You are still moralizing and pontification as though you were the highest authority on such things.

The other thing is, you keep making this about me. I think that I pointed out to you the stupidity of making assumptions about a person’s sexuality based on their political views but I guess that was lost on you. And you’re the one that was ranting about how it was straight people who won the day for gays based on the” perceived discrimination” against gays. Well dude, I one of those straight people who “perceive” the reality of discrimination and can’t stomach it.

You can call me hate filled and bigoted all you want. It does not change the fact that you are projecting your own hate and bigotry onto me. I will add that it matters little how I feel about how gays are treated in society. What matters to all decent people is how gays are actually treated in society, and under the law.

I do believe that I have detected some cracks in your armor. That you are coming to see that you’re on shaky ground and that you are running out of bull shit. You keep tossing dung at the wall to see if something sticks and guess what? The only thing that is sticking is the egg on your face. We are really done here Boss Man

Does this mean another ****** is leaving the board? AIDS got you down?

 

[the_human_being]

So you don't advocate incest marriage.....or you do? Again, you run from any question about it so often, its hard to tell.

Oh, and you were so sure I was, but can't find the link?

You could simply post a link that requires sex as a requirement to marriage and YOU WOULD HAVE ME!

Produce the post in which I advocate siblings having sex (remember, sex isn't a requirement of marriage), a law requiring married couples to have sex.

OR ADMIT YOU ARE A TROLL.

Thanks in advance
Sincerely,

Pop23

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what your argument is. As you advocate incest marriage...then abandon it as soon as its mentioned. Then declare that its what you're talking about.

If even you don't have the slightest clue what your position is, what chance do I have?

Incest is an act.

Provide the link to a law stating that Sex is an ACT required in marriage.

You may think it is, but without the link to that ACT being a requirement, you are simply being an attention whore.

Only a pervert would think that the only reason two siblings would enter into a contract is to have sex with each other.

I know many siblings that are contractually obligated to each other AND NONE HAVE EVER HAD SEX WITH EACH OTHER.

Now explain why you think marriage MUST INCLUDE SEX.

So you are advocating incest marriage or you're not? Because all you seem to talk about is siblings marrying.

Only a pervert thinks the two must be the same.

Tell me perv, can't two same sex siblings marry simply to share the economic benefits that gays say is the reason they claim they were being discriminated from?

Or is sex a requirement of marriage?

Common dude, you're not very open minded are you?

Nah. He's a real bigot.

 

[Pop23]

Projecting much?

The majority of Americans support the rights of Americans who happen to be gay being able to allowed to marry- like I do.

You of course want to deny Americans their rights- whether it is mixed race couples or gay couples.

Sucks to be you.

Well, apparently those in Kentucky and Alabama and a few other states don't agree with your depraved lifestyle. Aren't they Americans too?

Wait- Kentucky and Alabama don't agree with my 'depraved lifestyle'?

Which part of it don't they agree with?

• That I am educated
• That I am gainfully employed
• That I pay taxes
• That I have been married to the same woman for over 20 years
• That I am a father- and actually parent my child
• That I don't advocate the discrimination against American couples who happen to be gay?
• That I don't advocate the discrimination against American couples who are mixed race?

Tell me - which part of my 'depraved lifestyle' don't they agree with?

That you are a homosexual.

And you fantasize that I am a homosexual because........?

Because you are one.

It also thinks that 3 individuals can't wish to be married for the economic benefits, that somehow marriage is about sex even though it's not a requirement of the law.

All the sudden these morons want to argue about tradition.

You can't make this shit up!

 

[Skylar]

So you don't advocate incest marriage.....or you do? Again, you run from any question about it so often, its hard to tell.

Oh, and you were so sure I was, but can't find the link?

You could simply post a link that requires sex as a requirement to marriage and YOU WOULD HAVE ME!

Produce the post in which I advocate siblings having sex (remember, sex isn't a requirement of marriage), a law requiring married couples to have sex.

OR ADMIT YOU ARE A TROLL.

Thanks in advance
Sincerely,

Pop23

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what your argument is. As you advocate incest marriage...then abandon it as soon as its mentioned. Then declare that its what you're talking about.

If even you don't have the slightest clue what your position is, what chance do I have?

Incest is an act.

Provide the link to a law stating that Sex is an ACT required in marriage.

You may think it is, but without the link to that ACT being a requirement, you are simply being an attention whore.

Only a pervert would think that the only reason two siblings would enter into a contract is to have sex with each other.

I know many siblings that are contractually obligated to each other AND NONE HAVE EVER HAD SEX WITH EACH OTHER.

Now explain why you think marriage MUST INCLUDE SEX.

So you are advocating incest marriage or you're not? Because all you seem to talk about is siblings marrying.

Only a pervert thinks the two must be the same.

Tell me perv, can't two same sex siblings marry simply to share the economic benefits that gays say is the reason they claim they were being discriminated from?

Or is sex a requirement of marriage?

Common dude, you're not very open minded are you?

So are you advocating incest marriage or not? You keep deflecting every time I ask you.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You started this thread for the purpose of railing against gay marriage. From the beginning you have been on a crusade to deny gays the right to marry and the benefits that go with it. It is clear that you see gays as flawed and fundamentally different, and underserving of the same rights and benefits as others.

Well, none of this is true at all, but for the sake of argument, let's assume it is... what are you going to do about that? Does Gay Marriage fix that? Do you think being a belligerent prick to me will fix that? Insulting me, ridiculing my beliefs, assassinating my character? In the end, are you not still going to feel as if you are being unfairly discriminated against by society? And what about if you somehow, through all your hate-filled ranting and insulting me, managed to change my heart and turn me into your biggest ally... rallying me to your cause and causing me to remorsefully repent and show my deepest regrets... will that change how you feel about the way gays are treated in society?

You see.... I don't think it matters. Homosexuals are actively engaged in an abnormal sexual behavior that is immoral and wrong and they know it is. So it's almost a pathological guilt complex you have that no one will ever be able to appease. We can't do enough for you to make you feel normal. And ultimately, that is what is driving all of this. Now it may not be the PC thing to tell you this but it's the truth and you know it's the truth.

OK then, none of it is true. Those were not your words? OK, let’s give you the benefit of the doubt for a second. You’re not a bigot. Oh, but wait! Fast forward to the next paragraph where you say :“Homosexuals are actively engaged in an abnormal sexual behavior that is immoral and wrong and they know it is. So it's almost a pathological guilt complex you have that no one will ever be able to appease”. Holy shit! Do you realize how you just contradicted yourself and outed yourself for what you are? It is still all about the sex and nothing about the human factor. You are still moralizing and pontification as though you were the highest authority on such things.

The other thing is, you keep making this about me. I think that I pointed out to you the stupidity of making assumptions about a person’s sexuality based on their political views but I guess that was lost on you. And you’re the one that was ranting about how it was straight people who won the day for gays based on the” perceived discrimination” against gays. Well dude, I one of those straight people who “perceive” the reality of discrimination and can’t stomach it.

You can call me hate filled and bigoted all you want. It does not change the fact that you are projecting your own hate and bigotry onto me. I will add that it matters little how I feel about how gays are treated in society. What matters to all decent people is how gays are actually treated in society, and under the law.

I do believe that I have detected some cracks in your armor. That you are coming to see that you’re on shaky ground and that you are running out of bull shit. You keep tossing dung at the wall to see if something sticks and guess what? The only thing that is sticking is the egg on your face. We are really done here Boss Man

Does this mean another ****** is leaving the board? AIDS got you down?

I'm not going anywhere

 

[the_human_being]

No problem. The Supreme Court by a ruling of 5 to 4, will just have to overturn that one as well.

Unless they don't. As you've noted, the Supreme Court has never so much as mentioned it. Let alone shown the slightest interest in protecting it as a right.

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Well then why did you ask- the Supreme Court never authorized anything.

Which they didn't.

The Supreme Court overturned unconstitutional laws- and that is exactly what they can do- and did.

No they didn't overturn anything. All they did was render a ruling. It's still up to the states whether or not to adhere to their opinion.

 

[Skylar]

You're very confused. I've said that the Obergefell ruling never even mentions it. And that the States forbid bigamy.

You do know what a State is, right?

No problem. The Supreme Court by a ruling of 5 to 4, will just have to overturn that one as well.

Unless they don't. As you've noted, the Supreme Court has never so much as mentioned it. Let alone shown the slightest interest in protecting it as a right.

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Then show us the ruling where the courts authorized polygamy and overrode state laws. You said that the USSC ruling already authorized it.

Where? Quote the ruling you're referring to.

 

[Skylar]

Unless they don't. As you've noted, the Supreme Court has never so much as mentioned it. Let alone shown the slightest interest in protecting it as a right.

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Well then why did you ask- the Supreme Court never authorized anything.

Which they didn't.

The Supreme Court overturned unconstitutional laws- and that is exactly what they can do- and did.

No they didn't overturn anything. All they did was render a ruling. It's still up to the states whether or not to adhere to their opinion.

Oh, their rulings are quite binding. The States don't have the option of ignoring them.

As demonstrated by 50 of 50 states issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples. Remember, our legal system and what you imagine our legal system is really have nothing to do with each other.

 

[Skylar]

Te
Tell me, how does it feel to be pointed out and snickered at? Do folks feel dirty when the shake your hand?

Projecting much?

The majority of Americans support the rights of Americans who happen to be gay being able to allowed to marry- like I do.

You of course want to deny Americans their rights- whether it is mixed race couples or gay couples.

Sucks to be you.

Well, apparently those in Kentucky and Alabama and a few other states don't agree with your depraved lifestyle. Aren't they Americans too?

Wait- Kentucky and Alabama don't agree with my 'depraved lifestyle'?

Which part of it don't they agree with?

• That I am educated
• That I am gainfully employed
• That I pay taxes
• That I have been married to the same woman for over 20 years
• That I am a father- and actually parent my child
• That I don't advocate the discrimination against American couples who happen to be gay?
• That I don't advocate the discrimination against American couples who are mixed race?

Tell me - which part of my 'depraved lifestyle' don't they agree with?

That you are a homosexual.

And you fantasize that I am a homosexual because........?

He does it with most everyone. Hope blossoms eternal, I suppose.

 

[Pop23]

Oh, and you were so sure I was, but can't find the link?

You could simply post a link that requires sex as a requirement to marriage and YOU WOULD HAVE ME!

Produce the post in which I advocate siblings having sex (remember, sex isn't a requirement of marriage), a law requiring married couples to have sex.

OR ADMIT YOU ARE A TROLL.

Thanks in advance
Sincerely,

Pop23

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what your argument is. As you advocate incest marriage...then abandon it as soon as its mentioned. Then declare that its what you're talking about.

If even you don't have the slightest clue what your position is, what chance do I have?

Incest is an act.

Provide the link to a law stating that Sex is an ACT required in marriage.

You may think it is, but without the link to that ACT being a requirement, you are simply being an attention whore.

Only a pervert would think that the only reason two siblings would enter into a contract is to have sex with each other.

I know many siblings that are contractually obligated to each other AND NONE HAVE EVER HAD SEX WITH EACH OTHER.

Now explain why you think marriage MUST INCLUDE SEX.

So you are advocating incest marriage or you're not? Because all you seem to talk about is siblings marrying.

Only a pervert thinks the two must be the same.

Tell me perv, can't two same sex siblings marry simply to share the economic benefits that gays say is the reason they claim they were being discriminated from?

Or is sex a requirement of marriage?

Common dude, you're not very open minded are you?

So are you advocating incest marriage or not? You keep deflecting every time I ask you.

Where's the deflection?

Incest is an act I detest.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Unless they don't. As you've noted, the Supreme Court has never so much as mentioned it. Let alone shown the slightest interest in protecting it as a right.

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Well then why did you ask- the Supreme Court never authorized anything.

Which they didn't.

The Supreme Court overturned unconstitutional laws- and that is exactly what they can do- and did.

No they didn't overturn anything. All they did was render a ruling. It's still up to the states whether or not to adhere to their opinion.

Equine excrement! You really are that stupid aren't you? You are right down there on the IQ scale with Huckabee and Cruz

 

[Skylar]

I'm still trying to figure out exactly what your argument is. As you advocate incest marriage...then abandon it as soon as its mentioned. Then declare that its what you're talking about.

If even you don't have the slightest clue what your position is, what chance do I have?

Incest is an act.

Provide the link to a law stating that Sex is an ACT required in marriage.

You may think it is, but without the link to that ACT being a requirement, you are simply being an attention whore.

Only a pervert would think that the only reason two siblings would enter into a contract is to have sex with each other.

I know many siblings that are contractually obligated to each other AND NONE HAVE EVER HAD SEX WITH EACH OTHER.

Now explain why you think marriage MUST INCLUDE SEX.

So you are advocating incest marriage or you're not? Because all you seem to talk about is siblings marrying.

Only a pervert thinks the two must be the same.

Tell me perv, can't two same sex siblings marry simply to share the economic benefits that gays say is the reason they claim they were being discriminated from?

Or is sex a requirement of marriage?

Common dude, you're not very open minded are you?

So are you advocating incest marriage or not? You keep deflecting every time I ask you.

Where's the deflection?

Incest is an act I detest.

So now you oppose sibling marriage.

Sigh...make up your mind.

 

[the_human_being]

No problem. The Supreme Court by a ruling of 5 to 4, will just have to overturn that one as well.

Unless they don't. As you've noted, the Supreme Court has never so much as mentioned it. Let alone shown the slightest interest in protecting it as a right.

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Then show us the ruling where the courts authorized polygamy and overrode state laws. You said that the USSC ruling already authorized it.

Where? Quote the ruling you're referring to.

You are a true idiot. I have stated over and over and over and over and over that their ruling did in no way forbid it. Please don't make me repeat it yet again.

 

[Pop23]

You started this thread for the purpose of railing against gay marriage. From the beginning you have been on a crusade to deny gays the right to marry and the benefits that go with it. It is clear that you see gays as flawed and fundamentally different, and underserving of the same rights and benefits as others.

Well, none of this is true at all, but for the sake of argument, let's assume it is... what are you going to do about that? Does Gay Marriage fix that? Do you think being a belligerent prick to me will fix that? Insulting me, ridiculing my beliefs, assassinating my character? In the end, are you not still going to feel as if you are being unfairly discriminated against by society? And what about if you somehow, through all your hate-filled ranting and insulting me, managed to change my heart and turn me into your biggest ally... rallying me to your cause and causing me to remorsefully repent and show my deepest regrets... will that change how you feel about the way gays are treated in society?

You see.... I don't think it matters. Homosexuals are actively engaged in an abnormal sexual behavior that is immoral and wrong and they know it is. So it's almost a pathological guilt complex you have that no one will ever be able to appease. We can't do enough for you to make you feel normal. And ultimately, that is what is driving all of this. Now it may not be the PC thing to tell you this but it's the truth and you know it's the truth.

OK then, none of it is true. Those were not your words? OK, let’s give you the benefit of the doubt for a second. You’re not a bigot. Oh, but wait! Fast forward to the next paragraph where you say :“Homosexuals are actively engaged in an abnormal sexual behavior that is immoral and wrong and they know it is. So it's almost a pathological guilt complex you have that no one will ever be able to appease”. Holy shit! Do you realize how you just contradicted yourself and outed yourself for what you are? It is still all about the sex and nothing about the human factor. You are still moralizing and pontification as though you were the highest authority on such things.

The other thing is, you keep making this about me. I think that I pointed out to you the stupidity of making assumptions about a person’s sexuality based on their political views but I guess that was lost on you. And you’re the one that was ranting about how it was straight people who won the day for gays based on the” perceived discrimination” against gays. Well dude, I one of those straight people who “perceive” the reality of discrimination and can’t stomach it.

You can call me hate filled and bigoted all you want. It does not change the fact that you are projecting your own hate and bigotry onto me. I will add that it matters little how I feel about how gays are treated in society. What matters to all decent people is how gays are actually treated in society, and under the law.

I do believe that I have detected some cracks in your armor. That you are coming to see that you’re on shaky ground and that you are running out of bull shit. You keep tossing dung at the wall to see if something sticks and guess what? The only thing that is sticking is the egg on your face. We are really done here Boss Man

Does this mean another ****** is leaving the board? AIDS got you down?

I'm not going anywhere

He added the last part Cuz he likes them.

 

[the_human_being]

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Well then why did you ask- the Supreme Court never authorized anything.

Which they didn't.

The Supreme Court overturned unconstitutional laws- and that is exactly what they can do- and did.

No they didn't overturn anything. All they did was render a ruling. It's still up to the states whether or not to adhere to their opinion.

Equine excrement! You really are that stupid aren't you? You are right down there on the ICQ scale with Huckabee and Cruz

You'll never see the day you are as smart as Cruz. Nor as moral.

 

[Pop23]

Incest is an act.

Provide the link to a law stating that Sex is an ACT required in marriage.

You may think it is, but without the link to that ACT being a requirement, you are simply being an attention whore.

Only a pervert would think that the only reason two siblings would enter into a contract is to have sex with each other.

I know many siblings that are contractually obligated to each other AND NONE HAVE EVER HAD SEX WITH EACH OTHER.

Now explain why you think marriage MUST INCLUDE SEX.

So you are advocating incest marriage or you're not? Because all you seem to talk about is siblings marrying.

Only a pervert thinks the two must be the same.

Tell me perv, can't two same sex siblings marry simply to share the economic benefits that gays say is the reason they claim they were being discriminated from?

Or is sex a requirement of marriage?

Common dude, you're not very open minded are you?

So are you advocating incest marriage or not? You keep deflecting every time I ask you.

Where's the deflection?

Incest is an act I detest.

So now you oppose sibling marriage.

Sigh...make up your mind.

Pervert, incest is an act, sex is not a requirement of marriage.

You're not the sharpest tack in the box are you?

 

[Skylar]

Unless they don't. As you've noted, the Supreme Court has never so much as mentioned it. Let alone shown the slightest interest in protecting it as a right.

The Supreme Court usually doesn't comment on anything unless it is brought before them. I can't figure out why you're so bigoted against it. You claim you're not but anyone can see you really are.

How then can the Supreme Court authorize polygamy.....by never mentioning in a case that has nothing to do with polygamy?

By your logic, Madison v. Marbury authorized polygamy. As it had nothing to do with polygamy nor ever mentioned it.

How did they authorize gay and lesbian marriages? A 5 to 4 vote. Besides, the Supreme Court cannot authorize anything.

Then show us the ruling where the courts authorized polygamy and overrode state laws. You said that the USSC ruling already authorized it.

Where? Quote the ruling you're referring to.

You are a true idiot. I have stated over and over and over and over and over that their ruling did in no way forbid it. Please don't make me repeat it yet again.

You said the Supreme Court opened the door for any almost kind of marriage to take place.

Show me. Don't tell me. Quote the ruling that authorizes polygamy.