Gay Marriage is GO...

[DutchJazzer]

I agree. Consenting adults should be free to marry who ever they choose. Wether it is a man and woman, 2 women, a woman and 3 men, 2 men and 3 women...

Anything gov. performed should be a "civil union" and anything done religiously should be a "marriage". Gov. should view them as equal in every way.

And before anyone freaks out at me. Relax, my opinion would make my marriage a "civil union" instead of a "marriage".

basically what israel is doing
marriage is a religous thing they have seperation of church and state. but gives adult unregisterd cohabitation rights

 

[DutchJazzer]

I am A BIGGOT

 

[Harambe]

I am A BIGGOT

That's 30 posts over his leaving.

 

[Revolution 9]

I am A BIGGOT

you are more a troll than anything. i remember when we actually had some decent conversations in between the racism and bigotry. man i miss those days.

 

[Maktub]

Hasn't this been driven into the ground yet? One word: consent. A robot, dog, cat, child, toaster oven cannot legally consent to marriage. Problem solved.

For the record, I think polygamy should be legal, as long as those involved are of age and consenting adults. Why not?

The consent argument against "marrying my dog" is ridiculous. Did your dog consent to it's current living situation? For the record, you shouldn't be allowed to marry your dog. Let's draw the line at the human level and leave it at that.

 

[Jamezz]

Because the policy addresses marital rights. Nothing else is directly affected.

If you're only arguing that this moves us closer to wider non-discrimination laws for sexual orientation (which still vary state to state) that will eventually lead to a situation similar to race-based discrimination in college admissions, I'd guess you're probably right.

Do you think universities should retain their tax exempt status - which effectively grants them free access to public resources and services - while discriminating based on race?

This also had me mind-boggled when I learned about it. Such nonsense, we want equal rights for everyone as individuals, not as a collective, no matter what the color of your skin or your status is. Any kind of benefit provided to anyone based on these factors sets the ground to the group of people on the other side of the spectrum feeling uncomfortable.

I'm still having a hard time figuring out how the 14th Amendment is good reasoning for having approved of this ruling.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

The consent argument against "marrying my dog" is ridiculous. Did your dog consent to it's current living situation? For the record, you shouldn't be allowed to marry your dog. Let's draw the line at the human level and leave it at that.

That is basically the same line he's talking about with consent, fyi.

 

[DutchJazzer]

you are more a troll than anything. i remember when we actually had some decent conversations in between the racism and bigotry. man i miss those days.

no i am just stating that i disagree with mariage being man man or woman woman. but that is these days biggoted so i wear it proudly.
and i am trying to get it back to those days if the vote goes for me staying. but now it seems like it is not.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

Because the policy addresses marital rights. Nothing else is directly affected.

If you're only arguing that this moves us closer to wider non-discrimination laws for sexual orientation (which still vary state to state) that will eventually lead to a situation similar to race-based discrimination in college admissions, I'd guess you're probably right.

Do you think universities should retain their tax exempt status - which effectively grants them free access to public resources and services - while discriminating based on race?

Is there a difference in your mind between a university that has tax exempt status v. a university that receives government funding from tax monies? Is it possible there are different levels of rules that apply between the two?

A tax exempt university is different than a tax funded university imo.

 

[DutchJazzer]

This also had me mind-boggled when I learned about it. Such nonsense, we want equal rights for everyone as individuals, not as a collective, no matter what the color of your skin or your status is. Any kind of benefit provided to anyone based on these factors sets the ground to the group of people on the other side of the spectrum feeling uncomfortable.

I'm still having a hard time figuring out how the 14th Amendment is good reasoning for having approved of this ruling.

exactly most people seem to have problem with the 14th amendment part.

 

[Jamezz]

This might be the next thing we see happening here:

https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/millionaire-gay-couple-suing-force-church-hold-wedding/

 

[BabyPeterzz]

This might be the next thing we see happening here:

https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/millionaire-gay-couple-suing-force-church-hold-wedding/

Do some research on those dudes. They have a reality tv show and look to cause trouble. Anyway....

I think a suit like this would be a great way to put the issue at ease and show how powerful the 1st Amendment is. Plus, States could stop wasting their time with these religious liberty bills and move on to stuff that isn't already law.