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.
Obviously you did not read my post.
The issue can be approached as one of "should marriage be a legal/civil status vs a social/religious status" before we argue from the assumption that marriage laws are immutable.
Because clearly, they are not.
Neither have you read any respectable philosophical treatises on this subject, particularly the recent ones written by Elizabeth Brake.
And maybe YOU should engage in some serious critical thinking before you go off at the lip with essentially ad hominem attacks and a quick trigger finger.
I'm sorry, are you positing THIS as your brilliant post that was somehow supposed to stand out for its refreshingly new or profound perspective?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjardo
It's time to allow any number of consenting adults to enter into marriage.. even two brothers, three sisters, a brother and sister... heck, it's no one's business who "marries" who anyway.
Problem is in divying up the marriage benefits.
Hmmm. Maybe it's time to end all marriage benefits?
That will put the brakes on the whole controversy pronto!
Just need laws to protect children, right?
One line in an otherwise incoherent post? Slow clap for you.
And why am I supposed to care what "Elizabeth Brake" has to say on this issue? She important toy you? That's cool. But don't expect everyone else to be similarly enthralled.
^^I think it is more folks who are concerned regarding what their kids are exposed to in their formative years. Just like we block certain types of media so that they do not believe what is seen or heard is normal and to be encouraged.
If a couple thinks homosexuality is wrong, they can teach their kids that. The legality of gay marriage does not really impact what the poor children are exposed to.
TriMT.. I just LOVE your classic "Oh Yeah?" response!
So... another non-answer.
I'm sorry, is actually RESPONDING to the post too difficult? Perhaps you'd rather reference another obscure academic instead of actually posting an argument of merit on your own?
Why? Because you say so? You can't just throw such a ridiculous statement out there and expect us to accept it without question.
Throughout history.
Only in the last 100 years has government got involved in the marriage business, by using a group as a tool to gain power and votes. Special privileges for the married. Less taxes for the married. Picking winners and losers can be a double edged sword. You didn't need a marriage license to get married until the 1930's, before then you have to ask your church for the privilege. Same way for the Justice of the Peace. He wasn't elected. He was appointed by the Sheriff and always the preacher at the town church.
Since gay marriage is here, it is time to allow heterosexual men to have multiple wives? Will America fight to allow men to have more then one wife since we marching? I mean as a straight man my rights are being denied.
Gay marriage is two adults who are in love and choose to join in a legal binding marriage.
Straight marriage is two adults who are in love and choose to join in a legal binding marriage.
You're talking about polygamy. That has exactly as much to do with gay marriage as it does with straight marriage. I don't see why you want that allowed since gay marriage is allowed. They're completely unrelated things.
^^call it what it is-homosexual marriage and heterosexual marriage. Do not hide behind euphemisms. If it is natural and normal there is no need to hide.
Gay is something Fred and Barney did around Bedrock not Brokeback Mountain.
What a silly argument, mostly because it's not an argument at all. The only connection between A (gay marriage) and B (polygamy) is that you evidently don't agree with either.
That's hardly enough of a reason to say that since A is legally recognized, B should be as well. There's a totally legitimate argument for polygamy out there, but relying on the ol "if he has it, why can't I?" 5-year-old logic is not part of that argument. It might be the inspiration for an argument, but it can't be the whole argument itself.
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.
