IF gay unions are state-recognized... (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 11:35:59 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  IF gay unions are state-recognized... (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: IF gay unions are state-recognized...  (Read 5455 times)
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« on: September 12, 2004, 06:24:09 PM »
Some people are saying they support state recognition of gay 'marriage' but not polygamy?

Someone please explain how this makes sense.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2004, 06:45:00 PM »
« Edited: September 12, 2004, 06:47:23 PM by Philip »
I don't even think it'd be completely opening the floodgates. Gay marriage is in no way, shape, matter, or form better.

The 'real world societies' crap isn't what we're talking about. If three women in this country want to get 'married'--and there are--should their union be recognized?
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #2 on: September 12, 2004, 06:53:18 PM »
Got it, so you approve. How about incest?
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2004, 07:02:22 PM »
...This is really pathetic...
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #4 on: September 13, 2004, 11:15:42 AM »
Quote from: HockeyDude on September 12, 2004, 09:46:54 PM
Republicans....the world's only bedroom-police political party.  

What does state recognition of gay unions have to do with the bedroom? In any way, shape, matter, or form?
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #5 on: September 13, 2004, 02:12:45 PM »
Uh, we're talking about state recognition of something. This isn't intrusion into people's lives of any kind.

No one is forced to get state recognition of anything.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #6 on: September 13, 2004, 04:07:48 PM »
Quote from: English on September 13, 2004, 03:40:07 PM
Yes, although I don't agree with polygamy I don't think it's any business of the state.

That said, I don't think the state should carry out marriage ceremonies when a relationship is polygamous. There's a difference between turning a blind eye and actually condoning it.

So then, you would say the same about gay unions, right?
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #7 on: September 13, 2004, 05:00:23 PM »
Well, homosexuality is not the same in my opinion, for the simple reason marriage is supposed to be about love between one man and one woman.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35
« Reply #8 on: September 13, 2004, 06:23:09 PM »
« Edited: September 13, 2004, 06:24:33 PM by Philip »
You obviously don't care about the "equal rights" of three women who want to get married.

Dog does not mean cow, and we aren't changing the definition. Now, if we changed dog to mean cow, it would mean cow. Except no court or law could ever hope to change it; we know our language.

The question is whether or not we want to turn our government into a joke by which homosexuals seek acceptance by twisting our institutions into what they want, forcing their will on and over common law.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.019 seconds with 10 queries.