Why can't these People be Married together?...

[Flopper]

Husband, wife and lover all live together - Mirror Online

They look like a Happy, Caring, Stable, Loving Family... Who are you to Judge and tell them they can't be Married?

Bigots!



peace...

I just skimmed the article but I saw nothing in the article to indicate that anybody wanted to marry anyone. In fact, I saw nothing even newsworthy about this story, a women with kids is living with her ex-husband and also her boy friend. This is news?

 

[Redfish]

Not my problem...the lawyers are paid by the litigants

Like the disposition of any property, the house and cars would be assigned a fair market value and Louise and Mary each get a fifth

Divorce is always messy and kids pay a price...this situation is no different

I agree with the muslim men. The sex part is easy, it is the emotional baggage that is hard. Wouldn't catch me in a polygamous marriage. But it doesn't harm me in the least if others do it

It doesn't harm me either, but we need to look beyond ourselves, it would harm society.

How?

If I have to explain it to you, you will never understand. Now, go make love to your goat, she just called you--------baaaaaaaa baaaaaaaa.

 

[rightwinger]

It doesn't harm me either, but we need to look beyond ourselves, it would harm society.

How?

If I have to explain it to you, you will never understand. Now, go make love to your goat, she just called you--------baaaaaaaa baaaaaaaa.

What a childlike response

You made a claim it would harm society and I asked you to point out how. Other than outraged bible thumpers, how is society harmed?

 

[Redfish]

How?

If I have to explain it to you, you will never understand. Now, go make love to your goat, she just called you--------baaaaaaaa baaaaaaaa.

What a childlike response

You made a claim it would harm society and I asked you to point out how. Other than outraged bible thumpers, how is society harmed?

Oh what an idiot you seem to be. But let me try. Since the dawn of time males and females have committed to each other in order to bring children into the world and raise them in a committed, secure, and loving relationship, to teach them right from wrong, to give them stability and purpose in life.

group marriage cannot produce stable well adjusted children, there are just too many contradictions to it, too many complexities.

We see the same problems in one parent families, moms raising kids without fathers or husbands. society suffers when traditional families are not present.

If you disagree with that, fine. I am done with you and you foolish views of life and just about every thing else.

you are one stupid post from my ignore list.

 

[rightwinger]

If I have to explain it to you, you will never understand. Now, go make love to your goat, she just called you--------baaaaaaaa baaaaaaaa.

What a childlike response

You made a claim it would harm society and I asked you to point out how. Other than outraged bible thumpers, how is society harmed?

Oh what an idiot you seem to be. But let me try. Since the dawn of time males and females have committed to each other in order to bring children into the world and raise them in a committed, secure, and loving relationship, to teach them right from wrong, to give them stability and purpose in life.

group marriage cannot produce stable well adjusted children, there are just too many contradictions to it, too many complexities.

We see the same problems in one parent families, moms raising kids without fathers or husbands. society suffers when traditional families are not present.

If you disagree with that, fine. I am done with you and you foolish views of life and just about every thing else.

you are one stupid post from my ignore list.

Just what I expected from your childlike responses......pablum

The same arguments have been used against interracial marriages and gay marriage......We know the children will be harmed
With no supporting data

The key to a family is love and a safe stable environment

Many traditional families cannot provide that. Yet the religious right refuses to allow non-traditional families to try.......because they "know"

 

[Redfish]

What a childlike response

You made a claim it would harm society and I asked you to point out how. Other than outraged bible thumpers, how is society harmed?

Oh what an idiot you seem to be. But let me try. Since the dawn of time males and females have committed to each other in order to bring children into the world and raise them in a committed, secure, and loving relationship, to teach them right from wrong, to give them stability and purpose in life.

group marriage cannot produce stable well adjusted children, there are just too many contradictions to it, too many complexities.

We see the same problems in one parent families, moms raising kids without fathers or husbands. society suffers when traditional families are not present.

If you disagree with that, fine. I am done with you and you foolish views of life and just about every thing else.

you are one stupid post from my ignore list.

Just what I expected from your childlike responses......pablum

The same arguments have been used against interracial marriages and gay marriage......We know the children will be harmed
With no supporting data

The key to a family is love and a safe stable environment

Many traditional families cannot provide that. Yet the religious right refuses to allow non-traditional families to try.......because they "know"

children from gay and interracial marriages do have more problems in life. that is a known fact. throw in 5 mothers and who knows what these kids will become.

 

[KevinWestern]

children from gay and interracial marriages do have more problems in life. that is a known fact. throw in 5 mothers and who knows what these kids will become.

And for gay parents /interracial couples who have their own children, are you going to tell the child who was born to a gay mother that they'd be better off if they didn't exist at all because now they "might have some more problems in life"?

Also, with regards to adoption... two loving parents Redfish - how bad can it possibly be? Would you rather them stay with the State and not go up for adoption at all? Or maybe grow up in a series of foster homes? You know I hear that causes some "problems" too.


.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Government recognizes marriage in order to ensure that mothers and children are supported.

If folks want hetero, homo, polyandry, or polygamy as a marriage style, sure.

not surprising coming from you.

Of course it is not surprising. I have been married twice (my first wife passed), have had sexual relations only with those two women, have wonderful children and grandchildren, and happily support my church and its life.

I am worried about the soul-damaged like you, Redfish.

 

[rightwinger]

Oh what an idiot you seem to be. But let me try. Since the dawn of time males and females have committed to each other in order to bring children into the world and raise them in a committed, secure, and loving relationship, to teach them right from wrong, to give them stability and purpose in life.

group marriage cannot produce stable well adjusted children, there are just too many contradictions to it, too many complexities.

We see the same problems in one parent families, moms raising kids without fathers or husbands. society suffers when traditional families are not present.

If you disagree with that, fine. I am done with you and you foolish views of life and just about every thing else.

you are one stupid post from my ignore list.

Just what I expected from your childlike responses......pablum

The same arguments have been used against interracial marriages and gay marriage......We know the children will be harmed
With no supporting data

The key to a family is love and a safe stable environment

Many traditional families cannot provide that. Yet the religious right refuses to allow non-traditional families to try.......because they "know"

children from gay and interracial marriages do have more problems in life. that is a known fact. throw in 5 mothers and who knows what these kids will become.

I have seen heterosexual couples that made horrible spouses and horrible parents. A point should be made that these people should not be allowed to marry and once divorced, never allowed to marry again

Yet we allow heterosexuals to marry and divorce at will

There is no evidence that interracial or gay parents do any worse than "conventional" parents.

Kids need love. The more people that love them, the better off they are.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If gay marriage becomes legal, all forms of "marriage" will also become legal. Lawyers for bigamists and polygamists are waiting, the ACLU is waiting.

Gay marriage IS the beginning of the slippery slope. Anyone who denies that is either blind or stupid or both.

Your slippery slope fallacy is just as wrong in this thread as it is in every other same-sex couples’ access to marriage thread, and for the same reasons:

Same-sex couples are already eligible to access each states’ marriage law, no state’s marriage law can accommodate plural marriage.

Laws prohibiting same-sex couples from accessing marriage law contracts they’re eligible to enter into are un-Constitutional, laws prohibiting plural marriage are not. Laws prohibiting plural marriage are applied to everyone equally, no single class of person is singled out, and they pursue a legitimate legislative end.

Laws prohibiting same-sex couples from accessing marriage law do not seek a legitimate legislative end, are predicated on no facts or evidence, and are designed only to make homosexuals different from everyone else -– this the states cannot do.

Obviously you’re too blinded by your hate and willful ignorance to understand these simple facts of law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Oh what an idiot you seem to be. But let me try. Since the dawn of time males and females have committed to each other in order to bring children into the world and raise them in a committed, secure, and loving relationship, to teach them right from wrong, to give them stability and purpose in life.

group marriage cannot produce stable well adjusted children, there are just too many contradictions to it, too many complexities.

We see the same problems in one parent families, moms raising kids without fathers or husbands. society suffers when traditional families are not present.

If you disagree with that, fine. I am done with you and you foolish views of life and just about every thing else.

you are one stupid post from my ignore list.

Just what I expected from your childlike responses......pablum

The same arguments have been used against interracial marriages and gay marriage......We know the children will be harmed
With no supporting data

The key to a family is love and a safe stable environment

Many traditional families cannot provide that. Yet the religious right refuses to allow non-traditional families to try.......because they "know"

children from gay and interracial marriages do have more problems in life. that is a known fact. throw in 5 mothers and who knows what these kids will become.

Incorrect.

In Perry Proposition 8 supporters failed to provide any evidence in support of their claim that children with same-sex parents suffer any ‘ill-effects.’

In fact, evidence submitted in court documented that children with same-sex parents were just as emotionally healthy and well-adjusted as children with opposite-sex parents.

Children need love and attention from their parents, where gender is irrelevant.

Hollingsworth v. Perry:

PERRY v. BROWN, Nos. 10?16696, 11?16577., February 07, 2012 - US 9th Circuit | FindLaw

 

[Toro]

Husband, wife and lover all live together - Mirror Online

They look like a Happy, Caring, Stable, Loving Family... Who are you to Judge and tell them they can't be Married?

Bigots!



peace...

They should be allowed to marry.

 

[Pheonixops]

Husband, wife and lover all live together - Mirror Online

They look like a Happy, Caring, Stable, Loving Family... Who are you to Judge and tell them they can't be Married?

Bigots!



peace...

I wouldn't care if they got married, it doesn't affect my life. If that's the way they roll and everyone is happy, more power to them.

 

[Pheonixops]

I personally don't give a shit what they do, provided my church and I are free to believe what we will.

But, how do you address the sure to come up issue of 1 person claiming two spouses for whatever benefits?

Maybe they would list the extra one as a dependent if they are supporting them?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Government recognizes marriage in order to ensure that mothers and children are supported.

If folks want hetero, homo, polyandry, or polygamy as a marriage style, sure.

not surprising coming from you.

Of course it is not surprising. I have been married twice (my first wife passed), have had sexual relations only with those two women, have wonderful children and grandchildren, and happily support my church and its life.

I am worried about the soul-damaged like you, Redfish.

His soul isn’t the only thing damaged.

 

[Ame®icano]

Government recognizes marriage in order to ensure that mothers and children are supported.

If folks want hetero, homo, polyandry, or polygamy as a marriage style, sure.

Just remind us, in "two man marriage", which one is mother?

 

[Ame®icano]

Gay marriage does absolutely nothing to open the door for polygamy. Gay marriage does not involve marrying multiple partners.

you are wrong. the argument for gay marriage is that these people are being discriminated against because of their sexual orientation. The exact same argument WILL be made for bigamy and polygamy. They will have precedent on their side in court.

Gay marriage is step 1 towards the destruction of our society.

That's not the argument. The argument for same sex marriage is an equal protection argument.

The Constitution requires that laws apply equally to all situations that are the same, or sufficiently similar. Recognizing a civil marriage that 2 people can enter into but only if one is man and one is a woman violates equal protection because a marriage of two men or two women is a sufficiently similar situation and thus deserves the same civil recognition.

So you would agree to "civil marriage" in between father and his adult son, Or mother with her adult daughter. You said it, equal protection.

 

[Ame®icano]

We would need an entire new court system and statutes in every state to handle divorces, paternity, inheritance, property settlements, etc. And new tax codes to address every deviation and grouping of human beings into "marriages".

How much will taxes be raised to pay for that?

Not much

Polygamy would still be extremely rare. You would not have a rush of people seeking to embrace it. You are basicaly moving someone from the single column to the married column. Divorces are always messy no matter what you do

Beyond the "yuk" factor, I see polygamy as none of my business and it does no harm

Tom is "married" to Louise, Mary, Jenny, and Joan. together the 5 of them have 10 kids, 4 cars, and a large house.

Louise and Mary decide that they are really lesbians and decide to divorce the rest of them. 2 of the kids have tom and louise as biological parents and 1 has mary and tom as biological parents.

One of the cars was given to the family by Louise's parents.

Tom has a business that earns 200K per year.

Louise was married to tom for 10 years, Mary and Jenny for 8 and 7, and Joan for 4.

Please describe the property settlement, child care arrangements, and alimony after the divorce.

Well, father kills himself, mothers will go on Welfare and get Medicaid, while kids will get Obamacare. They all will get Obamaphones.

 

[Dutch]

If gay marriage becomes legal, all forms of "marriage" will also become legal. Lawyers for bigamists and polygamists are waiting, the ACLU is waiting.

Gay marriage IS the beginning of the slippery slope. Anyone who denies that is either blind or stupid or both.

That's retarded. Monogamy, bigamy, and polygamy are all separate, distinct forms of unions;

there is no 'if one, then the other' obligation, judicially.

Man and Woman are the only Natural Way that our Species has it's "very Existence"...

Man and Man and Woman and Woman is only the "same" in number.

They are Distinctly Different and Separate from what Created them.

Thanks for Illustrating my Point for me.



peace...

Then using that logic you would be against heterosexual couples getting married past the age of 60?

 

[Ame®icano]

That's retarded. Monogamy, bigamy, and polygamy are all separate, distinct forms of unions;

there is no 'if one, then the other' obligation, judicially.

Man and Woman are the only Natural Way that our Species has it's "very Existence"...

Man and Man and Woman and Woman is only the "same" in number.

They are Distinctly Different and Separate from what Created them.

Thanks for Illustrating my Point for me.



peace...

Then using that logic you would be against heterosexual couples getting married past the age of 60?

Please clarify, in this case is man or women past the age of 60?