"BREAKING: Obama admin. may urge Sup Ct to recognize gay marriage nationwide"

Ive never made any such comment regarding "A" same sex couple. Its a classification of people. Heterosexual couples are responsible for the perpetuation of the human species. Homosexual couples are responsible for 67% of the perpetuation of the HIV virus without any of the perpetuation of the human species.

 

please do not make false assertions about me, thanks

 

Youve confirmed for us in the thread that the assertions are accurate.

 

First came abortion. Next came gay marriage. Next will come incest, pedophilia and bestiality as an acceptable behavior. What an evil and despicable world in which we live. Obama has been on the forefront of paving the way for these insidious behaviors. We have sat by and watched, little by little, his intrusion into our cultural and religious beliefs. This country will fall given his destructive evil hold he has over Americans

 

you have lost the debate, give it up already....

 

Careful your vitriol is on show.

Gay couples often come together, mirroring the general overall nature of opposite-sex couples, and make the positive choice to bring life into the world that would otherwise not exist, had they not come together as a couple. They also often adopt children together, mopping up the mess of reckless heteros who take their bits for granted.

 

And they say there is no gay mafia.

What do you get when the government starts acting like thugs to enforce its policies in order please it's consituents?

It may not be actually named the mafia, but when you use coercion and other forms of pressure to bully people into submission, you might as well be.

Because there is no difference.

 

Or in the words of the 7th circuit:

"[These states] think[] that straight couples tend to be sexually irresponsible, producing unwanted children by the carload, and so must be pressured . . . to marry, but that gay couples, unable as they are to produce children wanted or unwanted, are model parents—model citizens really—so have no need for marriage. Heterosexuals get drunk and pregnant, producing unwanted children; their reward is to be allowed to marry. Homosexual couples do not produce unwanted children; their reward is to be denied the right to marry. Go figure."

It is true that there is good and bad going on on both sides, whether heterosexual or homosexual. It is also true that the bans on same sex marriage are not helpful with any of the issues in question... if anything, it is helpful.

 

Sounds a lot like the bullies that enacted the bans on same sex marriage in the first place in order to please their constituents if you ask me. Homosexuals have been beat down for decades, centuries even. Welcome to the club, hope you're enjoying your small taste being forced to endure the freedom of others which doesn't effect you in any way other than in your own head .

Best regards.

 

So, single people should be allowed to file joint tax returns?

You do realize you have to live in the same house in order to do that right?

 

There is no requirement that married couples live in the same house.

 

You're invoking the slippery slope fallacy. There's good reasons to ban incest and bestiality. However, the courts have realized that one's religion should not be a valid reason to oppress others.

You seem to see the world in a very dark light, so I want to do you a favor. Go look up statistics on poverty and crime. They're rapidly decreasing. The government for once is growing to fear the people. The world is better than ever. Why do you think that 2 men getting married outweighs any of that?

And I don't like Obama either, but he's just a man trying to do his job. I disagree with his general authoritarianism, but I'm glad he's speaking out in favor of equality.

 

Incest is a crime in 40 states. What does that have to do with marriage? And what is the good reason for banning marriage for the single mother and grandmother raising their children/ grandchildren together.

Equality would involve marriage available equally to any two consenting adults. "Gay marriage" is INequality by design.

 

also incest is not banned based on gender, race, disability, ect.... all are treated the same

 

Claiming that more people marrying is INequality is as moronic as claiming if you have 2 red apples and I give you 2 more green apples you now have less apples.

 

They will figure out they 'deserve' the same benefits as everyone else, married or not, that's sort of where this whole idiocy ends up. For countless generations single people have understood that married people raise families, not every single individual marriage, but the vast majority of them, and have always accepted that they deserve tax breaks and other benefits, if that is no longer the case, those benefits are equally deserved by all. It will be funny when they site the 14th for that...

 

If any two people is considered equality and deserving of rights currently granted only to registered, opposite sex couples, over 15-18 (State Laws), is changed to include any gender, then any two related people of the same sex can marry. Incest (Sexual intercourse between persons too closely related to marry) would have to be included. and granted those same rights, so long as the marriage does not involve the possibility of offspring's. That is two people of the same sex or too old to conceive, possibly even by an agreement in some cases, would be legal to marry and receive those rights/benefit.

I'm pointing out the modern day intention of marriage, in that it protects the family idea of the action, then justified by genetics of incestuous couples.

 

First, FEWER people are marrying, not more. AND SECOND, someone marrying isnt inequality. It is the continuing to exclude people from marriage that is the inequality.

 

Actually it is. Most states prohibit "sexual intercourse" between closely related people.


What is SEXUAL INTERCOURSE?

a contact between a male and a female's organs.
http://thelawdictionary.org/sexual-intercourse/

Law Dictionary: What is SEXUAL INTERCOURSE? definition of SEXUAL INTERCOURSE (Black's Law Dictionary)

 

it's not based on gender... it's based on genetic relationships

now if you are saying it should be legal for homosexuals and illegal for heterosexuals based on the gender of the couple, then you would have a valid comparison

.

 

Right, just like having 2 red apples then me giving you 2 green apples is LESS apples because I didn't give you a yellow one.

(*)(*)(*)(*)ing moronic.

 

LOLOLOL!!! A brother and sister have the same genetic relationship as two sisters. Gender specific because only a man and woman have the potential of procreation.

 

In order to file a joint tax return, a married couple must share a home address.