In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Gay marriage:so you know how MA new law affects U

jpwolfjpwolf Member Posts: 9,164
edited August 2020 in Politics
CAPITOL REVIEW

By State Senator Mark Hillman



For those who laughed at the prediction that runaway judges would someday impose gay marriage by judicial fiat, the time has come to eat crow.

Thanks to the self-aggrandizing Massachusetts Supreme Court, that state will soon obliterate the line between natural marriage and the "enlightened" definition which makes marriage nothing more than a domestic contract between consenting adults.

Coloradans should care because the U.S. Constitution requires that "full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state." A marriage performed in Massachusetts is valid in all 50 states.

The democratic foundation of our Republic is mere inconvenience to these robed dictators who hold their own morality in such high esteem that the opinions of the masses are irrelevant.

Not only is this yet another stellar illustration of judicial activism, it gives lie to the notion that "imposing morality" is the sole domain of the political right.

Contrary to assertions by the screaming left, most conservatives don't care what goes on in their neighbor's bedroom -- not that many weddings take place in bedrooms.

In fact, legislation addressing same-sex relationships and sexual orientation has come exclusively from the political left in the past two sessions of the Colorado General Assembly. The lone entry from the right is this year's resolution urging Congress to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment.

However, courts stir the pot by ordering legislatures to adopt gay marriage or civil union laws in Hawaii, Vermont and Massachusetts. The U.S. Supreme Court incredibly declared last summer that the U.S. Constitution contained a guarantee of the right to homosexual sodomy, a right unnoticed for more than two centuries by earlier justices.

It is clear from Lawrence v. Texas that a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court is poised to declare gay marriage to be an unwritten fundamental right at its next opportunity. In Lawrence, the court's majority agreed "that our laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing and education."

Justice Anthony Kennedy added, "Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes just as heterosexual persons do."

Although Kennedy later opined that Lawrence did not "involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter," his 18-page opinion laid the groundwork for gay rights advocates to argue that homosexual marriage meets the same criteria the court used to declare a fundamental right to gay sex.

America faces a choice: amend the U.S. Constitution to define marriage in its natural context or do nothing and let the courts "interpret" homosexual marriage into the constitution. If the former doesn't occur, the latter most certainly well.

Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave (R-Fort Morgan) is clearly in the right place at the right time. After leading the fight to preserve the natural definition of marriage in Colorado, she was elected to Congress just prior to Lawrence v. Texas. The Federal Marriage Amendment, which she and Sen. Wayne Allard sponsor, states:

"Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups."

Ratification is not a longshot if Congress will bring the amendment to a vote. Already, 38 states -- including California -- have passed laws preserve the natural definition of marriage. Threatened with the prospect of five justices taking away our right to define marriage, citizens may prefer to draw the line themselves


________________________________________________________________________

"If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine

If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.

Comments

  • jpwolfjpwolf Member Posts: 9,164
    edited November -1
    You forget to take into account one thing. Free Will. The ability given to us to make the WRONG decision, and suffer the consequences.

    ________________________________________________________________________

    "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine

    If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
  • woodshermitwoodshermit Member Posts: 2,589
    edited November -1
    Here we go again. Gay marriages...what's so special about straight marriages? Half end in divorce anyway. I don't care who marries who as long as they are two consenting adults. The homophobes will never be able to see homosexuality as anything but evil and a choice somebody makes. Can anybody tell me why a man would willingly CHOOSE to be with another man?
  • jpwolfjpwolf Member Posts: 9,164
    edited November -1
    Thinking homosexuality is wrong, is not a phobia. It is an opinion.

    ________________________________________________________________________

    "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine

    If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
  • chunkstylechunkstyle Member Posts: 2,463 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    I don't care what the gays do, as long as it's in private. Heck, legalize polygamy, too.

    "Go to Lakedaemon, stranger passing by;
    And say there, that in obedience to her law, here we lie"
  • RocklobsterRocklobster Member Posts: 7,060
    edited November -1
    Ok. Let's go with this thing. The bestiality crowd should be allowed to marry animals. Pedophiles need to be allowed to marry little kids. The underwear collectors, shoe collectors, * participants, all need special benefits. Group marriages need to happen. Swappers should be granted special short-term marriages to avert conflicts there. A new government-issued Special Perversion Permit should be issued, so everyone can exercise their rights. How lovely, this world we live in.
  • 44mag44mag Member Posts: 271 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    We don`t need that kind of people here in Nebraska. In my opinion they are not welcome, at least in my mind. I have thoughts as to what to do with them but if I said it I would get "poofed".[:D][:D][:D]
  • trstonetrstone Member Posts: 833 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Fine, let 'em get married. Who cares? And think of how much fun it'll be when the IRS nails 'em with the marriage penalty on their income taxes! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
  • jjmitchell60jjmitchell60 Member Posts: 3,887
    edited November -1
    If it is 2 consenting ADULTS then what is the probleem? Does them getting married physically harm you in any way? Does is harm you in an emotional way because if it does then you just lend credibility to any and all lawsuites that are concidered frivilous. The woman who filed a class siute over the Janet Jackson thing, we all put her down yet people say the allowing gays to marry "harms all of us" is the same as her complaint. Now as to Nebraska, I believe that there is a minister that goes around over the nation protesting anything to do with gays. He is about as close to God as Satan IMHO. He came to KY to protest the birth of some children of a gay couple. If he is indeed from Nebraska, and he speaks for all Nebraskians, then I know one state I will never settle in. I have been to Nebraska and they seemed to be logical people. I have been married for 25 years this year but I do have a family member that is gay. His partner is as fine a person as any. Those that are whining about gays probably do not even know any or are just brain washed by anti gay bashing in our government, churches, and society in general! My 2 cents worth.

    The statistics on sanity are that one out of every four Americans is suffering from some form of mental illness. Think of your three best friends. If they're okay, then it's you.
    Rita Mae Brown
  • bsallybsally Member Posts: 3,165
    edited November -1
    It doesn't affect me, nor does it affect you. Get over it, live your own life and let other citizens of this free country live theirs. Good grief! If these hard liners would put all the money they spend in court fighting this, imagine what GOOD they could actually do. [V] Marriage has become a joke anyway. What is the divorce rate now. Above 50% isn't it? That is shamefull. Sanctity of marriage, ha, now that has become a joke.[:(] I just think there are so many more important things that we should worry about.

    Also, my observations on this are that most that disagree with gay marriage do so for religious reasons. And as far as I am concerned religion has ZERO place in the laws of our country.

    SALLY
    Committee member-Ducks Unlimited
  • pickenuppickenup Member Posts: 22,844 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Just another in the long line of perversions of morality that people are being forced to accept as "normal" behavior. Do I care what two people, of the same sex, do in the privacy of their own home? NO. Will it affect me personally? NO. Will it effect out children? Grandchildren? YES. With each one of the "previously" unacceptable behaviors (and beliefs) that we are being FORCED to accept as "normal" behavior, the moral fiber of this country degenerates to a new low. Where will it end?


    The gene pool needs chlorine.
  • dennisjohnsondennisjohnson Member Posts: 471 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    what ever happened to morals?

    dennis
  • mousemouse Member Posts: 3,624
    edited November -1
    I'm glad to hear they want to ratify the constitution to define
    marriage as only between a man and a woman.
    Nebraska overwhelmingly voted in favor of this. It was interesting
    getting the signitures for a vote from the people. The pro-homo
    crowd we're rude to say the least.
    Read Michael Savages book; The Enemy Within if you'd need a bit
    of a wake up call. I was long aware of many of the perverted
    agendas of the left, but Michael managed to shock me with facts
    unknown to me. I hadn't realized how far they'd come with
    promotion of their sick lives.
  • pantera7974pantera7974 Member Posts: 938 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    good ol` taxachusettes, no longer are we gonna be known as "THE BAY STATE", thanks to those idiot judges letting those pickle smokers and carpet munchers get married were now gonna be known as "THE GAY STATE"!! i dont want my two children growing up being forced to look at these things walking hand in hand like its ok.....ITS NOT !!! and i dont think it has anything to do with god because i personally dont believe in that stuff,why are we the only species that screws the same sex ???were a male sex and a female sex for a reason, we need each other to reproduce,our species isnt gonna get anywhere by steve pushing in adams stool for him its f`ed up and flat out wrong , i have no use for them like a jennings or a raven, im sure i offended someone, that wasnt my intention, but homosexuals offend me and its just disgusting!![:(!][:(!][:(!][:(!]

    HAPPINESS IS LIKE PEEING YOURSELF, EVERYBODY CAN SEE IT BUT ONLY YOU CAN FEEL ITS WARMTH.
  • drobsdrobs Member Posts: 22,527 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by pantera7974
    good ol` taxachusettes, no longer are we gonna be known as "THE BAY STATE", thanks to those idiot judges letting those pickle smokers and carpet munchers get married were now gonna be known as "THE GAY STATE"!! i dont want my two children growing up being forced to look at these things walking hand in hand like its ok.....ITS NOT !!! and i dont think it has anything to do with god because i personally dont believe in that stuff,why are we the only species that screws the same sex ???were a male sex and a female sex for a reason, we need each other to reproduce,our species isnt gonna get anywhere by steve pushing in adams stool for him its f`ed up and flat out wrong , i have no use for them like a jennings or a raven, im sure i offended someone, that wasnt my intention, but homosexuals offend me and its just disgusting!![:(!][:(!][:(!][:(!]

    HAPPINESS IS LIKE PEEING YOURSELF, EVERYBODY CAN SEE IT BUT ONLY YOU CAN FEEL ITS WARMTH.


    Interesting... So basically you just hate homosexuals? No religion needed. Amazing!

    As the old saying goes...
    We're here
    We're queer
    Get used to it

    Last I heard the courts were a check and ballance on our system of government. Sounds like some of you here would like to do away with the courts all together?

    Regards,
    190191.gif
  • He DogHe Dog Member Posts: 50,947 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If we do away with the checks and balances Drobs, we can get rid of everyone we don't like or approve of, with out ever thinking that some day the powers that be may decide we are the ones needed to be rid of. These threads are a waste, no one will change anyones mind.

    He Dog
  • PATBUZZARDPATBUZZARD Member Posts: 3,556
    edited November -1
    I wouldn't have near as much a problem with the gays if they would merely try to be normal. I hate it when people try to stuff their ideas down my throat. Why can't they just let well enough alone? I am here on a college campus, and it seems that every day I am assaulted by the liberal agenda whether it be Gays or whatever. I am just tired of being told what I must accept as normal, that I MUST approve of their lifestyle. Why can't they just go do their thing in the privacy of their own home, and leave me the hell alone? I don't force my beliefs on them, why is it impossible for them to return the favor?
    OK rant ended

    May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't.
    - General George Patton Jr
  • RocklobsterRocklobster Member Posts: 7,060
    edited November -1
    Because, Pat, old buddy, this is the Era of the Minority.

    How can you possibly expect people who are too confused to be able to figure out what gender they are to try to be "normal"?
  • bsallybsally Member Posts: 3,165
    edited November -1
    Pat, I agree with you 100%. As a matter of fact, seeing the rainbows and such is the only thing that bothers me about their lifestyle. I don't advertise I'm strait. Or does my wedding ring do that?[;)]

    quote:I don't force my beliefs on them, why is it impossible for them to return the favor?


    That got me to thinking. Oh no! But isn't outlawing gay marriage doing just that to them? Forcing your beliefs on them.



    SALLY
    Committee member-Ducks Unlimited
  • mpolansmpolans Member Posts: 1,752 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If it's between two consenting ADULTS (not animals or kids, neither of which can give consent...duh) who cares? As someone mentioned, let them pay the marriage penalty tax and help lower everyone's taxes![}:)]
    Some people might kick and scream about morals, but if that's the case, let that be between them and God. I've known several gay folks who were nicest folks in the world.
    Given that homosexuality has been documented back to biblical times and IS exhibited in some animals (primates, my friend's dog [?] ), I don't think it's a learned behavior.
    The flamboyant ones that have gay pride crap all over and dress in outlandish parade costumes are a little annoying, but those seem to be the exception and not the rule.
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    CAPITOL REVIEW

    Coloradans should care because the U.S. Constitution requires that "full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and judicial proceedings of every other state." A marriage performed in Massachusetts is valid in all 50 states.



    What about my permit to carry issued to me by the state of Pennsylvnia? If I get caought carrying in New Jersey, I get thrown in the slammer, and the Federal government does not seem to care, notwithstanding this constitutional provision.
    I dont care what they do in Massachusettes-if Massachusettes wants to make a mockery out of the institution of marriage, that is their business. But do not pollute the rest of the country with this nonsense. Does the rest of the country have to be forced to recognize these marriages? Absolutely not! Are we in danger of having one of these cases go to the Supreme court? We are, but we do not have to be, if Congress takes up its constitutional duty and authority.
    Someone mentioned "the courts were a check and balance on our system of government"-They arent. To descibe them as a check and balance IN our system of government would be accurate, but to infer that the courts "check and balance our system of government" is false. I know many would like to believe that, especially those, like homosexuals, who cant get the legislatures to buy into their homosexual agenda, and therefore hope that the courts will rule in their favor in an "above the law" manner.
    Let the absurdity run rampant in Massachusettes, Vermont, California, Jersey(you are next), but as soon as they go to the courts seeking equal protection, and "full faith and credit", and expect their marriages to be recognized in normal states, congress MUST step in and prohibit the court from hearing any cases dealing with the homosexual agenda.

    "Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
    -Jimmy the cheese man
  • longhunterlonghunter Member Posts: 3,242
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by woodshermit
    Here we go again. Gay marriages...what's so special about straight marriages? Half end in divorce anyway. I don't care who marries who as long as they are two consenting adults. The homophobes will never be able to see homosexuality as anything but evil and a choice somebody makes. Can anybody tell me why a man would willingly CHOOSE to be with another man?


    So you are ok with them getting the complete rights that a hetrosexual couple does? Lets see,we'll give em healthcare,foodstamps,and oh ya,let em adopt children into their "Chosen lifestyle".I was taught to PROTECT children...Yes I am my brothers keeper..
  • jpwolfjpwolf Member Posts: 9,164
    edited November -1
    Salzo, they tried to make a law last year saying that if one state recognized these people as married the rest of the states would not be forced to recognize them, but it failed. Some are pushing for a Const. amendment recognizing only marriage as only between a man and a woman. Pres. Bush says he would support.

    ________________________________________________________________________

    "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine

    If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
  • longhunterlonghunter Member Posts: 3,242
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by bsally
    It doesn't affect me, nor does it affect you. Get over it, live your own life and let other citizens of this free country live theirs. Good grief! If these hard liners would put all the money they spend in court fighting this, imagine what GOOD they could actually do. [V] Marriage has become a joke anyway. What is the divorce rate now. Above 50% isn't it? That is shamefull. Sanctity of marriage, ha, now that has become a joke.[:(] I just think there are so many more important things that we should worry about.

    Also, my observations on this are that most that disagree with gay marriage do so for religious reasons. And as far as I am concerned religion has ZERO place in the laws of our country.

    SALLY
    Committee member-Ducks Unlimited


    This has been aired here before but just HOW do you even come close to this?(zero religion) ONE more time,MOST all of the founders were CHRISTIANS,they based al ot of what they wrote with the scriptures in mind,the early JUSTICES made their decisions based a lot upon BIBLICAL principle and did in fact often quote the verse that helped them to arrive at their decision....So they were ALL WRONG,ALL the time? My faith aside I still object to it.The act ,behind closed doors,well I'd never no would I? But to allow the to be everywhere ALL the time and to consider it a HEALTHY alternative lifestyle....?...NO ,for them to adopt children...No ....I just can't get there...If they keep it between them and God or whoever ,whatever they worship,or don't,fine.........
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by bsally
    And as far as I am concerned religion has ZERO place in the laws of our country.




    Well you know what they say about opinions.

    "Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
    -Jimmy the cheese man
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    Salzo, they tried to make a law last year saying that if one state recognized these people as married the rest of the states would not be forced to recognize them, but it failed. Some are pushing for a Const. amendment recognizing only marriage as only between a man and a woman. Pres. Bush says he would support.


    Personally I am opposed to a constitutional amendment. I think marriage should be an issue that remains with the states.
    And I do not like the law that you mentioned, because it is unecessary, and the court can always rule that a federal law denying the recognition of same sex marriages from another state is unconstitutional.
    The best solution, is for congress to prohibit the Syupreme court from hearing any cases related to marriage, both normal and bizarre marriages.

    "Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
    -Jimmy the cheese man
  • mpolansmpolans Member Posts: 1,752 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    But those same founding fathers made a conscious effort to limit the degree to which religion played a part in politics (see 1st Amendment).

    quote:Originally posted by longhunter
    quote:Originally posted by bsally
    It doesn't affect me, nor does it affect you. Get over it, live your own life and let other citizens of this free country live theirs. Good grief! If these hard liners would put all the money they spend in court fighting this, imagine what GOOD they could actually do. [V] Marriage has become a joke anyway. What is the divorce rate now. Above 50% isn't it? That is shamefull. Sanctity of marriage, ha, now that has become a joke.[:(] I just think there are so many more important things that we should worry about.

    Also, my observations on this are that most that disagree with gay marriage do so for religious reasons. And as far as I am concerned religion has ZERO place in the laws of our country.

    SALLY
    Committee member-Ducks Unlimited


    This has been aired here before but just HOW do you even come close to this?(zero religion) ONE more time,MOST all of the founders were CHRISTIANS,they based al ot of what they wrote with the scriptures in mind,the early JUSTICES made their decisions based a lot upon BIBLICAL principle and did in fact often quote the verse that helped them to arrive at their decision....So they were ALL WRONG,ALL the time? My faith aside I still object to it.The act ,behind closed doors,well I'd never no would I? But to allow the to be everywhere ALL the time and to consider it a HEALTHY alternative lifestyle....?...NO ,for them to adopt children...No ....I just can't get there...If they keep it between them and God or whoever ,whatever they worship,or don't,fine.........
  • mpolansmpolans Member Posts: 1,752 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Assuming you go with the idea that homosexual tendencies are genetic (and most evidence seems to point this way), regarding gay/lesbo folks and adoption, what's the big deal?
    I've only known a couple kids with gay parents, but they turned out straight.
    Heck, if anything, I'd think we'd have to worry more about keeping kids away from popstars and priests.
  • Ruger22Ruger22 Member Posts: 385
    edited November -1
    The courts are dominated by Bolshevic perverts and degenerates who's goal is the complete obliteration of the Judeo Christian way of life. It is our responsibility to stand up to these vermin who legislate from the bench and violate the Constitution.

    Member: NRA, RFC, John Birch Society, American Numismatic Association.
    50pic.jpg
    124L.gif
    597lr_sm.jpg
    rfcmember.gifnraseal.jpgvo_large.jpg
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by mpolans
    But those same founding fathers made a conscious effort to limit the degree to which religion played a part in politics (see 1st Amendment).



    No they didnt. The only limiting that was done was limiting the federal government from getting involved with religion. With respect to our discussion, the founders would have no objection to state laws prohibiting gay marriage, or sodomy, based on religious principles(see 1st amendment).

    "Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
    -Jimmy the cheese man
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    More from the homofront.
    www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040214-120825-7104r.htm

    "Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
    -Jimmy the cheese man
  • jpwolfjpwolf Member Posts: 9,164
    edited November -1
    mpol, your last statement is the proof that it is NOT genetic. It is a choice. Evidence points towards genetics??? If it was normal genetics, half the population would be fags.
    As far as those who say, "let them pay the marriage penalty", Bush said he would do away with that.

    ________________________________________________________________________

    "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine

    If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
  • Red223Red223 Member Posts: 7,946
    edited November -1
    A Marriage is a religious ceremony. Governments have no power to try to regulate or manage them. That is separation of church and state.

    I am against gays but if they start their own religion that supports being gay, there is nothing anyone can do about it.

    The people are just fostering more big government by not realizing this and allowing more silly laws that the government has no power to enact.

    kabalogoshadowed.gif
  • n/an/a Member Posts: 168,427
    edited November -1
    I dont think its a question of HOMOSEXUALITY at this point, The problem is that the legislators are going to screw with the constitution, and change it, If they do it in this case, what other cases will they do it in?????????

    animatflip.gif

    "I dont care how thin you make a pancake, it still has two sides"

    "A wise man is a man that realizes just how little he knows.
    Hudson.gif
    900.gif
  • RocklobsterRocklobster Member Posts: 7,060
    edited November -1
    Ruger22- exactly! Thank you!
  • mpolansmpolans Member Posts: 1,752 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The quote I originally replied to did not appear to restrict its comments to questions of state law and implied federal concerns. Regarding state law, I wonder how they would feel about the full faith and credit clause in the context of gay marriages being fully sanctioned in one state and not in another?

    quote:Originally posted by salzo
    quote:Originally posted by mpolans
    But those same founding fathers made a conscious effort to limit the degree to which religion played a part in politics (see 1st Amendment).



    No they didnt. The only limiting that was done was limiting the federal government from getting involved with religion. With respect to our discussion, the founders would have no objection to state laws prohibiting gay marriage, or sodomy, based on religious principles(see 1st amendment).

    "Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
    -Jimmy the cheese man
  • mpolansmpolans Member Posts: 1,752 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    How does it prove it is not genetic? Things like Downs Syndrome and Kleinfelters Syndrome are genetic, but half the population isn't retarded.

    quote:Originally posted by jpwolf
    mpol, your last statement is the proof that it is NOT genetic. It is a choice. Evidence points towards genetics??? If it was normal genetics, half the population would be fags.
    As far as those who say, "let them pay the marriage penalty", Bush said he would do away with that.

    ________________________________________________________________________

    "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine

    If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
  • jpwolfjpwolf Member Posts: 9,164
    edited November -1
    True enough mpol, I wasn't totally serious about that, just partially.[;)]

    ________________________________________________________________________

    "If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine

    If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
  • mpolansmpolans Member Posts: 1,752 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Legally, not true. See Maynard v. Hill 125 U.S. 190 (1888). The Supreme Court has said that, "Marriage, as creating the most important relation in life, as having more to do with the morals and civilization of a people than any other institution, has always been subject to the control of the legislature. That body prescribes the age at which parties may contract to marry (but technically not a contract), the procedure or form essential to constitute marriage, the duties and obligations it creates, its effects upon the property rights of both, present and prospective, and the acts which may constitute grounds for its dissolution."

    quote:Originally posted by Red223
    A Marriage is a religious ceremony. Governments have no power to try to regulate or manage them. That is separation of church and state.

    I am against gays but if they start their own religion that supports being gay, there is nothing anyone can do about it.

    The people are just fostering more big government by not realizing this and allowing more silly laws that the government has no power to enact.

    kabalogoshadowed.gif
Sign In or Register to comment.