|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
AndyGodLove  Suspended Member (Idle past 5798 days) Posts: 18 From: Wentworth Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Gay Marriage | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
I wish they would just let us vote on this issue, instead of using the courts to make policy. Or at least define marriage, unfourtunately that is not how socialism works.
It was pretty funny that you called somebody a bigot because their beliefs are different than yours, when that is what biggotry is. Edited by Artemis Entreri, : typos
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
speaking of representative avatars, look in the mirror.
BTW that is not me. I didn't ask for a popular vote, i feel my congressman represents me just fine. thanks for the broad assumption though, quite a bit simple of you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: Im not from Virginia, but i do live here. and its not about popular vote, then the urban centers would run this country more than they already do. Edited by Artemis Entreri, : bad html
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: yep.the Lovings could have moved to a different state. states rights, bro. quote:I was actually talking about defining the word marriage as it was originally meant to be defined. unfourtunately in all those marriage laws and rulings (even your so oftenly quoted Loving v. Virginia) it was assumed the marriage was between a man and a women. If Mildred Loving was a man, do you think the ruling would have went the same way? All im saying is let's just define the word in law, as most of us (70%+ according to you), know what it means. I could care less if two d00dz want to be together, but lets call it something else. can you marry your cat? does marriage have to be with a human? if there is no set legal definition then you could interpret it in what ever crazy manner you wanted. you are all hung up on the wrong issue.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote:nope. BTW its your mom who takes care of me every morning
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: marrying black chicks is a basic human right!?! roflmfao
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: i laughed because it ws funny. that's what i do when i read or hear something that is funny. where you not trying to make a joke? where you being serious? if you where serious then that was EXTRA funny, i thought it was a joke.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
there must be a ton of liberals on this site, because all you do is insult people with name calling, personal attacks, and NSFW curse words, when they hold views different than you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: you have a lovely vocabulary. do think cussing at me is somehow going to get your point accross. if i wanted street talk i'd be on the street. from wikipediaA bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding state of mind. i have found nothing but intolerance of my opinions since i got here, there are at least 3 bigots who have responded to my posts.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: interesting. because i came from Missouri (before Virginia), and in Missouri the People did vote on this issue. Missourians have amended thier STATE Constitution, through voting, and now it is against the law for same sex people to get married, and the state of Missouri does not accept those marriages from other states. that's why your posts are so funny. you think you know what you are talking about, and try to put others down because of it, but we know how our governments works and are just laughing at most of the things you say/type. if you want to marry some d00d then go ahead, in some other state. but it isn't going to happen in Missouri. Marriage is not something that is set by the federal government, it IS up to the individual states. i have no problem with states making thier own rules based on thier populations needs and desires. BTW this is four years old: http://marriage.about.com/...esexmarriage/qt/missourigay.htm constitution? from the courts? what about the voters of Missouri amending thier constitution? pul-lease, dont try to tell me how my government works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: not a fan of peer review, i thought this was a science forum.
quote: so when people like catholic scientist are called bigots, its just immature name calling? because i dont recall reading anywhere that catholic scientist told others they should not be allowed to post thier opinion. if that is so i agree with you. otherwise ill have to go with my own definition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: i think Catholic Scientist just wants to define the word. as do i. that is not bigotry or denying rights. what about the intolerance of someone else's defintion of a word, because it is a defferent definition than yours?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: not in every case. In recent case of D.C. vs. Heller, had the SCOTUS ruled in favor of "collective" gun rights over "individual" gun rights, then the USA would have effectively violated its agreement with the state of Montana's statehood contract, and therefore made Montana its own seperate self-governing nation. the feds cannot do what ever they want. people have the right of self determination in the form of local government, as it is clearly expressed in the declaration of independence. if the federal government violates this then it is violating its own rules, and stripping itself of any validity. and it shouldn't in rules that are left up to the states, such as marriage.
quote: only if they are ready to be the cause of the 2nd american civil war
quote:yeah we are big fans of liberty and freedom.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: yeah let the people decide the definitions in thier own states. if more people in my state want to say marriage is between tow people reguardless of gender, then guess what? im for it. pedophile is a realative term to some degree. age of consent laws very state by state (because the states make thier own rules reguarding marriage). Take the socalled polygamists at the YFZ ranch in Texas who were marrying girls at age 14. this could be pedophillia in another state, but in Texas the age of consent is 14 (with parental permission). Polygamy is not really an issue, because those people who practice it only have one leagal wife, the other wives are spiritual marriages accepted by the community, and not recognized by the state, so really they are doing nothing wrong. unless of course you support adultery laws, but then i would find it odd you support adultery laws when you are not a fan of sodomy laws that supposedly discriminate between same sex partners. I think neither the sodomy laws nor the adultery laws are really enforced anymore, though.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4257 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
quote: my bad. you are right. i said the wrong thing. you are right as far as sexual consent goes, though its interesting that in texas it is only between a male and female (as per your link). since we were talking about marriage, i got my marriage laws and consent laws mixed up. From wikepedia:
quote: I meant marriage then intercourse, sorry to make such a broad assumption. these young girls are getting married 1st. also its deiffernt in the various counties within a state, and i made the assumption that it was the whole state. my bad again. but still you can get married at 14, and then as a married person engage in intercourse legally, in TX at 14.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024