California Voters Approve Gay-Marriage Ban

Then you've missed the nuance of the discussion.

shows that thousands of couples do want to get married

You're picking nits again.

spendi is a pathetic individual who's perception of the world is created in his own mind. As can be observed on the many threads that spendi posts his nonsense, he still doesn't realize that his ideas are not based on common knowledge or common sense. His imagination is the core of his beliefs that springs from his voracious reading of the classics, but has learned nothing. His quotes from long-gone authors have no relationship to the topic under discussion. Will he ever learn this basic truth?

I dont DISMISS them as legal definitions, I insist we could change laws so that all kinds of couples are recognised without marriage .

Quote:

shows that thousands of couples do want to get married

Do they ? Or do they want the legal protection that marriage offers ? If it is the legal protection, we could change that .

Spendius I thought that you were all about the love of money, I guess that I miss read you at times

Marriage is a union of love and nothing else.

"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."

Quote:

Spendius I thought that you were all about the love of money, I guess that I miss read you at times

I take it as a given that you will misread my posts. Probably most others that contain any sensible contribution.

It is how the money is earned that matters. See my post about two male incomes in a homosexual union and benefits for marriage having an economic function. And that similar benefits applied to homosexual unions cost the collective and don't fulfill the economic purpose. Which is money for nothing.

Rex--you've been reading too many lower-middle-class Agony Aunts and associated self-justifiers. The terms you are using, as they do, are nebulous and can be manipulated to prove anything. And that makes them meaningless. They are sentiments.


Sentiments used in the Bible, twisted to deny fair and equal rights among those who love one another and desire a life long commitment. Yes biblical terms are nebulous to say the least and are manipulated by clergy to spread fear, hate and division. They are used as an illusion to prove hocus pocus and have no intrinsic value otherwise.

If you were on a podium spouting that lot I would expect bouquets of pink roses to be nicely positioned to set it off. And pinefresh fragrances to have been sprayed around the hall. And the audience would go home feeling good about themselves. You're milking.

What you are describing is the bleeding hearts, souls harbor of the destitute and weak-minded Christian gatherings taking place.

Are those azaleas by the podium?

http://youtu.be/H3XS9JftEns

The only one being "porked" is the audience by such drivel. Pork is one of the cleanest meats sold at the supermarket. Also lobsters are scavengers should we not eat lobsters? Humand will eat the dead if hungry enough and some humans did not even need to be starving while eating the dead. This practice came out mostly of religious ceremonies. That word cannibal means "priests of Baal" in Chaldee...

Pork was "unclean" because of trichinosis and it took a long process to "cure" it and people were not curing it right and dying. So the Bible employed a scare tactic to stop people from eating it rather than leveling with them and speaking the truth. It is an abomination? What garbage!

Quote:

Marriage is a union of love and nothing else.

Gobbledegook. How long does this "love" last? What actually is it?

How does it last? It lasts because it is LOVE. What is it? LOVE....

Quote:

"It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife."

Some women want a wife and good fortune too...

Jane Austen. One of the most famous sentences in English literature. And rightly so.

Aldous Huxley portrays serial monogamy which is condemned if it lasts more than one night. Bernard Shaw turns the whole business into a stud farm.

We have a statistically sufficient number of homosexual unions made official in California, Maine and other places to give us an idea of the permanence of them. What is the result? You and barmyman are making great play on the number of ceremonies as if they prove something other than that folk like a splash and a booze up. And those who provide the facilities for the splash and the "do" are obviously on your side.

You have no statistics... all you have sadly is a pathetic fear of gays in bed together. And heterosexuals booze up at their stripper laden bachelor parties and tie the knot while still intoxicated from the night before and this is the correct way to perform a marriage ceremony? Let's hope gays add some class to a ceremony that has been already perverted by the heteros.

But marriage is not about ceremonies. It is not a transient affectation. As Dylan said--"it's just a job".


Loving someone monogamously is not a job it is a treasure and an honor to another lover. If marriage is not your sort of thing well then it becomes a job I guess... Another famous saying.. "To each their own."

What if one of the males in the relationship is a transsexual who dresses as a woman and unfair labor laws and employers with homophobic attitudes like yours prohibit their attempts to find a job.

Quote:

What if one of the males in the relationship is a transsexual who dresses as a woman and unfair labor laws and employers with homophobic attitudes like yours prohibit their attempts to find a job.

I should imagine that most employers would discriminate against a cross-dresser because it would detract from the efficiency of their business. With a female cross-dresser as well the firm might need four toilets instead of two. An employer who benefits from a cross-dresser will discriminate in their favour. You're confusing homophobia with profit seeking.

Do you think a cross-dresser could win the Presidency by touring the country in a crinoline and matching bonnet. If not your homophobia charge is stuck on the population of the USA.

How many times do you need telling that I have no inclination, never mind desire, to thwart homosexual couples. I just want the word "marriage" to mean what it says in the dictionaries and all the literature of our tradition. Will you kindly get that into your head?

I'll admit to having had a lot of problems with women. I have often thought how easy it must be to be a homosexual. But alas women have me spellbound. It is a cross I have bourne with as much dignity as I can muster. Men are simply horrible.

some humans did not even need to be starving while eathing the dead. this practice came out mostly of religious ceremonies.