Originally posted by Alliance
I shall repost my post from the religion forum here.I think it needs to be shared.
I think that would be a good idea.
omg..........hahahhaha..........People in Australia are very creative..........
Thanks, I do my best. It's how we keep ourselves entertained on the dark nights when dingos are circling. 😆
Originally posted by ADarksideJediMy brain hurts now, you posted under me but I'm not sure if you were referring to me because this makes no since to me.
Being not married has nothering to do with being gay.My mom and dad were never married when they had me and my twin sister and they are not gay!So what is your point?If everyone was gay we would all be dieing out real fast.jm
Re: 4 Reasons Gay Marriage Should Be Legal in the USA!
Originally posted by LeafarI never understood the "sacred bond" excuse/. Atheists get married all the time
1. According to the US Constitution, all Men are created equal, including gays. They should have the same rights are non-gays.2. Gay marriage happens everyday in America. What we are really debating is making gay marriage licenses legal. As you read this, two men are getting "married" in a church somewhere in America, and you people in the Red States can't stop it. 😆
3. How the hell does two men getting a marriage license in another state affect my marriage? This is the best example of imposing your moral beliefs on others. I do not care if gay people are allowed to get marriage licenses. It doesn't affect me at all. 😠
4. Finally, I want gay marriage to be legal because it would piss off the Red States. That is reason enough for me.
💃
Originally posted by ThePittmanI agree with you, the birth rate should be lowered substantially. Babies should be killed if they can't mentally hold up.
Where did you get this idea? As far as I know marriage was a way that two people could have sex and it not to be a sin since sex is a sin if you are not married. So if a man and a woman both were infertile by this meaning then they couldn’t get married either. No where have I ever seen that it had to be to “reproducing” people.Also who cares if the reproduction rate is lowered, in fact it should be. We as a human race are breeding faster then we can handle and running out of room and destroying the planet in the process as well as the animals that inhabit it. Gay or lesbian relations are only about 3% to 10% of the total population so I don’t see that being a major issue anyways.
Also, at the age of 18, if you don't know at least 60% of the things you should know, you should be shot in the face with a shotgun.
But anyways....While the birth rate should go down, there comes a point where the human race risks extinction.
Originally posted by KMC USER
Marriage is not a right. If it was every person should have a shot at it, but relationships do not work out like that for everyone. If the Bill of Rights says that marriage is a right then I would say that it needs to be changed. Marriage is a privelege..
Originally posted by http://www.law.umkc.edu
The first state marriage law to be invalidated was Virginia's miscegenation law in Loving v Virginia (1967). Mildred Jeter, a black woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, had been found guilty of violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages and ordered to leave the state. The Court found Virginia's law to violate the Equal Protection Clause because it invidiously classified on the basis of race, but it also indicated the law would violate the Due Process Clause as an undue interference with 'the fundamental freedom" of marriage.
Similarly, when the Sodomy laws were struck down, opinons written about the regulation can alos be applied to a future decision on same-sex marriage.
Originally posted by Justice Anthony M. Kennedy
When homosexual conduct is made criminal by the law of the state, that declaration in and of itself is an invitation to subject homosexual persons to discrimination both in the public and in the private spheres.
Originally posted by Justice Sandra Day O’ConnorA law branding one class of persons as criminal solely based on the state’s moral disapproval of that class and the conduct associated with that class runs contrary to the values of the Constitution and the Equal Protection Clause, under any standard of review.
That aside...Do you remember this amendment?
Originally posted Dec. 11, 1912 as a proposed Amendment to the US constitution by the 3rd Session of the 62nd Congress
"That intermarriage between negroes or persons of color and Caucasians or any other character of persons within the United States or any territory under their jurisdiction, is forever prohibited; and the term "negro or person of color," as here employed, shall be held to mean any and all persons of African descent or having any trace of African or negro blood.
Homosexuals aredenied over 1000 rights that come with marriage. 100 major ones can be found here http://www.fairwisconsin.com/ban/100.html .
Gay marriage bans are completely unconstitutional. You don't have to personally support gay marriages, but it is unconstitutional to deny homosexuals the right to marry.
Originally posted by TheKingofKINGS!
I agree with you, the birth rate should be lowered substantially. Babies should be killed if they can't mentally hold up.Also, at the age of 18, if you don't know at least 60% of the things you should know, you should be shot in the face with a shotgun.
But anyways....While the birth rate should go down, there comes a point where the human race risks extinction.
Teacher: Today children we shall look at the massive hole in this argument were things like common sense and logic belong.
Now children - some people claim if we let homosexuals marry for some unfathomable reason the majority of straight people will cease to exist. Why is unknown, even to the people who believe this, maybe they think straight people will turn gay, or people wont get married anymore, even though that in itself is stupid since marriage is not required for child birth. Now does any one want to say what this argument sounds like? Yes Jimmy?
Jimmy: Stupid miss.
Teacher: Yes, it is stupid, as there is no logical, statistical or even scientifically theoretical reason to believe that gay marriage will lead to the extinction of the human race. In fact quite the opposite. Since gays have existed for as long as humanity it seems to strongly suggest homosexuality is not having an adverse affect on birth rates. So children, when you meet someone who argues "Duh, homosexuals can't be allowed to marry because they can't have babies and humanity will become extinct" how should you respond? Yes Elle?
Elle: Punch them in the groin?
Teacher: Exactly.
Originally posted by Imperial_Samura😆
Teacher: Today children we shall look at the massive hole in this argument were things like common sense and logic belong.Now children - some people claim if we let homosexuals marry for some unfathomable reason the majority of straight people will cease to exist. Why is unknown, even to the people who believe this, maybe they think straight people will turn gay, or people wont get married anymore, even though that in itself is stupid since marriage is not required for child birth. Now does any one want to say what this argument sounds like? Yes Jimmy?
Jimmy: Stupid miss.
Teacher: Yes, it is stupid, as there is no logical, statistical or even scientifically theoretical reason to believe that gay marriage will lead to the extinction of the human race. In fact quite the opposite. Since gays have existed for as long as humanity it seems to strongly suggest homosexuality is not having an adverse affect on birth rates. So children, when you meet someone who argues "Duh, homosexuals can't be allowed to marry because they can't have babies and humanity will become extinct" how should you respond? Yes Elle?
Elle: Punch them in the groin?
Teacher: Exactly.
Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
yea like a teacher would say that to the kids.if it is real those kids been brainwashed by a bunch of libral parents.jm
you, who spats out ridiculous statements on issues which you cannot vaguely comprehend, based on what someone told you, have the nerve to cry 'brainwashing'?
Okay, this is my 2 cents on the take...and I will remove religion from it.
Marriage WAS (initially) created representing a union between a man and woman-declaring each to be the other's spouse. I don't want to include polygamy in this discussion either because now another religion is entered into the equation that I'm not familiar with.
This union is also biologically copasetic in nature. You have one person from the opposite sex marrying the other. I'd like it to stay that way.
I am not casting judgment on homosexuals because lots of them are probabaly better persons than I am.
That being said, if marriage was first created to be a union by 2 members of the same sex, then I'd be an outsider looking in.