Latest from NJ

[Kagom]

Anyone else see the irony?

The same can be said of heterosexuals, Glock.

 

[glockmail]

..... what planet do you live on?

Earth, USA, the Big Red Island.

 

[glockmail]

The same can be said of heterosexuals, Glock.

Polygamy is already banned in marriage. Change the definition and see what happens. Some bi will marry both a man and a woman, just like Roadhouse said.

 

[Kagom]

Polygamy is already banned in marriage. Change the definition and see what happens. Some bi will marry both a man and a woman, just like Roadhouse said.

That's a fallacy. There's no evidence for that, merely speculation.

 

[glockmail]

That's a fallacy. There's no evidence for that, merely speculation.

So what do you suppose we do about that? Throw out 5000 years of tradition, just to prove that YOU are wrong?:duh3:

 

[jillian]

Earth, USA, the Big Red Island.

Well, it sure isn't here. That, or maybe you should refrain from making pronouncements about things you know nothing about.
Hint: law isn't your strong suit.

 

[Kagom]

So what do you suppose we do about that? Throw out 5000 years of tradition, just to prove that YOU are wrong?:duh3:

What's that have to do with me pointing out the bisexual/polygamy point is fallacy?

 

[glockmail]

Well, it sure isn't here. That, or maybe you should refrain from making pronouncements about things you know nothing about.
Hint: law isn't your strong suit.

Not in the liberal fringe area that you live? Too bad.

Freedom of speech only applies to those who you agree with?

 

[glockmail]

What's that have to do with me pointing out the bisexual/polygamy point is fallacy?

It is your theory that the point is a fallacy, and the only way to prove you right or wrong is to undo 5000 years of tradition. To a liberal, that may be a nice experiment, but to a conservative, it is an extremely bad idea.

 

[Kagom]

It is your theory that the point is a fallacy, and the only way to prove you right or wrong is to undo 5000 years of tradition. To a liberal, that may be a nice experiment, but to a conservative, it is an extremely bad idea.

Does Canada have polygamist marriages? What about Sweden? The UK? Germany? Spain?

 

[jillian]

Not in the liberal fringe area that you live? Too bad.

Freedom of speech only applies to those who you agree with?

Who said you can't speak?

I simply said don't make pronouncements about law... "conservative" or not since you don't have a clue what you're talking about.... which brings me back to the point I was making.... legislators can't tell judges to "pound sand". Do try to address the point at hand occasionally.

BTW, anyone to the right of Rush Limbaugh has no standing to talk about "fringe areas".

Try again.

 

[glockmail]

Does Canada have polygamist marriages? What about Sweden? The UK? Germany? Spain?

Time will tell. It hasn't been all that long since they went gay.

 

[glockmail]

Who said you can't speak?

I simply said don't make pronouncements about law... "conservative" or not since you don't have a clue what you're talking about.... which brings me back to the point I was making.... legislators can't tell judges to "pound sand". Do try to address the point at hand occasionally.

BTW, anyone to the right of Rush Limbaugh has no standing to talk about "fringe areas".

Try again.

Now my opinion is a "pronouncement"?

Pound sand = flip the bird, ignore, etc.

BTW I am proudly in the conservative fringe- not afraid to admit being an extermist like y'all on the left.

 

[jillian]

Now my opinion is a "pronouncement"?

Pound sand = flip the bird, ignore, etc.

BTW I am proudly in the conservative fringe- not afraid to admit being an extermist like y'all on the left.

You cannot hold an "opinion" on the law which does not comport with the law.

Legislatures cannot ignore the Courts. Period.

 

[roadhouse158]

http://www.pro-polygamy.com/

Need I say more....Your actually OK with this? People have on blinders today. I just don't get it. I agree with Glockmail..Only time will tell. I'm sure they will try here first.

 

[glockmail]

You cannot hold an "opinion" on the law which does not comport with the law.

Legislatures cannot ignore the Courts. Period.

I can hold any opinion that I want. Here, I'll use the old lawyers trick: "In my legal opinion, blah, blah, blah..

Legislatures can ignore the courts as I stated in the past. If effect, the law in question becomes moot.

BTW, post 17, baby cakes!

 

[glockmail]

http://www.pro-polygamy.com/

Need I say more....Your actually OK with this? People have on blinders today. I just don't get it. I agree with Glockmail..Only time will tell. I'm sure they will try here first.

Lets not give them the chance. :chains:

 

[jillian]

I can hold any opinion that I want. Here, I'll use the old lawyers trick: "In my legal opinion, blah, blah, blah..

Legislatures can ignore the courts as I stated in the past. If effect, the law in question becomes moot.

BTW, post 17, baby cakes!

Do please site the legal precedent proving that legislatures ignore the Courts.
I await the results of your legal research.
And I explained what "moot" means, lambie pie... and you're using the word incorrectly.

Gotta give you credit for tenacity, though, sugar cheeks. No matter how ignorant you appear or how wrong you're proven to be, you keep on going like the Everready Bunny.

As for post 17, you don't like it, stop saying really dumb stuff about things you know nothing about.

 

[Kagom]

http://www.pro-polygamy.com/

Need I say more....Your actually OK with this? People have on blinders today. I just don't get it. I agree with Glockmail..Only time will tell. I'm sure they will try here first.

I'm okay with polygamy if it's a religious thing like it is for the Mormons and Muslims. However, Sweden's had gay marriage/civil unions for some time now and I've yet to hear of any endeavors to get polygamy in. And I know quite a few people into polygamy. I had an ex try to force me into a polygamic relationship and I wouldn't go along with it. You're only making speculations and assumptions based on nothing other than your own fears.

 

[glockmail]

Do please site the legal precedent proving that legislatures ignore the Courts. ....

**(points to signature line)**

Nice straw man though.