| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
08 Sep 2005 09:19:14 AM |
| Object: |
California And Gay Marriage |
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/1234/sept/article102.html
California And Gay Marriage
By Nicholas Olson
Sept. 7, 2005
It was announced today that California is sending a bill to the governor
approving the rights of gays to marry. I say hurray for ending another form
of discrimination.
Republicans and their bible-thumping constituents can hem and haw all they
want about their sanctity and that it is against the nature of humanity and
whatever. All I have to say is that I am sick to my stomach that this form
of discrimination is even up for debate.
The stupidest argument I have heard in this whole ordeal is the one where
they have men and women marrying their pets. Let's be logical about this.
If a man wants to marry a woman, he needs her consent, at least in this
country. Since when does your dog ask you to marry it? I can see it now. It
gets down on one knee and pulls out this ring... Wait, that never happened.
The next argument is about sanctity. You know, when two heterosexual people
divorce at over 60 percent of all marriages and infidelity runs rampant and
don't get me started on alimony. Besides, if you want to get married in
this country, shouldn't gays have the same right to be as happy and
miserable as a hetero couple?
The most controversial reason why I am happy about this decision is because
it opens the door for the secular part of our culture to go for the jugular
of the religious right. You see, if you want to call marriage a religious
ceremony or a representation of their love before a spiritual being, then I
can go to the words of James Madison where he specifically noted that there
is a distinct separation of church and state. If religious people want to
keep their precious word "marriage," then they can do without the rights
afforded by our government to married people by having an equitable
separation of this right for all citizens. This would mean that you could
be married but get no benefit by it. After all, if it only matters in the
eyes of God that you are married then be married with no benefits.
Anti-homosexual sentiment is born out of need to discriminate against
something. At once mixed race marriage was looked down upon, so will we
adapt to gay marriage.
Americans are going to have to start realizing that change is going to come
in the form of the future youth, those that feel that the current adults
are messing things up, will not tolerate the indignities of the past. It
happened in the 1860s, it happened in the 1960s and it will happen in the
not-so-distant future. Learn to deal. California is on their way. Why not
in your state?
------------
About the author: Nicholas Olson is a long-time journalist who has been a
columnist at his college newspaper and is currently a military journalist.
***************************************************************
Posting and reading from alt.politics.usa.constitution OR alt.education
You are invited to check out the following:
The Rise of the Theocratic States of America
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocracy.htm
American Theocrats - Past and Present
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/theocrats.htm
The Constitutional Principle: Separation of Church and State
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
[and to join the discussion group for the above site and/or Separation of
Church and State in general, listed below]
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
[Its not just Hampton Roads folks who are members]
***************************************************************
.. . . You can't understand a phrase such as "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion" by syllogistic reasoning. Words
take their meaning from social as well as textual contexts, which is why "a
page of history is worth a volume of logic." New York Trust Co. v. Eisner,
256 U.S. 345, 349, 41 S.Ct. 506, 507, 65 L.Ed. 963 (1921) (Holmes, J.).
Sherman v. Community Consol. Dist. 21, 980 F.2d 437, 445 (7th Cir. 1992)
.. . .
****************************************************************
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE:
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE
http://members.tripod.com/~candst/index.html
****************************************************************
.
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
17 Sep 2005 05:38:47 PM |
|
|
On 17 Sep 2005 10:02:07 -0700, wrote:
Michael Altarriba wrote:
Martin McPhillips wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:7ifni1tc67ojld32i9msaecempihpjf2ib@4ax.com...
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 22:44:04 GMT, "Martin McPhillips"
<nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
"Michael Altarriba" <mikealt@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126909985.430693.3630@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
snip
There's no such thing as a "same-sex marriage."
It's an oxymoron.
Tell that to people in Spain, Canada, and the
Netherlands.
Are the
same-sex couples there not really married? Their
governments would
disagree with you.
Governments are not omnipotent; they can't
change a turtle into a duck, especially not
just because they call the turtle a duck.
Marriage, on the other hand, is not a part of nature.
Marriage is rooted in the natural opposition
and complementarity of the two sexes. It is
not simply a fungible catch basin for
postmodern wishes and fantasies.
Given that the institution of marriage now includes same-sex couples in
several countries and one state in the United States, and given that
many churches perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples, aren't
your continual statements that such marriages do not exist getting a
tad irrational?
The institution of marriage now includes plural couples in several
societies; that does not mean iut should be adopted HERE.
It is good that you admit that marriage is a legal institution, and
that different kinds of marriage have existed and do exist - all
defined by man-made laws. In short same-sex marriage exists.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
17 Sep 2005 07:35:16 PM |
|
|
It is good that you admit that marriage is a legal institution, and
that different kinds of marriage have existed and do exist - all
defined by man-made laws. In short same-sex marriage exists.
not in this country, and please do not talk Netherland, because I will
suggest you to go to Saudia Arabia
From now on I will call you - gay-marriage supporters a
marriage-killers, that is your real name. You want to destroy
families, then go ahead. And remember you people are doing bad things
for the country because Democratic party going to lose again misearbly
because of you trying to kill families.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
17 Sep 2005 07:58:59 PM |
|
|
<chirabbit@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127003716.648804.281710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
It is good that you admit that marriage is a legal institution, and
that different kinds of marriage have existed and do exist - all
defined by man-made laws. In short same-sex marriage exists.
not in this country, and please do not talk Netherland, because I will
suggest you to go to Saudia Arabia
From now on I will call you - gay-marriage supporters a
marriage-killers, that is your real name. You want to destroy
families, then go ahead. And remember you people are doing bad things
for the country because Democratic party going to lose again misearbly
because of you trying to kill families.
Plonkeroonie. Another ***** down the tubes.
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
| User: "1899 Dead" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 11:17:47 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:58:59 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
<chirabbit@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127003716.648804.281710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
It is good that you admit that marriage is a legal institution, and
that different kinds of marriage have existed and do exist - all
defined by man-made laws. In short same-sex marriage exists.
not in this country, and please do not talk Netherland, because I will
suggest you to go to Saudia Arabia
From now on I will call you - gay-marriage supporters a
marriage-killers, that is your real name. You want to destroy
families, then go ahead. And remember you people are doing bad things
for the country because Democratic party going to lose again misearbly
because of you trying to kill families.
Plonkeroonie. Another ***** down the tubes.
This topic really brings them out from under their rocks, doesn't it?
"'I’m not meeting with that goddamned *****,' Bush screamed at aides
who suggested he meet with Cindy Sheehan, the war-protesting mother
whose son died in Iraq. 'She can go to hell as far as I’m concerned!'"
--Putsch, a decompensating drunk
"Grover Norquist couldn't drown the government, so he drowned New Orleans instead."
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 12:06:51 PM |
|
|
"1899 Dead" <zepp1899#2211finestplanet.com@> wrote in message
news:so4ri1do3kunpv13msre1ifhoick41hvnk@4ax.com...
On Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:58:59 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com> wrote:
<chirabbit@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127003716.648804.281710@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
It is good that you admit that marriage is a legal institution, and
that different kinds of marriage have existed and do exist - all
defined by man-made laws. In short same-sex marriage exists.
not in this country, and please do not talk Netherland, because I will
suggest you to go to Saudia Arabia
From now on I will call you - gay-marriage supporters a
marriage-killers, that is your real name. You want to destroy
families, then go ahead. And remember you people are doing bad things
for the country because Democratic party going to lose again misearbly
because of you trying to kill families.
Plonkeroonie. Another ***** down the tubes.
This topic really brings them out from under their rocks, doesn't it?
That's putting it mildly <cough>
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
#1557
Science doesn't burn people at the stake for disagreeing - Vic Sagerquist
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Altarriba" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:28:32 AM |
|
|
wrote:
It is good that you admit that marriage is a legal institution, and
that different kinds of marriage have existed and do exist - all
defined by man-made laws. In short same-sex marriage exists.
not in this country,
Same-sex marriage is legally recognized in the state of Massachussets.
and please do not talk Netherland, because I will
suggest you to go to Saudia Arabia
What does The Netherlands have to do with Saudi Arabia? You don't
appear to be making any sense.
From now on I will call you - gay-marriage supporters a
marriage-killers, that is your real name.
Same-sex marriage exists, and is recognized outside and inside this
country. Last time I checked, I was still married, and the institution
of marriage still existed. In fact, same-sex couples want to get
married, so I don't see how you could call them "marriage-killers."
You want to destroy families, then go ahead.
How does same-sex marriage destroy anyone's family. Remember, same-sex
marriages are happening already.
And remember you people are doing bad things for the country because
Democratic party going to lose again misearbly because of you
trying to kill families.
How are Democrats trying to "kill families"? Democrats have families
too, you know.
You seem to be making less and less sense with each post. Why is that?
Is it just that you're getting mad?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:14:37 AM |
|
|
On 17 Sep 2005 17:35:16 -0700, wrote:
It is good that you admit that marriage is a legal institution, and
that different kinds of marriage have existed and do exist - all
defined by man-made laws. In short same-sex marriage exists.
not in this country,
Still denying reality I see.
and please do not talk Netherland, because I will
suggest you to go to Saudia Arabia
How very odd! Is that supposed to mean something?
From now on I will call you - gay-marriage supporters a
marriage-killers, that is your real name. You want to destroy
families, then go ahead. And remember you people are doing bad things
for the country because Democratic party going to lose again misearbly
because of you trying to kill families.
How very pathetic. You have begun to babble incoherently.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
17 Sep 2005 08:05:02 PM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and posting the
following on 17 Sep 2005 17:35:16 -0700 iin alt.atheism?
From now on I will call you - gay-marriage supporters a
marriage-killers, that is your real name. You want to destroy
families, then go ahead. And remember you people are doing bad things
for the country because Democratic party going to lose again misearbly
because of you trying to kill families.
Wow. Complete meltdown.
OK, tell me. I've been married for 14 years. How is two men marrying
going to destroy my marriage. Be specific.
My sister has been married just shy of two years, and has a brand new
baby. How will two women exchanging vows in front of the county clerk
destroy their marriage? Be specific.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
17 Sep 2005 08:19:51 PM |
|
|
My sister has been married just shy of two years, and has a brand new
baby. How will two women exchanging vows in front of the county clerk
destroy their marriage? Be specific.
I am not sure what are you taliking about, by saying destroy I meant
structure of the family, a husband and a wife.
Actually, I am going to laugh when I hear how former wifes will try to
prove in divorce court that they were indeed wives, but not the
husbands. Especially women in Calfornia would be very miserable, when
they find out that they are not wives anymore and no one give them a
break in th court.
I know who is promoting this family killing system, yes those
unemployed lawyers who can't do anything besides discussing muddy
freedoms.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
17 Sep 2005 11:27:39 PM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and posting the
following on 17 Sep 2005 18:19:51 -0700 iin alt.atheism?
My sister has been married just shy of two years, and has a brand new
baby. How will two women exchanging vows in front of the county clerk
destroy their marriage? Be specific.
I am not sure what are you taliking about, by saying destroy I meant
structure of the family, a husband and a wife.
How? My wife and I still love each other even though we've been to
gay commitment ceremonies. How is gay marriage going to destroy my
marriage?
Are you capable of explaining this? My marriage has survived a war,
cancer, fights, triumph and disaster. How is two gay men marrying
going to destroy it?
Actually, I am going to laugh when I hear how former wifes will try to
prove in divorce court that they were indeed wives, but not the
husbands. Especially women in Calfornia would be very miserable, when
they find out that they are not wives anymore and no one give them a
break in th court.
Wow. Amazing non sequitor there.
I know who is promoting this family killing system, yes those
unemployed lawyers who can't do anything besides discussing muddy
freedoms.
Actually its gay rights activists, the same ones who stopped random
raids on gay bars by bored cops with the Stonewall Riot.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 10:06:27 AM |
|
|
How? My wife and I still love each other even though we've been to
gay commitment ceremonies. How is gay marriage going to destroy my
marriage?
Love is not equal to marriage, if for you love is equivalent to
marriage then we have nothing to talk about.
And by the way you are a bigot against traditional family.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 04:37:45 PM |
|
|
wrote:
How? My wife and I still love each other even though we've been to
gay commitment ceremonies. How is gay marriage going to destroy my
marriage?
Love is not equal to marriage, if for you love is equivalent to
marriage then we have nothing to talk about.
Then what is marriage about, if not love?
And by the way you are a bigot against traditional family.
Howso? How is "gay marriage" against "traditional family?" And define
"traditional family" for me, if you would.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin McPhillips" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 04:45:06 PM |
|
|
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:J6lXe.5414$nV1.5302@trnddc06...
chirabbit@gmail.com wrote:
How? My wife and I still love each other even though
we've been to
gay commitment ceremonies. How is gay marriage going to
destroy my
marriage?
Love is not equal to marriage, if for you love is
equivalent to
marriage then we have nothing to talk about.
Then what is marriage about, if not love?
Marriage is about a virtuous commitment between
a man and a woman, anchored in the *reality*
of their natural biological opposition and
complementarity, which includes the natural
reproductive function and the natural
family.
"Gay marriage" is the postmodern fantasy of
gay activists and queer theorists; it is
anchored in their transient wishes about
the normalization of sodomy, and has nothing
at all to do with real marriage other than
as a parasitic attachment to it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 07:45:40 PM |
|
|
Martin McPhillips wrote:
"DanielSan" <daniel-san@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:J6lXe.5414$nV1.5302@trnddc06...
chirabbit@gmail.com wrote:
How? My wife and I still love each other even though
we've been to
gay commitment ceremonies. How is gay marriage going to
destroy my
marriage?
Love is not equal to marriage, if for you love is
equivalent to
marriage then we have nothing to talk about.
Then what is marriage about, if not love?
Marriage is about a virtuous commitment between
a man and a woman,
....or many women, if the Bible is to be believed...
anchored in the *reality*
of their natural biological opposition and
complementarity, which includes the natural
reproductive function and the natural
family.
So, people beyond reproductive age, or are unable to reproduce may not
marry?
"Gay marriage" is the postmodern fantasy of
gay activists and queer theorists; it is
anchored in their transient wishes about
the normalization of sodomy, and has nothing
at all to do with real marriage other than
as a parasitic attachment to it.
Firstly, sodomy appears both in homosexual acts as well as heterosexual
acts. There are men that enjoy women with strapons, for example.
Secondly, "Gay Marriage" is not postmodern and has existed since before
the Bible was written.
Thirdly, how is "Gay Marriage" "parasitic?" Please explain this
assertion and, where necessary, provide cites.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 05:44:45 PM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and "Martin McPhillips"
<nospam@nospam.com> posting the following on Sun, 18 Sep 2005 21:45:06
GMT iin alt.atheism?
Marriage is about a virtuous commitment between
a man and a woman, anchored in the *reality*
of their natural biological opposition and
complementarity, which includes the natural
reproductive function and the natural
family.
So, all of us sterile people wouldn't be allowed to get married in
your world? How about people who choose not to have children?
What about straight couple who need technilogical assistance to
conceive? What about married couples who adopt?
Hate to tell you this but there are more kinds of family than your
Leave It To Beaver dream world.
"Gay marriage" is the postmodern fantasy of
gay activists and queer theorists; it is
anchored in their transient wishes about
the normalization of sodomy, and has nothing
at all to do with real marriage other than
as a parasitic attachment to it.
And your experience with real marriage is what? I've been married 14
years, and what you describe is utter claptrap. My wife and I got
engaged because we were in love. We wanted to spend our lives
together, and even before my cancer knew that children were probably
not going to be in the picture.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 07:36:30 PM |
|
|
Then what is marriage about, if not love?
See other messages and you will find it. Marriage is an social
institution created and supported by the government with honest
intention to make man and woman stay together for a long time and bring
up children fostering concept of marriage and family along the way.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 09:09:38 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Then what is marriage about, if not love?
See other messages and you will find it. Marriage is an social
institution created and supported by the government with honest
intention to make man and woman stay together for a long time and bring
up children fostering concept of marriage and family along the way.
So, love has nothing to do with it? People beyond reproductive age are
not allowed to marry? Sterile people, too?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
18 Sep 2005 09:34:06 PM |
|
|
So, love has nothing to do with it?
love makes people happier but marriage is not about love, marriage is
an incentive for heterosexual couple to create a family and stay
together as family
People beyond reproductive age are not allowed to marry? Sterile people, too?
As long as those people are one man and one woman they will always be
allowed to marry and stay togther as long as possible, serving as an
example to be imitated.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
19 Sep 2005 09:29:22 PM |
|
|
<chirabbit@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127097246.550809.250080@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So, love has nothing to do with it?
love makes people happier but marriage is not about love, marriage is
an incentive for heterosexual couple to create a family and stay
together as family
Millions of straight couples get married wih no intention of having
children. Marriage is not about children.
People beyond reproductive age are not allowed to marry? Sterile people,
too?
As long as those people are one man and one woman they will always be
allowed to marry and stay togther as long as possible, serving as an
example to be imitated.
So, why then can't same sex couples get married and do the same? After all,
there is the concept of "Equal rights for all" that you have to contend
with.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
19 Sep 2005 10:04:47 PM |
|
|
So, why then can't same sex couples get married and do the same?
do the same what? same sex couple cannot serve as a an example to be
imitated because same sex couple cannot have children, they can't
teach children by example because it is a bad example.
After all,
there is the concept of "Equal rights for all" that you have to contend with.
Equal for whom?, for people that have different behavior and lifestyle.
Well, some people can't sleep at night, why don't we enforce the law
that make day and night equal, so we don't have to worry about closed
stores and offices.
sure I am a man and want to have an equal right to get pregnant as many
time as I want, if you can provide that right for me I will definitely
consider your statements about equality.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
20 Sep 2005 06:13:29 AM |
|
|
<chirabbit@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1127185487.478582.318020@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
So, why then can't same sex couples get married and do the same?
do the same what? same sex couple cannot serve as a an example to be
imitated because same sex couple cannot have children,
Neither can infertile couples. Or elderly couples.
they can't
teach children by example because it is a bad example.
What's a bad example?
After all,
there is the concept of "Equal rights for all" that you have to contend
with.
Equal for whom?,
All.
for people that have different behavior and lifestyle.
Well, some people can't sleep at night, why don't we enforce the law
that make day and night equal, so we don't have to worry about closed
stores and offices.
There are 24-hour stores.
sure I am a man and want to have an equal right to get pregnant as many
time as I want, if you can provide that right for me I will definitely
consider your statements about equality.
Is your name Loretta, by any chance?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
19 Sep 2005 10:16:01 PM |
|
|
wrote:
So, why then can't same sex couples get married and do the same?
do the same what? same sex couple cannot serve as a an example to be
imitated because same sex couple cannot have children, they can't
teach children by example because it is a bad example.
But neither can couples in their 60s. They cannot have children and
they cannot teach children by example because it is a bad example.
After all,
there is the concept of "Equal rights for all" that you have to contend with.
Equal for whom?, for people that have different behavior and lifestyle.
Well, some people can't sleep at night, why don't we enforce the law
that make day and night equal, so we don't have to worry about closed
stores and offices.
The Internet is open 24/7. ;-)
sure I am a man and want to have an equal right to get pregnant as many
time as I want, if you can provide that right for me I will definitely
consider your statements about equality.
If you are going to be silly about this, might as well end the
conversation here. Tell me. Do you really want to get pregnant or are
you just being stupid to try to prove some lame point?
Have you discussed this with your therapist?
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth *
* and nothing but the truth; so help me me." *
* --George Burns as God *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
19 Sep 2005 10:42:00 PM |
|
|
But neither can couples in their 60s. They cannot have children and
they cannot teach children by example because it is a bad example.
Hey man, rewind couple pages back, I already said that when man and
woman get married they serve as an example for younger people. By
getting married they support system of marriage where one woman marry
one man and man become a husband and woman become a wife. If two same
sex people claim that they are married, they do not support system of
procreation and reproduction of society. Note a key word - system.
System - something that works. System of reproduction of society that
works.
If you are going to be silly about this, might as well end the conversation here.
Whole story about same sex marriage cannot be considered serious also.
Look, after you redefine concept of marriage, it would mean that there
no such thing as husband and wife. If no such thing as husband and wife
whey we should differentiate between man and the woman. Accordingly, it
would be very unfair to man because, woman can create a family by just
getting pregnant, but man cant'.
.
|
|
|
| User: "RainLover" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
20 Sep 2005 09:10:44 AM |
|
|
On 19 Sep 2005 20:42:00 -0700, wrote:
But neither can couples in their 60s. They cannot have children and
they cannot teach children by example because it is a bad example.
Hey man, rewind couple pages back, I already said that when man and
woman get married they serve as an example for younger people. By
getting married they support system of marriage where one woman marry
one man and man become a husband and woman become a wife. If two same
sex people claim that they are married, they do not support system of
procreation and reproduction of society. Note a key word - system.
System - something that works. System of reproduction of society that
works.
If you are going to be silly about this, might as well end the conversation here.
Whole story about same sex marriage cannot be considered serious also.
Look, after you redefine concept of marriage, it would mean that there
no such thing as husband and wife. If no such thing as husband and wife
whey we should differentiate between man and the woman.
Oh my God! (pardon the pun).. you're SO CLOSE to getting it, rabbit!
We should NOT differentiate between men and women when it comes to
marriage because it DOESN'T MATTER.
Marriage is about commitment and love and supporting each other! It
doesn't require the opposite sex for gay and lesbian couples.
You can talk about "bad examples" and "good examples" until you're
blue in the face, but, when it comes right down to it, *YOU* are being
the bad example here by preaching intollerance and supporting
inequality.
Accordingly, it
would be very unfair to man because, woman can create a family by just
getting pregnant, but man cant'.
yeah, and a woman can't pee her name in the snow, so what? A man
could adopt a child, could he not? God knows, there are PLENTY of
children with *NO* parents who would love a chance to be loved.
James, Seattle
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
20 Sep 2005 09:47:54 AM |
|
|
Oh my God! (pardon the pun).. you're SO CLOSE to getting it, rabbit!
We should NOT differentiate between men and women when it comes to
marriage because it DOESN'T MATTER.
it DOESN'T MATTER, for YOU!!! but IT IS MATTER for ME and thats where
the problem is You want to do apply your opinion by force changing
defintion of marriage.
Marriage is about commitment and love and supporting each other! It
doesn't require the opposite sex for gay and lesbian couples.
It is only your opinion, "commitment and love and supporting" is just a
parts of the system of procreation and reproduction of society.
*YOU* are being
the bad example here by preaching intollerance and supporting
inequality.
It is not true, I want equality for everyone, I want that system of
procreation and reproduction of society stayed the same. You want real
equality then go and declare that system as unfair system and fight for
something new.
And you are supporting a dictatorship, i.e. system when group of people
can voluntarily change definitions and basic concepts in order to
please group of people that cannot be objectively differentiated from
all people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "RainLover" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
21 Sep 2005 10:42:15 AM |
|
|
On 20 Sep 2005 07:47:54 -0700, wrote:
Oh my God! (pardon the pun).. you're SO CLOSE to getting it, rabbit!
We should NOT differentiate between men and women when it comes to
marriage because it DOESN'T MATTER.
it DOESN'T MATTER, for YOU!!! but IT IS MATTER for ME and thats where
the problem is You want to do apply your opinion by force changing
defintion of marriage.
Why are YOU so opposed to same sex marriage, Rabbit? No one is
forcing you to marry another man (woman? I don't know your gender)
If two people who are VERY unlikely to reproduce anyway (gay) want to
get married, how does that effect your narrowminded 'system' of
reproduction?
It's already a FACT that reproduction is *NOT* a requirement for
marriage, and since that's the case, why are you so adamant against
same sex marriage??
Marriage is about commitment and love and supporting each other! It
doesn't require the opposite sex for gay and lesbian couples.
It is only your opinion, "commitment and love and supporting" is just a
parts of the system of procreation and reproduction of society.
*YOU* are being
the bad example here by preaching intollerance and supporting
inequality.
It is not true, I want equality for everyone, I want that system of
procreation and reproduction of society stayed the same.
Would you make it a LAW and REQUIREMENT that if married couples don't
reproduce within a set time limit their marriage should be annulled?
If YES: How does that fit with the current laws on marriage and the
U.S. Constitution? . . . and... man-oh-man, people are going to open
up a can of whoop-***** on you.
If NO: If you're not going to make reproduction manditory, then how
does that jibe with your stance on same-sex marriage?
You want real
equality then go and declare that system as unfair system and fight for
something new.
When you say "system" are you using "natural reproduction system" and
"political system" interchangably here?
Cuz... it's impossible to change mothernature's system, but the
political system is changed all the time. You've been arguing against
same-sex marriage as if it's UNchangable (ie: nature).
You're confusing.
And you are supporting a dictatorship, i.e. system when group of people
can voluntarily change definitions and basic concepts in order to
please group of people that cannot be objectively differentiated from
all people.
Why does it matter to you? And why would two straight men get married
in the first place? And, if they DID, why would that matter? All of
a sudden their lives would become intertwined... one straight guy's
credit card debt would become his straight husband's debt, ect....
The people (courts actually) of the USA changed the 'system' when it
allowed interracial marriages, didn't it? The USA is a REPUBLIC as
opposed to MAJORITY-RULE nation.
The US Constitution is ALL about protecting a small group or powerless
group of people... that's why women got the vote. that's why blacks
got the vote. that's why the disabled can go SHOPPING. that's why
the KKK can expouse it's views.
Why would you want to oppress people who want to marry the ones they
love just because IN YOUR OPINION, they shouldn't because they can't
reproduce?
James, Seattle
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
21 Sep 2005 08:35:52 PM |
|
|
"RainLover" <SP-AMB-LOCKrainlover@raincity.com> wrote in message
news:0tu2j11aadhdlk6vivqetf7jhjjps3cmue@4ax.com...
It's already a FACT that reproduction is *NOT* a requirement for
marriage, and since that's the case, why are you so adamant against
same sex marriage??
Because he's nothing but a dime-store bigot. His tortured mind is
overwhelmed with seething, irrational hatred for gays, probably because he's
having a hard time suppressing his own homosexual desires.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
22 Sep 2005 10:30:48 AM |
|
|
In article <dgt1pk$m7$1@news.seed.net.tw> "Peacenik" <cnelsonpublic@hotmail.com> writes:
"RainLover" <SP-AMB-LOCKrainlover@raincity.com> wrote in message
news:0tu2j11aadhdlk6vivqetf7jhjjps3cmue@4ax.com...
It's already a FACT that reproduction is *NOT* a requirement for
marriage, and since that's the case, why are you so adamant against
same sex marriage??
Because he's nothing but a dime-store bigot. His tortured mind is
overwhelmed with seething, irrational hatred for gays, probably because he's
having a hard time suppressing his own homosexual desires.
Laura Bush is clearly beyond her child-bearing years. I wonder if
the First Couple, who will be procreating no longer, should be
required to divorce?
-- cry
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MikeSoja" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
22 Sep 2005 09:50:03 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 09:35:52 +0800, "Peacenik"
<cnelsonpublic@hotmail.com> posted:
Because he's nothing but a dime-store bigot. His tortured mind is
overwhelmed with seething, irrational hatred for gays, probably because he's
having a hard time suppressing his own homosexual desires.
Thas bootiful, Chrissy. You bash the guy for homophobia while
slipping in the dig that he's probably a little light in the loafers
himself.
As they say, priceless.
Mike Soja
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: California And Gay Marriage |
22 Sep 2005 11:33:15 AM |
|
|
"MikeSoja" <msoja9@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:ivg5j19s1eatsvmvs9r0gnvet1ir90mjhd@4ax.com...
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 09:35:52 +0800, "Peacenik"
<cnelsonpublic@hotmail.com> posted:
Because he's nothing but a dime-store bigot. His tortured mind is
overwhelmed with seething, irrational hatred for gays, probably because
he's
having a hard time suppressing his own homosexual desires.
Thas bootiful, Chrissy. You bash the guy for homophobia while
slipping in the dig that he's probably a little light in the loafers
himself.
It's a fact that pretty much every homophobe is a self-loathing homosexual.
That makes them hypocrites. I reserve the right to verbally bash hypocrites.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
