Gay Couples:Marriage is Not a Right

@Ionus,

I retire before such brilliant legal scholarship. All I can say is, lets wait a few years and see if anything comes up to even minimally support your daydream.

Until then, I suppose we will have to watch and listen as you continually talk out of your anal sphincter.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Why are you obsessed with another man's rectum ? Played around a bit in your college days, huh ? You know I am sure you could afford a psychologist to help you with your hatred, homosexual frustrations, arse obsessions, drinking problem, fantasy world of being a clever scientist, growing senility, misguided patriotism (north good people, south bad people) , and others too numerous to mention here . Take along your rock collection...they would love to hear how you are clever .

0 Replies

How can anyone of sound mind say homosexuals have Marriage Rights and not Polygamists or Polyandrists ? If consenting adults want to, who are you with your little bigoted hatred to stop them ? Is it because a man and a woman would get married so you are stuck with the idea of two ? Wasn't the whole argument that it wasn't about just men and women any more ? That marriage no longer applied to them ?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

How can anyone of sound mind say homosexuals have Marriage Rights and not Polygamists or Polyandrists ? If consenting adults want to, who are you with your little bigoted hatred to stop them ? Is it because a man and a woman would get married so you are stuck with the idea of two ? Wasn't the whole argument that it wasn't about just men and women any more ? That marriage no longer applied to them ?

You are not very bright are you. The issue of "equal protection" goes out the window with either polyandry or polygamy. Can you even understand why?

Maybe someone else can explain.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

You're an idiot . It is that very clause that would mean polygamists have equal protection, the very thing that homosexuals have now . Why shouldn't an adult be allowed to marry someone they love ? All it needs is consent from the other wives . Wait till the bench changes, homosexuals may still get it in the arse .

1 Reply

@Ionus,

OK, Ill admit Im an idiot.
What then are you if you cannot understand that "equal protection" refers to everyone in the "union" . If theres a polygamist (One who has multiple wives), what equal protection do the wives enjoy?
HMMMMM?

get it Einstein?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

They enjoy the equal protection as a homosexual and are able to marry who they love, the same as a couple . As wives they would be equally protected as each other . Why are you denying Marriage Rights to adults who are consentuous to a relationship ? Obviously marriage is no longer about a man and a woman, so why deny Rights to people ? You are Polygaphobic . They are going to have these relationships anyway, you are just denying them legal protection .

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Marriage is a contract between 2 people. It grants rights under the law to the 2 people in that contract. To restrict it to only certain types of 2 people like whites, heterosexuals, the rich would be to deny equal protection.

It doesn't deny rights to poly relationships since marriage law is about the rights one person has when married to one other person. When you introduce a third person then all those rights are no longer available simply because under marriage law the rights are granted to 2 people equally and result in one person having rights when the spouse dies or is incapacitated.

In a marriage, the spouse inherits all without tax consequences. In a polygamous relationship, no single person can inherit it all so tax law would trump the poly marriage making the benefit not applicable.

In a marriage one spouse can make legal and medical decisions for the other if they are incapacitated. In a poly relationship there would be no one person to make those decisions so it wouldn't fall under current law.

The law is filled with many benefits for marriage that would not be available to a poly relationship because it is not 2 people.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Perhaps someday the laws will sort out a way to work with poly relationships. That would be a good thing IMNSHO.

Right now the US is having enough trouble sorting out how things are going to work with two people.

One step forward at a time.

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

Heres a worldmap re the legal status of Polygamy.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/Legality_of_polygamy.png

PS, the blue shades are where it is forbidden by law. The lighter blue is where it is forbidden but not a crime.

In the Muslim world , polygamy is allowed "If the man owns the woman"--Yeh that's gonna make the Supreme Court reverse 150 years of Constitutional uphill march.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

BTW, why must the US be the testing ground for such unions. We already have a legal position into which a loving group may enter and still retain their individual rights or property, life, and liberty. Its called a FAMILY.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

The Supreme Court has decided that gay people have the right to marry, that covers all 50 states.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

youre misreading me. I was referring to Polyangyny, and Anus' desire to have the US supreme Court validate this "institution" as legal. Anus claimed that polygamy was mentioned and (I believe) endorsed within the US contitution. SO far though, hes failed in anything that approaches evidence .
In my response I merely stated that under the "equal protection" clauses, polyangyny would be not allowed because only ONE party is protected in that type of union. We, and most all of the Western, Oceanian,and Asiatic world has agreed.
I showed a map that let ANus know where he should go live if he so desires to see polyangyny be a legal institution.
\
He was merely being his normal asshole self by trying to drop some bait and see who rises. I am pissed that I actually took the time to respond to that beetlehead , which only gives him false credibility.

Im such an idiot

1 Reply

@farmerman,

The US is nowhere near being a testing ground for any social progression.

It might have been once upon a time but those days are gone. It's a follower in social politics now. This weekend we're celebrating the 14th anniversary of the first same-sex marriage here in Tranna. Thousands since then. Literally hundreds this weekend last year when World Pride was here.

2 Replies

@ehBeth,

well, it takes longer cause we aint good at proof reading

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

The US is nowhere near being a testing ground for any social progression.

It might have been once upon a time but those days are gone. It's a follower in social politics now. This weekend we're celebrating the 14th anniversary of the first same-sex marriage here in Tranna. Thousands since then. Literally hundreds this weekend last year when World Pride was here.

and to expand on that

Quote:

The laws that were enacted to fight terrorism after 9/11 contain many aspects that are constitutionally troubling. It was expected that all of these laws would be repealed by the Obama administration. That has happened in part, due to Congress limiting the powers of the intelligence services. Nevertheless, the inner-American discussion about the balance between security and freedom; that is, the rights of the intelligence community and rights of citizens, deals with these issues in a way that I find problematic. The conclusions don't represent what the majority of German's expect from their own government, for instance.
The Patriot Act and Guantanamo are also viewed critically, and the practice of systematically torturing detainees to glean information about terror networks is especially controversial. In America, 58 percent of those polled support such tactics, in Germany, 68 percent are opposed to them. Why are American and European opinions so divided about this practice?
We don't always have the same hierarchy of moral values. In the USA, some members of Congress have attempted to introduce initiatives to end the use of torture. One of the main proponents trying to force the issue is John McCain, who is normally very conservative, and was himself a victim of torture at the hands of the Vietcong during the Vietnam War. Nevertheless, he has been unable to break through with clarity and poignancy because the balance between security and freedom has been suspended - with the approval of the populace.

http://www.dw.com/en/germanys-low-opinion-of-the-usa/a-18539628

The rights of the citizen in relationship to the rights of the government?? Lets face it, our government has no problem spying on us or gunning us down in the streets. That is a problem.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

I always marvel and smile t how we rnge far afield . Its almost like a ""concept association" game. Maybe someone should start such a thread

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

I always marvel and smile t how we rnge far afield . Its almost like a ""concept association" game. Maybe someone should start such a thread

maybe soon we will get to critical mass on the subject of abuse of the citizens at the hands of the state so that we can do a thread on it, but I dont think we are there yet. Be we are gaining on it. Till then I will continue to point out examples in various other threads.

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Marriage is a contract between 2 people.

Says what law ? If polygamists want to set themselves up in a marriage, then so be it . Polygamists have been around for thousands of years .

Quote:

To restrict it to only certain types of 2 people like whites, heterosexuals, the rich would be to deny equal protection.

To restrict it to only certain types of 2 people like whites, heterosexuals, the rich, those who are polyaphobic would be to deny equal protection . They are going to do it anyway, why not give equal protection to the wives rather than just one ?

Quote:

The law is filled with many benefits for marriage that would not be available to a poly relationship because it is not 2 people.

The law is filled with many benefits for marriage that would not be available to a homosexual relationship because it is not a man and a woman . Same argument as for homosexual marriage . We already have situations where multiple contracts can exist covering the same situation and there are far more people in polygamy relationships then there are in homosexual marriage relationships .

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

Quote:

Right now the US is having enough trouble

So why didnt it deal with what was affecting the larger number of people ? Muslims, Mormans and hippies have long had poly marriages . Early Judaism had multiple marriages over 5,000 years ago .

3 Replies

Gay Couples:Marriage is Not a Right

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know