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.
As for whether or not you're Choctaw, i couldn't possibly care less. Just know that i find it dubious at best when i find folks who look like they just hopped off of a boat from Sweden that claim Indian roots. I mean really...Kennedy? LOL..is that the Irish branch of the Choctaw tribe?
You do realize, don't you, that one inherits their surname only from their father's side? (Well, that is, if you come from a culture where people actually get married.)
There are many, many fair skinned Americans who have Native American and Black heritage. That you don't believe it based on their phenotype is a testament to your ignorance of genetics, and nothing more.
You do realize, don't you, that one inherits their surname only from their father's side? (Well, that is, if you come from a culture where people actually get married.)
Inherits due to cultural limitations but not destined, thanks to individual freedoms. You can abide to live by customs created artificially, or you can be a natural individual self. I support the latter.
I wish that gays would stop using race (particularly using Black people) as an equivalent of homosexuality in trying to fight their cause. I find it quite interesting that so many gays attempt to use the Black civil rights struggle to make a case for their rights...especially when many gays are quite racially bigoted in their attitudes as well.
Why does every other group feel obliged to climb on the backs of Blacks to advance their agenda?
I don't see it as anyone 'using race as an equivalent of homosexuality'. But when looked at, doesn't it seem that there are similar stories of discrimination? 45 years ago, it was legal in most of this country for a hotel to turn away a black couple simply because they were black. Because of the civil rights bill, that can no longer happen. But that same hotel in 33 states can still turn away a gay couple for no other reason than because they are homosexual. The same holds true in restaurants, and any other business that's open to the public. As well as marriage. 45 years ago, my brother was looked down on because he was dating a black girl and was turned away from several restaurants because they didn't allow backs inside. And they would also have been turned away from the marriage license bureau in the state where we lived. Now it's a common thing to see interracial couples in any restaurant and heading to the marriage license bureau. But in 44 states, that gay couple can still be turned away without the marriage license. The way I see it, rights should not be 'withheld' from anyone for any reason or they become not rights but privileges.
I don't see it as anyone 'using race as an equivalent of homosexuality'. But when looked at, doesn't it seem that there are similar stories of discrimination? 45 years ago, it was legal in most of this country for a hotel to turn away a black couple simply because they were black. Because of the civil rights bill, that can no longer happen. But that same hotel in 33 states can still turn away a gay couple for no other reason than because they are homosexual. The same holds true in restaurants, and any other business that's open to the public. As well as marriage. 45 years ago, my brother was looked down on because he was dating a black girl and was turned away from several restaurants because they didn't allow backs inside. And they would also have been turned away from the marriage license bureau in the state where we lived. Now it's a common thing to see interracial couples in any restaurant and heading to the marriage license bureau. But in 44 states, that gay couple can still be turned away without the marriage license. The way I see it, rights should not be 'withheld' from anyone for any reason or they become not rights but privileges.
In most states it's not legal for a man to marry a 14 year old girl, either. Do we just need to get more education?
In most states it's not legal for a man to marry a 14 year old girl, either. Do we just need to get more education?
Pretty much. Yes. Because if you did, and if you had even the least bit of understanding that marriage is a CONTRACT of law at its CORE, then you would understand why AGE is an appropriate basis for restricting entry into contract, while SEX of the parties to the contract is NOT an appropriate or logical basis to restrict entry to the contract.
It would also prevent every banal, ridiculous (and inevitable) question by "social conservatives" with the worldview and perspective the size of a gnat along the lines of: "What's next, people marrying their dogs? People marrying their cars?"
I'd suggest a "Contracts 101" course from a television correspondence school as a bare minimum requisite for discussion on these matters.
A gay Charlotte guy says interracial marriage is not natural. There is too much irony for me right now I have to log out and go outside and laugh, maybe to death...
The above is your opinion. In MY opinion the 'requirements' for marriage should be:
1. Both human
2. Both of legal age
3. Both free of other encumbrances (not legally married to someone else)
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.
I mean really...Kennedy? LOL..is that the Irish branch of the Choctaw tribe?
