California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

@izzythepush,

16 or 17 with parental or guardian consent except for certain family relations.

Eldridge Gerry, a Founding Father and delegate to the Convention for Massachusettes Bay, was married to a 17 year old at the age of 55. At the time the couple had a 2 month old son.

Manasseh Cutler, a visiting observer, reported her to be "very handsome and exceedingly amiable".

0 Replies

@RexRed,

Quote:

I think 16 is too young for marriage and sex in many cases...

How have you worked that out Rex?

I'll offer you a reason for opposing homosexual marriage. It is to prevent totalitarians re-writing the world's literature.

When Manasseh Cutler visited with the delegations at the Convention in 1787 he took a ride with a company including Mr Strong (Massachusettes), Mr Martin (N. Carolina), Mr Mason (New England), his son, Mr Williamson (N. Carolina), Mr Madison (Virginia), Mr Rutledge (S, Carolina), Mr Hamilton (New York), and some others. They visited the botanic gardens of John Bartram who, Cutler reports for history, was "embarrassed at seeing so large and gay a company so early in the morning,"

What does a young reader make of that Rex?

When what has been done to the magnificent word "gay, turn it into its opposite, you are now trying to do with another very important word. After that it will be "sex". There is no sex in a homosexual relationship because to admit there is has to include handshaking. The possibility of conception is necessary for sex. Without that it can mean too many things.

Boswell, Sterne, Shakespeare and many others used the word gay in its proper context and to young readers today, thanks to the self-serving revisionism of media led operatives, their works become unintelligible.

Will you address this point rather than continually posting carefully selected propaganda.

2 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

I'll offer you a reason for opposing homosexual marriage. It is to prevent totalitarians re-writing the world's literature.

Spendius You really are one sick and illogical puppy if you think that is a logical reason.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
I think 16 is too young for marriage and sex in many cases...

How have you worked that out Rex?

I'll offer you a reason for opposing homosexual marriage. It is to prevent totalitarians re-writing the world's literature.

When Manasseh Cutler visited with the delegations at the Convention in 1787 he took a ride with a company including Mr Strong (Massachusettes), Mr Martin (N. Carolina), Mr Mason (New England), his son, Mr Williamson (N. Carolina), Mr Madison (Virginia), Mr Rutledge (S, Carolina), Mr Hamilton (New York), and some others. They visited the botanic gardens of John Bartram who, Cutler reports for history, was "embarrassed at seeing so large and gay a company so early in the morning,"

What does a young reader make of that Rex?

When what has been done to the magnificent word "gay, turn it into its opposite, you are now trying to do with another very important word. After that it will be "sex". There is no sex in a homosexual relationship because to admit there is has to include handshaking. The possibility of conception is necessary for sex. Without that it can mean too many things.

Boswell, Sterne, Shakespeare and many others used the word gay in its proper context and to young readers today, thanks to the self-serving revisionism of media led operatives, their works become unintelligible.

Will you address this point rather than continually posting carefully selected propaganda.

Apparently there is no sex in your life and that appears to be why you have to belittle the sex of others...

For what it is worth...

“...for of this sort are they which creep into houses,
and lead captive "silly" women...
II TIMOTHY 3:6a (KJV)

Are women silly Spendi? Like 'haha' silly?

Do they like to laugh a lot? Are they good at making jokes and always quick to the punchline? Are they prone to hysterics?

Actually in the old English of which the King James Bible was translated, silly did not mean what it does today, it meant harmless... "harmless" women...

Meaning they are often victims of male brutes as chauvinistic male violence was common. Egotistical heterosexual males who think they are the end all to sexual prowess. Much like violence towards "gay" men... Perhaps the meaning of gay (as in happy) is actually a corruption of its original meaning? Gay meaning "harmless" just like, silly... Gays are harmless too, the fact that they desire to be married does no harm to heterosexual marriage...

I shudder to think what you consider sex... you being chronically single and such an expert.

I don't expect you to grasp this... Shakespeare's old English or the Bible's meaning here...

Also guess where most homosexuals were relegated to in the civil war times? The military, just as they were drawn to the prairies as cowboys and to become sailors on the open seas just to be closer to the homosexual life they idealized.

Gay men started male clubs, like stonemasons, for the same purpose to live as close to the life that was forbidden by narrow minded cultures and people. Even the Teutonic Knights were most likely a predominantly homosexual faction of early European society....

This did not stop the heterosexuals from turning the major cities London, Paris etc into havens for female prostitution...

My point is, when did history and language become your long suit? Where is your doctorate in language pedagogy?

1 Reply

Two men in one bed two women grinding and no end to homophobia. Rolling Eyes

You may not be able to bare this but this is what makes me think that homophobia will be alive for a very long time. Sad

0 Replies

@RexRed,

Quote:

Apparently there is no sex in your life and that appears to be why you have to belittle the sex of others...

Never mind rl's Baptists. They are easy to discredit. Your statement right there is the reason homophobia will be around a long time. You're unfit for ordinary company. You blackmail people to say things you approve of under threat of being greeted with a slimy smear for which you have not the slightest evidence.

And what is there to say about the use of "apparently" and "appears". Each one is limp-wrist sneak shite. With both in one blurt you can square that. I wouldn't stoop to such under-handed skid-marks but it would be a mistake, born of conceit, to think that I can't give as good as I get if I chose to.

You define sex when there's no possibility of conception.

"Silly" never meant just harmless. Plenty of people are harmless without being silly. It meant the sort of frivolous chirping that was attractive because it meant so little. Like an office hen-party when they've had a few and all get wittering at once.

Women who are good at making jokes and always quick to the punchline are never silly. Neither are those prone to hysterics?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Marriage is the creative union of opposites. Creativity is associated with opposites.

Could brothers be married if they were homosexuals and asserted that they were in love for the purpose of being at the centre of a Media feeding frenzy? Why would incest apply to brothers?

The thing about stunts is that somebody goes a little further. And legislation that fails to take account of that is flawed.

The Constitution was written taking into account people going further. The Constitution could have been written in half a day if it assumed sweet reasonableness in all the participants. The writers assumed the worst.

2 Replies

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/559313_345817118829493_373990945_n.jpg

0 Replies

@spendius,

Quote:

Could brothers be married if they were homosexuals and asserted that they were in love

I never thought of that one before, Why not? Do you have some sort of empirical data that would prove this to be immoral or a bad thing? I am not talking about what you believe.

1 Reply

@reasoning logic,

Quote:

Do you have some sort of empirical data that would prove this to be immoral or a bad thing?

No. Sooner or later when homosexuals rush to City Hall to be hitched, officially, two brothers will arrive demanding their human rights.

Do you think it would cause consternation rl?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Quote:

Do you think it would cause consternation rl?

No. not from me, I would find it to be none of my business but I would hope the best for them.

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Could brothers be married if they were homosexuals and asserted that they were in love for the purpose of being at the centre of a Media feeding frenzy? Why would incest apply to brothers?

Egypt allowed brothers and sisters to marry and never batted an eyelash. The only reason we do not allow male/female siblings this is due to the possibility genetic defects. Gay brothers and sisters do not have this problem. Not sure about this one, get back to me on it in 5 years...

Once again, marriage is between consenting "adults", that stipulation should never change.

Lack of marriage rights has never stopped love from going where it may, it has just driven it underground.

My next door neighbors all while I was growing up were two sweet old lady sisters who were unmarried and lived together all their lives... The oldest sister had once been in the military... We never even gave it a thought.

1 Reply

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/423482_333723913385724_808463319_n.jpg

0 Replies

@RexRed,

Quote:

Not sure about this one, get back to me on it in 5 years...

You can't afford the luxury of not being sure Rex. It makes it look like you have not thought the thing through.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
Not sure about this one, get back to me on it in 5 years...

You can't afford the luxury of not being sure Rex. It makes it look like you have not thought the thing through.

A bisexual father could also marry his son (provided the son has reached the age of consent)... Or lesbian mother and daughter... The possibility of it being legal exists but I do not personally endorse it.

This type of sexuality is already present in our culture but driven underground...

Heterosexuals marry much younger spouses at times also.

Siblings already have the rights of next of kin...

I support gay marriage, yet siblings marrying or parents marrying their children I have reservations with that.

Perhaps because their heterosexual counterparts have strict laws prohibiting marriage between family members, gay siblings and gay parent/sibling affairs should follow suit. Otherwise what consenting adults do in their bedrooms is a private matter.

The republicans want to block abortions due to incest so that says where their heads are at. I am opposed on this subject but not opposed on gay marriage at all.

It is not "marriage equality" for gay siblings or gay adult parent/siblings to marry because their heterosexual counterparts are not granted that same right. It is on that basis that I oppose gay siblings or gay adult parent/siblings from marrying.

1 Reply

How a Gay Rights Maverick Helped Topple Iceland’s Government
http://www.alternet.org/world/how-gay-rights-maverick-helped-topple-icelands-government

http://www.alternet.org/files/styles/story_image/public/story_images/icelandprotest.jpg

1 Reply

Kinda makes you just want to put your arms around him and let him know he's okay, doesn't it.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/427389_333926883365427_621164626_n.jpg

0 Replies

You have to be brave to do this in Uganda, very moving ...
Pride march in Uganda. Indescribably brave and moving. Now this is real PRIDE !

https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/378292_516051181754277_20868686_n.jpg

0 Replies

@RexRed,

Right then Rex. You admit denying some people the right you claim for yourself. Now we know where we stand on rights. Heterosexual sibling relationships are nothing to do with homosexual ones. The latter have no consequences in reproductive terms.

Quote:

The republicans want to block abortions due to incest so that says where their heads are at.

Yes it does. They respect the rights of an unborn child who has nothing to do with the manner of its conception. It exists and the Republicans you refer to are opposed to killing it in grisly circumstances with no cameras allowed.

Many actors and actresses have declared deep passionate love as a stunt to make money or get fame. Cary Grant said that Hollywood creates minds.

Could a movie be made about two brothers played by actors who are not brothers and shown love-making. And distributed with a Library of Congress serial number. Which is a stamp of approval.

0 Replies

@RexRed,

When governments are toppled there is ruin and devastation.

Changing a few faces, which all went to the same schools, is not toppling a goverment. If Mr Romney gets elected the US government will not even feel a tremor.

Your use of language leaves a great deal to be desired Rex in the eyes of those who don't wish it to become incomprehensible.

0 Replies

California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know