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.
Let's look at this economicaly for a moment: Same sex marriage partners now qualify for spousal benefits under Social Security. If polygamy becomes recognized, then there will be no limit to the number of spouses eligible for benefits. This will collapse the SS spousal and survivor programs. How about military retirement and VA healthcare benefits to spouses? Are we prepared to see these benefits go away? Are we prepared to pay this price as a society for the "equality" of a few people? Are we?
You defeated your own argument by saying it's just a 'few' people.
Sorry "tiger". You're as threatening as origami, now sit.
Why can't one consenting adult marry another? Marriage is NOT about children. Never was, never will be. Marriage is a bond that two (or more) people who want to spend the rest of their lives with each other go through in order to make it official and to secure their relationship with one another.
Having sex for the purpose of having children is about children. Not marriage. Sorry "tiger'. Try again.
Why can't one consenting adult marry another?
One consenting adult can marry another.
Marriage is NOT about children. Never was, never will be. Marriage is a bond that two (or more) people who want to spend the rest of their lives with each other go through in order to make it official and to secure their relationship with one another.
"Make it official"?
For what "official" purpose would they "make it official"?
Are they not officially in an "official" relationship until they make it "official"?
"Secure their relationship"?
In what sense does a marriage license make a homosexual relationship "secure"?
And secure from what?
We know a marriage license protects faithful spouses and their children from the very real consequences of heterosexual infidelity (extramarital children), but what does that have to do with homosexuals?
You aren't seriously going to claim a same-sex marriage is needed to protect homosexuals from gay infidelity are you?
If not that, then what?
"Having sex for the purpose of having children is about children. Not marriage."
Yes, and marriage is about protecting the rights of those children and the sexually faithful partner.
Protecting a sexually faithful homosexual partner when no material harm (excepting herpes and hurt feelings) can come from homosexual infidelity is a solution in search of a problem and an Orwellian ruse.
Marriage is NOT about children. Never was, never will be. Marriage is a bond that two (or more) people who want to spend the rest of their lives with each other go through in order to make it official and to secure their relationship with one another.
"Make it official"?
For what "official" purpose would they "make it official"?
Are they not officially in an "official" relationship until they make it "official"?
"Secure their relationship"?
In what sense does a marriage license make a homosexual relationship "secure"?
And secure from what?
We know a marriage license protects faithful spouses and their children from the very real consequences of heterosexual infidelity (extramarital children), but what does that have to do with homosexuals?
You aren't seriously going to claim a same-sex marriage is needed to protect homosexuals from gay infidelity are you?
If not that, then what?
"Having sex for the purpose of having children is about children. Not marriage."
Yes, and marriage is about protecting the rights of those children and the sexually faithful partner.
Protecting a sexually faithful homosexual partner when no material harm (excepting herpes and hurt feelings) can come from homosexual infidelity is a solution in search of a problem and an Orwellian ruse.
Wrong dude, those 1049 rights, benefits that the federal government offers with a secular marriage license has nothing at all to do with protecting children. That is why senior citizens can get all those same rights with marriage, or sterile couples. A marriage license in no way protects a marriage from infidelity, that is why the divorce rate for you straight people is over 55%. This has been explained to you many times, but you refuse to see that the protections granted with a secular marriage license should be granted to same sex couples too.
Wrong dude, those 1049 rights, benefits that the federal government offers with a secular marriage license has nothing at all to do with protecting children. That is why senior citizens can get all those same rights with marriage, or sterile couples. A marriage license in no way protects a marriage from infidelity, that is why the divorce rate for you straight people is over 55%. This has been explained to you many times, but you refuse to see that the protections granted with a secular marriage license should be granted to same sex couples too.
Those rights and benefits were created before same-sex marriage came along and at a time when heterosexual couples marrying and having multiple children was the norm.
They were never intended for same-sex couples, singles or anyone else not in a heterosexual marriage.
As for divorce, that is the legal remedy for heterosexual infidelity.
Last I heard, homosexual infidelity still can't produce a love child so I see no need to have a family court referee someone's childless gay soap opera.
Notice the insistence by leftists in having the state stay out of our bedrooms and doctor-patient relationships, except when they want to force something down our throats.
Notice the insistence by leftists in having the state stay out of our bedrooms and doctor-patient relationships, except when they want to force something down our throats.
Those rights and benefits were created before same-sex marriage came along and at a time when heterosexual couples marrying and having multiple children was the norm.
So?
They were never intended for same-sex couples, singles or anyone else not in a heterosexual marriage.
And voting was never intended for blacks and women, your point?
As for divorce, that is the legal remedy for heterosexual infidelity.
It's the legal remedy for a lot of problems in marriage.
Last I heard, homosexual infidelity still can't produce a love child so I see no need to have a family court referee someone's childless gay soap opera.
Childless heterosexual couples find their way into the divorce courts all the time.
Notice the insistence by leftists in having the state stay out of our bedrooms and doctor-patient relationships, except when they want to force something down our throats.
What's being forced down your throat? Seriously, what exactly is being forced upon YOU here? If you don't like gay marriage, you don't have to get gay married. Were you under the impression that gay marriage was suddenly going to become mandatory? Because it seems that's what you think.
Those rights and benefits were created before same-sex marriage came along and at a time when heterosexual couples marrying and having multiple children was the norm.
They were never intended for same-sex couples, singles or anyone else not in a heterosexual marriage.
The benefits weren't intended for anyone in an interracial marriage either.
Marriage doesn't have anything to do with kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
As for divorce, that is the legal remedy for heterosexual infidelity.
You don't need a reason to get divorced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Last I heard, homosexual infidelity still can't produce a love child so I see no need to have a family court referee someone's childless gay soap opera.
Marriage doesn't have anything to do with kids.
Homosexuals do have kids.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Notice the insistence by leftists in having the state stay out of our bedrooms and doctor-patient relationships, except when they want to force something down our throats.
Gay marriage isn't about marriage, it's about being accepted in all segments of life. Gays are insisting on it. More gay relationships break up that straight ones. More gays have domestic violence than straight ones.
Read the book, "After the Ball" the whole plan on forcing society to accept the gay lifestyle is laid out in it. Demonizing anyone who criticizes gays in in the plan. Only showing sympathic gay people on TV and in the media is also in the plan to be accepted.
So what? If some fool wants more than one wife he is welcome to it...One wife is too many in my opinion.
I feel sorry for you
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.
