Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

?

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

So... Will there be riots with glitter bombs? :lol:

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

It's the only thing in the world more important right now than global warming.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

I think they already do this every year. It's called Pride or something.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

I'll leave this right here.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcs1K7Gi9Pg&hd=1

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

^ That might be the stupidest thing I've seen all week. People need to get out of this 2000 year old, outdated definition.

His response about a thruple or quaduple (or whatever) doesn't fit into what the guy is asking. He is just circumventing the actual question with a bogus scenario.

Change the law so that "marriage" is defined as a union of two people, not a man and a woman - and not this stupid ass thruple crap.

If one person wants to enter a union of marriage with a member of the same sex, why not let them? How is that going to impact my life? I might see them in public!? GASP!

Yes, you could argue that if we let them get married, then they can file taxes jointly and not pay in as much, and that would take money out of the system. Our tax dollars are already blown on dumb shit already that this wouldn't even make a dent.

I could not agree with this sarcastic statement more. This is so not important that it shouldn't even be at the Supreme Court level. Let them get married, be happy or be miserable. This shouldn't even be an issue.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Pete loves the cack.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Pete if things dont work, me you and pat are getting thruppled.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Oh, so the definition of "marriage" is the problem and not the fact that what he wants is really a "civil union"? Wrong. I love how all these "oppressed what-ever wannabes" need to rewrite everything to suit their wants. He is 100% correct that a "marriage is the joining of two complimentary sexes to form a family". You don't have to like it one bit, but it is a fact. And no matter how you want to divert from that, it's still a fact. And that was the point he was making. And he is correct that nobody is stopping him from getting married. It is his choice to be with another man, nobody is forcing that on him. He has the choice to get married to a person of the opposite sex, but chooses not to. So you can call it what ever you want, but is not a marriage by DEFINITION.

I do agree that the SCOTUS should leave this alone, its not their call to make. And you know why? Because nobody's Constitutional right are being violated.

At some point we need to look at the bigger picture of what's really important, and this ain't it.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Only yours!

Until this! We can get a few more dudes and form an octuple! So many wangs - but none of us are getting married. Not the five or six of us. Cause that is not marriage. Thats polygamy. I lived in Utah for 12 years. I know polygamy.

You keep emphasizing your DEFINITION. Your fact. His fact. You two have so much in common maybe you should form a civil union.

I'm sorry, allow me to speak. This definition. Its outdated. Come towards the light... Who cares if its called a marriage or a civil union? That is the issue with that video you posted. The guy on the stage keeps throwing out examples of a definition.

I don't know if you are married, but if you are, why did you get married? Was it love? Was it that you wanted to be with that one person for the rest of your life? Or.. was it because you wanted the tax break?

Why should anyone give a fuck what two gay guys or two lesbians (which is HOT cause porn taught me so) want to get married?

Please answer my question as to how does two homosexual people who want to be "married" by whatever definition, lets just say two people together for life, impacts your own life?

Reasons not accepted: Because it makes for a stupid thread on a forum.

GO!

Oh, forgot, payban me again if you get frustrated, or cause of the LOLs.

http://i.imgur.com/SORlNU4.gif

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Um, marriage is way worse for us tax wise than being single. I'm guessing we pay at least 1-2k more a year in taxes by being married. Thus, his original question is bogus.

But in all seriousness, I really don't care if gay people want to get married. I was brought up to believe that it's wrong, but as I see it, it doesn't affect my life one bit. And if it makes them happy, what's wrong with that?

PS - I told Emily how much extra we're paying in taxes by being married, suggested a civil union instead, she didn't seem overly excited. Said it's worth the extra taxes I guess..... who knew. LOL

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

LOL @ bringing up a civil union with your wife!!!

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Hahaha yea Im with Pete and Andrew. Has no affect on me and whatever views you have against it are purely based on probably your view of marriage via the Bible. But the bible has a lot of rules which Im sure you dont follow.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/List_of...d_by_the_Bible

http://www.ranker.com/list/top-20-bi...na-wynn?page=3

The US sure has come a long way on a lot of issues.

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/20...social-change/

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

It's not my DEFINITION, I don't get to re-write them like the LGBT community does. Nice attempt though.
So where does it end? If we have to re-write the definition of marriage to suit same sex couples, what about somebody who wants to marry a dog, or a horse, or their pet hamster? Of course the answer is, "Don't be rediculous, that's not natural", right? Well same sex marriage is not natural either. Let's call it what it is, a mental illness that gets a pass because it serves a bigger agenda. And at some point we have to look at the bigger picture and say enough is enough. In nature, without human intervention, the LGBT would have become extinct because same sex couples can't reproduce. Today, we just let them adopt,......

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, regardless of where their beliefs stem from. I personally do not agree with gay marriage...that is my right and not up for debate :)

If they want a civil union or something similar to marriage, that's fine. I'm all for giving them equal, but different, rights, just under a different name.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

lmao I KNEW someone would take it to marrying animals. hahaha

Science cant explain what causes attraction to the same gender. So far nothing DNA based. Also to call it an illness is quite ignorant. Illness usually can be treated, this is something that can not. You cant change someone into thinking another way. Give it a try, think super hard about penises, doubtful you will start having a hankering for a long one.

You claim you have a lesbian friend, yet you feel they dont have the right to get married because they are sick? Go ahead and tell them that, pretty sure they wont be friends with you much longer.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

True friends are accepting and respectful of their friends' beliefs and opinions.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Yea so he probably wouldnt bring up the topic with them becuase if they are passionate about it, they wouldnt be too happy with his remarks. Weve all had political debates as friends, but this is on a whole other level if you were in their shoes.

While I feel it isnt "natural" either, homosexual acts in nature are common between animals. Just one of those things we cant explain yet. Maybe some day we will be able to. For now Id say that group of people who want to be equal, deserve that right.

Regardless, marriage these days is a sham in most cases. Is the ratio still 50% end in divorce, maybe higher?

Just give it some time, if it doesn't become a fedaral law, all states will eventually pass the law anyway.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Everyone deserves equal rights to be miserable. :)

Its stupid to sit here and argue this. Letting gay people get married affects your marriage in no way shape or form. Does it cause your marriage to be less of a marriage? No. Will they force you to get divorced and marry a same sex person? No. So why bother? There is a thing called Separation of church and state, so using definitions given by a book of stories to make laws against someone based on their preference should not even be up for debate. Laws should not be written to take away rights of people. Get over it, its going to happen, and you will be on the wrong side of history.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Why not call it an illness? Because it might offend somebody? What about Pediohpiles? What about Pyromania? Beastiality? Those are illnesses related to the way people think. Should they get a pass too?

Yes, I do have a friend who is a lesbian, and she knows how I feel about it, and she respects my opinion. But in knowing her as long as I have, I also see other underlying issues in her personality that have a big influence,.. mental instability, anxiety disorder, fear of men from an overbearing father, etc. And if you look at it from that perspective, you might pick up on it when interacting with others in the LGBT community.

I do love the aurguments that Tom just made though, the "separation of church and state", well, except for when somebody wants the state to change the way the church thinks,......
And "laws should not be written to take away the rights of people", unless you want to maintain the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman, or exersise you right to free speech, or gun ownership, or have water to irrigate your dying crops while flushing millions of gallons of fresh water into the ocean to protect a 3 inch minow (that will die when it gets flushed into the salt water), and so on,...

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

lol oh boy, yea Im done reasoning with you. Two consenting adults can do as they please. Pyromania, beastiality and pedophilia hurts others in many different ways. How do gay people harm you or anyone? Terrible comparisons.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Why not call it an illness... because its not. Not the same as pedophiles, pyros and beastiality.
And because you have a friend that is a lesbian that makes you an expert, and because this lesbian has mental issues, makes all gays have mental issues? I know plenty of straight men who have mental issues beyond repair, (im quoting one in this reply) and yet that doesnt make all straight people sick.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

I'm curious to know what you would do if you had a child that grew up and told you they were gay/lesbian/transgender. Send them to anti-gay camp? Would you never speak to them again? Let me know.

Other than that, I'm done.

Oh, at the next funeral of a gay person you protest at wearing your god hates fags t-shirt, make sure to bring sunscreen cause of global warming and shit.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

LMFAO, i wasnt the only one thinking this.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Yes two consenting adults can do as they please, but it's not a marriage.

Look in the mirror,...
You can sit here and try to justify the "feel good" notions of "What's normal?" and what should be accepted as normal. But in reality it's not a normal function of the human race, or nature in general, to pair off into non-reproductive pairs. By the examples of nature, these pairings would end through natural extinction from lack of reproduction.
And you can call me a horrible person for stating the facts as I see them, but you can't take away the facts of what I'm saying are true.

The same as I told my friend, I don't agree with it. And notice she is still my friend no less. Same as if it were my child, it would still be my child. And they would be free to make they're own choices.

Your last statement is hilarious though, you assume too much about me. But personal attacks are the norm for the left,.....

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Some how I'm not surprised,......

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

While Tom is pretty liberal, I know Pete is pretty far right wing, and im a little under that. Its funny though, because it seems only ultra right wing thinks gay marriage is an attack on everyone elses values.

While you dont have to agree its marriage, it will be law soon, so it wont matter what you think.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Its funny how you can deny science in one thread, but evolution through natural selection is ok with you... oh wait you probably dont believe that but just stated it.
Humans will not go extinct due to gay marriage. No one is forcing everyone to all of the sudden become gay. its just not a problem that modern society will see.
Like peter said, its not something you can stop, and you can fight it all you want, but it doesnt matter. It will get passed, and that will be the end of it.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

But you would freely admit that your gay child would have a mental illness, right?

Pot, kettle, black. You assume I'm a lefty like Tom, but your assumption is dead wrong.

My personal attacks don't come from me being a lefty or righty. They come from me being an all-around 100% American asshole. :smile:

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

It's a slippery slope to call any of these an illness if you're willing to exclude others. People are often times born liking what they like out of no control of their own. Society is slowly becoming more accepting of things outside the norm so who's to say, for example, beastiality isn't next? All are unnatural, but there are still plenty of people who enjoy/crave/want/seek it.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

+1

good way of putting it.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

What is normal and natural? Everyone has their own definition, that is true.

Also what is being broken here, the sanctity of marriage itself?

Because if that's true, then should divorce be illegal? Should strip clubs be illegal since that's a form of prostitution? Capital punishment? Where do you narrow down anything really, it all comes down to a collective society of whats acceptable and whats not. Obviously the people are speaking out because as a whole they feel gay marriage is now acceptable. Sure some wont like it, but you cant make everyone agree on everything.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Ha, this is not what I meant by this statement. I don't agree with gay marriage one bit, but I'm all for gay civil unions, or make up something altogether different, I don't really care. Marriage has been defined for thousands of years, no need to make sweeping changes for the whims of 1% of our population.

I was actually poking fun at the way the world is going to shit by the minute, monthly riots and looting in the US over known criminals, beheadings, possible nuclear threats, and Barry keeps saying GW is our biggest threat. Perhaps the biggest non-issue of all.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

I knew what you were trying to say, and whether we agree or not on the topic, we both know that there are much bigger things the govt should be focusing on.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

I believe in science, just not manipulated for an agenda science, there is a big difference. You might wake up and see that one day.

You misunderstood my comments. Of course the human race will not go extinct due to gay marriage. But through natural selection the LGBT community should, with all things being equal, because two men or two women can't reproduce together on their own.

Don't be so sure about it becoming law just yet. The SCOTUS can't right law, they can only undo a law they find unconstitutional. And saying that marriage is between a man and a woman is not unconstitutional.

Yes. :violin:

Not from what I see in your post. :fish'D:

I agree. :)

+1


+1

And as a collective society, I would bet you the silent majority out number the LGBT community many times over. All we see and hear are the 1% screaming for wants,....

This ^^ especially at the SCOTUS level.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

This thread is now on a SCROTUS level.

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

SCROTUS or SCROTUM? LoL

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Speaking of which, the other day on Netflix streaming, under the "Popular On Netflix Now" category was a movie called Scrotal Recall, made me do a double take...

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

:score001: :lol:

Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages
 

Hahaha I saw that in there too B, intrigued me a bit. But I still favor bewbs so whatever agenda Netflix has, it isnt working yet.