Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
20+ years ago people were saying: "You make no sense. A man cannot marry a man, a woman cannot marry a woman. No debate about it."
READ what he wrote. THAT is what I said made no sense.
And my debate comment refers to the fact that there is no issue to debate here. You won't find many reasonable, intelligent people that want to make such marriages possible, ever.
READ what he wrote. THAT is what I said made no sense.
And my debate comment refers to the fact that there is no issue to debate here. You won't find many reasonable, intelligent people that want to make such marriages possible, ever.
USA has what 10 or 20% of Muslim population? How big is mormon population? And would it be difficult to find a married couple willing to get someone else on board? I bet if ACLU decide to pursue it, people would be found easily.
READ what he wrote. THAT is what I said made no sense.
And my debate comment refers to the fact that there is no issue to debate here. You won't find many reasonable, intelligent people that want to make such marriages possible, ever.
I thought that poster meant why can't more than two people marry each other. I guess I misinterpreted.
Why do you say that reasonable, intelligent people won't want to or support marriages between more than two people?
Sure I don't give a $$$$ about what other people do with their lives. If 3 or more people decide they love each other they should be able to go ahead. How would 3 + people being married to each other affect anyone outside of the marriage in anyway? It's pretty much the same premise as same sex marriage, though legal contract wise it's probably way more complicated....
No, it's a silly debate. And you are just trolling and baiting. Gays only wanted what others have. To argue that their rights somehow open the door to silly and weird combinations is a hollow argument. In Massachusetts, gays have been marrying for 10 or so years, and I have not heard of any silly situations that you mentioned.
This country is based on monogamy, and if the Muslims want to follow their Sharia laws and keep multiple wives, then they can move to a Muslim country that allows lt. We have a two spouse system, for both gay and straight people. That's it.
I wonder why some read these threads, much less post to them.
1. You start with the state of MA, where you state gays have been marrying for approximately 10 years. That is MA and fine.
2. This country is not based on marital practices; where do you get the idea is is?
3. We have a what? Two spouses = an individual has two spouses. Perhaps you mean a couple. The US federal government has no legal standing on any of what you list.
Marriage is not enumerated in the Constitution, therefore it is not a concern of the federal government.
Can anyone find it in here(link below)? If you can, drop me a line. When you can't, look to the 10th amendment and realize it is up to the states to make laws concerning education, medicine, marriage and every other grievance people feel a need to take up with the federal government. None of it is in the Constitution and none of it needs to be addressed/entertained by politicians. Politicians are overstepping their bounds and actually breaking their oaths when doing otherwise. The supreme court should be off limits to any of the social BS American citizens are up in arms about - they are not the PC police. I doubt many have read the following document.
I wonder why some read these threads, much less post to them.
1. You start with the state of MA, where you state gays have been marrying for approximately 10 years. That is MA and fine.
2. This country is not based on marital practices; where do you get the idea is is?
3. We have a what? Two spouses = an individual has two spouses. Perhaps you mean a couple. The US federal government has no legal standing on any of what you list.
Marriage is not enumerated in the Constitution, therefore it is not a concern of the federal government.
Can anyone find it in here(link below)? If you can, drop me a line. When you can't, look to the 10th amendment and realize it is up to the states to make laws concerning education, medicine, marriage and every other grievance people feel a need to take up with the federal government. None of it is in the Constitution and none of it needs to be addressed/entertained by politicians. Politicians are overstepping their bounds and actually breaking their oaths when doing otherwise. The supreme court should be off limits to any of the social BS American citizens are up in arms about - they are not the PC police. I doubt many have read the following document.
When I was saying, the primary goal of marriage, I was speaking more of historical/biblical context, and not of its current implementation. Obviously, people can be married for variety of reasons nowadays, including "to get US citizenship", get some tax breaks, or prevent any other b'itch to marry that guy. But can we say any of those are reasons why institute of marriage was brought in the first place?
What difference does it make? We aren't alive back then, we are alive now.
Your interpretation of the Constitution is one interpretation. It is not the only one, as many supreme court justices have pointed out.
You just alluded to the fact politicians are crooked oathbreakers. Why does the Constitution need interpretation? It wasn't written so. It is written in plain English and not in legal terms requiring lawyers. A judge should rule whether or not one is in accordance with federal or state law.
Supreme court justices (unelected officials) are legislating from the bench and congress needs to call them to task about it.
You didn't and never have read it if you can respond so quickly. Don't feel bad; you have lots of company.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
