Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-25-2014, 10:44 PM
 
Location: Foothills of Northern California
442 posts, read 586,731 times
Reputation: 324

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469 View Post
I wasn't arguing it at all. I just asked why not?




You cannot marry at eleven

You cannot marry in Heaven


You cannot marry two men

You cannot marry two hens



You cannot marry the dead

You cannot marry my head!

Last edited by californiawomann5; 01-25-2014 at 10:54 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-25-2014, 10:44 PM
 
31,949 posts, read 14,955,784 times
Reputation: 13591
Quote:
Originally Posted by californiawomann5 View Post
LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2014, 01:35 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,567,116 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thHour View Post
Haha... the Republican are so butt hurt over not being able to blanket their personal morality onto everybody. What a shame that they would choose to deny all if not able to discriminate against the few. Sickening. Those people have rotten, dark, and festering hearts.
I don't expect the bill to get so much as a committee hearing. Only libertarians like the idea of abolishing marriage licenses and they don't have much of a following in Oklahoma. A couple of years ago another out to lunch Republican legislator submitted a bizarre sounding bill that would ban aborted fetuses from being put into food. It never got a committee hearing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-27-2014, 11:51 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,625 posts, read 26,307,471 times
Reputation: 12635
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33 View Post
"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen."


I like to think of it as the ability to connect the dots and learn from experience regardless of age.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2014, 01:04 AM
 
17,842 posts, read 14,354,108 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thHour View Post
Haha... the Republican are so butt hurt over not being able to blanket their personal morality onto everybody. What a shame that they would choose to deny all if not able to discriminate against the few. Sickening. Those people have rotten, dark, and festering hearts.
The adult version of a bunch of dummy-spitting, foot stamping, pouting 5 year olds who haven't learnt to share.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2014, 01:05 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
14,856 posts, read 8,179,887 times
Reputation: 4590
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
I don't expect the bill to get so much as a committee hearing. Only libertarians like the idea of abolishing marriage licenses and they don't have much of a following in Oklahoma. A couple of years ago another out to lunch Republican legislator submitted a bizarre sounding bill that would ban aborted fetuses from being put into food. It never got a committee hearing.

Its amazing that this thread is still going, since it is a total misrepresentation of reality.


Secondly, I thought it was funny that a legislator from Oklahoma finally put forth what I have been advocating for quite some time. The deregulation of marriage altogether.


I also think you downplay the libertarian influence in Oklahoma politics because they are effectively forced to be party of the two-party system. Do you not recall what happened at the 2012 Oklahoma Republican convention?

Moreover, the problem with Republican primaries is that they aren't very representative anyway. About 290k people voted in the Republican primary, about 890k voted for Mitt Romney in Oklahoma. The people who vote in Republican primaries are usually older people. Older people are far less likely to be libertarian.


In my opinion, the young generation is the libertarian generation. And every day the government shows what inept and corrupt dickheads they are. The more libertarians there will be.

It is the only consistent/principled position. Everything else is everyone's stinky opinions being swayed by influences from the media and politicians. I think the internet has done a wonderful job teaching people how much they have been lied to all of their lives. And just how biased and corrupt the national media is. The internet is a source for information which ordinarily would be unavailable to the vast-majority of the population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2014, 01:10 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
14,856 posts, read 8,179,887 times
Reputation: 4590
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceist View Post
The adult version of a bunch of dummy-spitting, foot stamping, pouting 5 year olds who haven't learnt to share.

The problem I have with liberals. Is that they always say they advocate for freedom, but when given the opportunity, they never choose freedom. You are just as much into "social-engineering" as any Republican. But yet you refuse to admit it. At least they do.


If you were really for freedom, you would support the deregulation of marriage. And you would push to eliminate special-benefits handed only to married couples by the coercive power of the state in an attempt to force you into marriage.


Be consistent, be principled, and you will have my support. Otherwise you are just as much a bigot as everyone else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2014, 01:48 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,567,116 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz View Post
Its amazing that this thread is still going, since it is a total misrepresentation of reality.


Secondly, I thought it was funny that a legislator from Oklahoma finally put forth what I have been advocating for quite some time. The deregulation of marriage altogether.

But you can't run from the fact that the U. S. Supreme Court has ruled marraige is a fundamental right a total of 14 times. I don't know how the state of Oklahoma can get around that, unless it's going to recognize privately made marriage contracts, rather than issue marriage licenses. Even then that won't work with most Republicans, since the state could recognize a marriage contract signed by a same sex couple. And who's to say three or more people couldn't get together on a contract and label it a marriage?

Last edited by StillwaterTownie; 01-28-2014 at 02:00 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-28-2014, 09:32 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,625 posts, read 26,307,471 times
Reputation: 12635
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
I wouldn't deny the right of marriage to two adult men simply because they were brothers. I wouldn't deny the right of marriage to two adults who happened to be siblings, as long as procreation were not on the table. In the cases where procreation is on the table, given the fact that incest ALWAYS exists in subcultures and not the mainstream culture, and that a family pattern of incest has genetic consequences, I think society has an interest in preventing those genetic consequences.

As for Woody Allen marrying his daughter, couldn't care less, because she's not his genetic daughter. The interest the state has in incest relates to genetic consequences.


Well, look at who gets to decide when the potential to procreate matters to marriage and when it doesn't!

So it's OK for you to apply a double standard to heterosexuals?

I thought that all that mattered was that two people loved each other.

I thought the ability or inability to create children was irrelevant to marriage.

I thought "society" wasn't supposed to decide the rights of others.

Shall we begin sterilizing people with family histories of genetic disease since their procreation could have "genetic consequences"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 07:13 AM
 
17,290 posts, read 29,349,509 times
Reputation: 8691
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
Well, look at who gets to decide when the potential to procreate matters to marriage and when it doesn't!

So it's OK for you to apply a double standard to heterosexuals?

I thought that all that mattered was that two people loved each other.

I thought the ability or inability to create children was irrelevant to marriage.

I thought "society" wasn't supposed to decide the rights of others.

Shall we begin sterilizing people with family histories of genetic disease since their procreation could have "genetic consequences"?


Let the brothers and sisters marry. Honestly, who cares? It's not going to stop the 0.00001% of brothers and sisters inclined to incest from getting down and dirty if they wanted. Let the incestuous and their allies fight that fight, however, and stop trying to muddy the waters of the gay rights movement with your absurd hypotheticals.


I assure you, however, that the biggest howls of "no way!" re: incestuous marriages would not come from those of socially liberal minds, but those from the conservative right. GUARANTEED.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:44 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top