- Joined
- May 1, 2013
- Messages
- 119,662
- Reaction score
- 75,613
- Location
- Outside Seattle
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I did, people keep saying it's 31 states, but with the addition of Wyoming I think it's now 32. Not worth the effort though to correct the.
>>>>
I missed it, where? I saw no threads on it.
So prove that's the case. Come up with an argument that can't be reduced to "i'm better than you"
True, up until you ask the government to sanction your marriage, at which point it becomes everyone's business. If you want society to completely ignore your marriage, then why bother with a legal marriage?Who I marry, as long as they are of age, of the same species, and not too closely related is my business and not yours at all.
True, up until you ask the government to sanction your marriage, at which point it becomes everyone's business. If you want society to completely ignore your marriage, then why bother with a legal marriage?
Great, so when do I get to weigh in on on your marriage? Can't wait!
Any time you want. Marriage laws are written by state legislatures and you may voice your opinion with them whenever you wish. It feels so good to go around granting people their wishes like this.
True, up until you ask the government to sanction your marriage, at which point it becomes everyone's business. If you want society to completely ignore your marriage, then why bother with a legal marriage?
This hasn't got anything to do with how I view homosexuality. It has to do with how I see marriage and what marriage actually is. Love and commitment are one thing - marriage is another thing. They're not even necessarily related and people can have all the love and commitment they want without being married. And some marriages are entered into without love and maybe not even commitment nor is marriage actually a guarantee of either love or commitment. The fact that marriage is an institution comprised of one consenting member of each sex does not keep homosexuals from living together and loving together in a committed relationship if that's what they want to do. It just means that they aren't husband and wife, which wouldn't make sense, anyway.
I didn't say homosexuality is wrong. I said that marriage is a union of two people that must have one member of each sex. My position has nothing to do with the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality. It has to do with the nature of marriage. It is a "marriage" of opposite sexes into a single union. Two people of the same sex are just a couple of people. They can love each other. They can engage in sexual activity if they wish. They can live together. They can be devoted to each other. But it can't be marriage because that's not the fundamental nature of marriage. Marriage was never intended nor designed to be some kind of insult to homosexuals. It's purpose isn't to "exclude" homosexuals. The nature of homosexuality is such that homosexuals, for the most part, exclude themselves because their choices in sexual partners make it impossible for those sex partners to be marriage partners because a marriage partner has to be of the opposite sex. Now we might break from that sane and rational tradition of marriage, but it will make us the exception to the rule.
What is the 'purpose' of marriage?
That's because it's not about gender. It doesn't have to "meet the test".
Gender is a federally protected right under the Const. So this takes it out of the state's hands.
marriage:
man and woman
man and man
woman and woman
See the red? GENDER change!
Don't tell me you are so naive as to believe that all of society need not recognize your marriage, only those who are close to you. When you seek a legal marriage, you are making it everyone's business, and necessarily so.No, the government represents me as much as you. So not even then do you have a say. If the government agrees to sanction marriage, it sanctions the act and not the decision as to who.
As for society ignoring, all of society never is involved, only those close to me or you. I don't sent out invitations to anyone else. Nor do I ask anyone else to comment, to approve, to give permission.
You don't need to wait. If it really bothers you that much feel free to try and get the law changed.Great, so when do I get to weigh in on on your marriage? Can't wait!
I know one of the first things I do when others care what I think about their marriages is take a good, long look at Newt Gingrich marriage #3. Really, should society sanction someone marrying a mistress, who was part of an adulterous affair while hubby was married to wifey #2? I think not...
You don't need to wait. If it really bothers you that much feel free to try and get the law changed.
Whether you marry or not has nothing to do with how much better you are than other people. It has to do with whether or not you want to be married and can find a suitable partner. Being married isn't being better or worse than anyone else. It's just being married. And if you don't want to engage in relationships that are suitable for marriage, you have every right to do that.
You aren't Mohammed and marriage isn't the mountain. Don't expect that the mountain must come to you if you don't want to go to the mountain.
Don't tell me you are so naive as to believe that all of society need not recognize your marriage, only those who are close to you. When you seek a legal marriage, you are making it everyone's business, and necessarily so.
No say at all, huh? Try marrying a 15-year old, or your parents, or a a tree, or... Marriage is defined by society, and society dictates what is and isn't appropriate. When you enter into a legal marriage, you must abide by the rules set by society. Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong.They can recognize the institution, but have no say at all in who I marry.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. We could pass a law tomorrow and do away with the concept entirely "based on opinion". We could allow people to marry trees. Or their parents...And when we talk about legal, it isn't based on everyone's opinion.
Rights aren't granted, they are recognized. Before you go around telling others that they don't understand the law, perhaps you should learn something about it first, because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.Instead, when rights are granted, they aregranted to everyone equally. And when you restrict, you have to have just cause, and mere opinion isn't just cause. That's why your side loses in court. Your side doesn't understand law and how this actually works.
No say at all, huh? Try marrying a 15-year old, or your parents, or a a tree, or... Marriage is defined by society, and society dictates what is and isn't appropriate. When you enter into a legal marriage, you must abide by the rules set by society. Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. We could pass a law tomorrow and do away with the concept entirely "based on opinion". We could allow people to marry trees. Or their parents...
Rights aren't granted, they are recognized. Before you go around telling others that they don't understand the law, perhaps you should learn something about it first, because you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?