Same Sex Marriage could move forward in New York, Maryland and Rhode Island | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1237903 Australia 01/22/2011 08:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: ajkHow loving of you...... They can pervert nature all they want, I just don't want to hear about it...I don't go around yelling about how great my heterosexuality is, and I won't stand for the redefinition of marriage. If we redefine marriage we start down the slippery slope...next is marriage to dogs and cats...where do you draw the line? Where do you draw the line? Man and man? Man and dog? Man and child? Where? I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? I don't know where you draw the line, but I do know that I believe in equality for all consenting adults. If two men or two women want to marry, who are you or I to tell them they cannot? :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:14 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | What's wrong with polygamy?? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1043297How about One man and Multiple women?? Sure, and why not one man and thirty school girls? Hell, they love each other right? Why not a guy and his dog? A woman and her teenage student...I mean if we can marry and fuck just because we LOVE then there is no boundary right? Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | What's wrong with polygamy?? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1043297How about One man and Multiple women?? Nothing wrong with that at all, if all parties are consenting and happy. :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1239722 United States 01/22/2011 08:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:15 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | gamerfag ...., Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1239722you again, huh? you like stalking me, don't you? Last Edited by gamerprincess81 on 01/22/2011 08:18 PM :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | gamerfag .... If, as you say, it should be between two consenting adults, WHY do SO MANY FAGS 'queer' the YOUNG ???? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1239722i'm sorry, i don't speak MORAN... did you make a typo? not quite sure what ""queer" the young" means...? explain or correct yourself and i'll answer. :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 342395 United States 01/22/2011 08:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:18 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: BRIEF AND TO THE POINTThey can pervert nature all they want, I just don't want to hear about it...I don't go around yelling about how great my heterosexuality is, and I won't stand for the redefinition of marriage. If we redefine marriage we start down the slippery slope...next is marriage to dogs and cats...where do you draw the line? Where do you draw the line? Man and man? Man and dog? Man and child? Where? I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? I don't know where you draw the line, but I do know that I believe in equality for all consenting adults. If two men or two women want to marry, who are you or I to tell them they cannot? I'm saying the state should recognize a marriage between one man and one woman. Anything else is a private matter...The alternative is starting down the slippery slope...So do you approve of a consenting child marrying another consenting child? Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1237903 Australia 01/22/2011 08:20 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:20 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: gamerprincess81I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? I don't know where you draw the line, but I do know that I believe in equality for all consenting adults. If two men or two women want to marry, who are you or I to tell them they cannot? I'm saying the state should recognize a marriage between one man and one woman. Anything else is a private matter...The alternative is starting down the slippery slope...So do you approve of a consenting child marrying another consenting child? No, definitely not. I see your point and what you are saying when talking about where do we draw the line. It's tricky, really. I don't really advocate anyone under the age of 30 getting married. So many couples who marry in their 20's divorce within a few years if not sooner. Again, not sure where to draw the line, just that I want equality. Hopefully that makes sense :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:20 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: BRIEF AND TO THE POINTThey can pervert nature all they want, I just don't want to hear about it...I don't go around yelling about how great my heterosexuality is, and I won't stand for the redefinition of marriage. If we redefine marriage we start down the slippery slope...next is marriage to dogs and cats...where do you draw the line? Where do you draw the line? Man and man? Man and dog? Man and child? Where? I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? Firstly on the man marrying a child argument, that is ENTIRELY different and FAR from consensual. You're using an extreme case to base your prejudices on. That's number one, number two as to where our morals come from? How about simple common sense? Is that so hard of a concept to grasp? If you're hurting someone else in your actions, then more than likely something is wrong with what you are doing. No religious belief system needed to figure that one out is there? Lastly, what if those kids have no other options? Would rather they have no parents at all to guide them? And who says the child they raise is gonna be automatically gay?? With your "logic" as long as the child doesn't object then that child can marry the parent...who are you to dictate who can love who? Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:21 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | gamerfag ...., Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1239722you again, huh? you like stalking me, don't you? don't flatter yourself bushpig. lol...alrighty then, kangaroo fucker! :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:22 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: BRIEF AND TO THE POINTTwo queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? I don't know where you draw the line, but I do know that I believe in equality for all consenting adults. If two men or two women want to marry, who are you or I to tell them they cannot? I'm saying the state should recognize a marriage between one man and one woman. Anything else is a private matter...The alternative is starting down the slippery slope...So do you approve of a consenting child marrying another consenting child? No, definitely not. I see your point and what you are saying when talking about where do we draw the line. It's tricky, really. I don't really advocate anyone under the age of 30 getting married. So many couples who marry in their 20's divorce within a few years if not sooner. Again, not sure where to draw the line, just that I want equality. Hopefully that makes sense It makes sense to not redefine marriage. Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 252372 United States 01/22/2011 08:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: ajkHow loving of you...... They can pervert nature all they want, I just don't want to hear about it...I don't go around yelling about how great my heterosexuality is, and I won't stand for the redefinition of marriage. If we redefine marriage we start down the slippery slope...next is marriage to dogs and cats...where do you draw the line? Where do you draw the line? Man and man? Man and dog? Man and child? Where? I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? First, DUMBASS, two "queers" don't raise children "to be queers", anymore than the two heterosexuals raised their child "to be queer". Second, two "queers" wouldn't have any children to adopt if it wasn't for the irresponsible heterosexuals fucking willy-nilly. Heterosexuals fucking willy-nilly is a disservice to OUR planet. If you're so generous that you would allow the "queers" to live together, then why can't they enter into a legal binding contract called "marriage", and then of course divorce later like all the heterosexuals get to do? |
ajk User ID: 1114631 United States 01/22/2011 08:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: gamerprincess81I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? Firstly on the man marrying a child argument, that is ENTIRELY different and FAR from consensual. You're using an extreme case to base your prejudices on. That's number one, number two as to where our morals come from? How about simple common sense? Is that so hard of a concept to grasp? If you're hurting someone else in your actions, then more than likely something is wrong with what you are doing. No religious belief system needed to figure that one out is there? Lastly, what if those kids have no other options? Would rather they have no parents at all to guide them? And who says the child they raise is gonna be automatically gay?? With your "logic" as long as the child doesn't object then that child can marry the parent...who are you to dictate who can love who? I'm not exactly sure a child can really make such a choice of their own volition though, with their minds being what they are. No one is perfect. A babe before walking will first stumble and fall many times but NEVER gives up until he succeeds. Always remember, ultimately, to never follow any person's belief. Your relationship with God is between you and God. If nothing else, remember this: religion = subservience, control and conformity, the same template as EVERY government "Most believers would kill truth if truth threatened their religion." L. K. Washburn "This crime called blasphemy was invented by priests for the purpose of defending doctrines not able to take care of themselves." Robert Ingersoll "If anyone wants to know how God feels, it's a warm light as if the sun is poking through dark clouds and lifting your spirits with pure joy." |
Nikki_LaVey User ID: 1120752 United States 01/22/2011 08:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: BRIEF AND TO THE POINTTwo queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? Firstly on the man marrying a child argument, that is ENTIRELY different and FAR from consensual. You're using an extreme case to base your prejudices on. That's number one, number two as to where our morals come from? How about simple common sense? Is that so hard of a concept to grasp? If you're hurting someone else in your actions, then more than likely something is wrong with what you are doing. No religious belief system needed to figure that one out is there? Lastly, what if those kids have no other options? Would rather they have no parents at all to guide them? And who says the child they raise is gonna be automatically gay?? With your "logic" as long as the child doesn't object then that child can marry the parent...who are you to dictate who can love who? I'm not exactly sure a child can really make such a choice of their own volition though, with their minds being what they are. I'm not sure a person who goes against nature is qualified to make such decisions either. Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:27 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: gamerprincess81I don't know where you draw the line, but I do know that I believe in equality for all consenting adults. If two men or two women want to marry, who are you or I to tell them they cannot? I'm saying the state should recognize a marriage between one man and one woman. Anything else is a private matter...The alternative is starting down the slippery slope...So do you approve of a consenting child marrying another consenting child? No, definitely not. I see your point and what you are saying when talking about where do we draw the line. It's tricky, really. I don't really advocate anyone under the age of 30 getting married. So many couples who marry in their 20's divorce within a few years if not sooner. Again, not sure where to draw the line, just that I want equality. Hopefully that makes sense It makes sense to not redefine marriage. That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. I'm not going to argue your opinion with you, but it is not the opinion of everyone out there. :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 342395 United States 01/22/2011 08:28 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 252372 United States 01/22/2011 08:29 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: gamerprincess81I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? I don't know where you draw the line, but I do know that I believe in equality for all consenting adults. If two men or two women want to marry, who are you or I to tell them they cannot? I'm saying the state should recognize a marriage between one man and one woman. Anything else is a private matter...The alternative is starting down the slippery slope...So do you approve of a consenting child marrying another consenting child? Children can't give "consent". But, of course, different states have different ages of consent. I believe in some states, a parent can give "consent" for an adult man to "marry" a otherwise legal "child". You heterosexual men are so funny. |
Nikki_LaVey User ID: 1120752 United States 01/22/2011 08:30 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:30 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: BRIEF AND TO THE POINTThey can pervert nature all they want, I just don't want to hear about it...I don't go around yelling about how great my heterosexuality is, and I won't stand for the redefinition of marriage. If we redefine marriage we start down the slippery slope...next is marriage to dogs and cats...where do you draw the line? Where do you draw the line? Man and man? Man and dog? Man and child? Where? I personally think the definition of marriage should be between two consenting ADULTS....Regardless of gender. If that is what makes two people happy, and those people share a strong bond and immense love for one another, who are they hurting?? NO one! And lets face it, the world is overpopulated. Most same sex couple adopt children that are unwanted in other parts of the world, or even our own country. In my eyes, they are doing a lot of good in the world. Haters will be haters. Keep on hating. Two queers raising children to be queers is not a service to our planet...I never said two fags can't live together, I simply said the state shouldn't recognize it as a marriage. If a man can marry a man and pervert nature as such, what is to prevent a man marrying a child? Where and how do you draw the line? Where do your morals come from? If you can fuck and marry anything you "love" then why exclude anyone? First, DUMBASS, two "queers" don't raise children "to be queers", anymore than the two heterosexuals raised their child "to be queer". Second, two "queers" wouldn't have any children to adopt if it wasn't for the irresponsible heterosexuals fucking willy-nilly. Heterosexuals fucking willy-nilly is a disservice to OUR planet. If you're so generous that you would allow the "queers" to live together, then why can't they enter into a legal binding contract called "marriage", and then of course divorce later like all the heterosexuals get to do? Like I said: if you start down the slippery slope, then where do you draw the line? Man on man ok Man on goat ok Man on child ok If you throw out the laws of nature you are changing what it means to be human... Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:32 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: BRIEF AND TO THE POINTI'm saying the state should recognize a marriage between one man and one woman. Anything else is a private matter...The alternative is starting down the slippery slope...So do you approve of a consenting child marrying another consenting child? No, definitely not. I see your point and what you are saying when talking about where do we draw the line. It's tricky, really. I don't really advocate anyone under the age of 30 getting married. So many couples who marry in their 20's divorce within a few years if not sooner. Again, not sure where to draw the line, just that I want equality. Hopefully that makes sense It makes sense to not redefine marriage. That is your opinion, and you are entitled to it. I'm not going to argue your opinion with you, but it is not the opinion of everyone out there. If you are so open minded then why not marriage between a consenting child and an adult? Who are you to say that the child is too young? What gives you the right to decide? Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 252372 United States 01/22/2011 08:32 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: ajkFirstly on the man marrying a child argument, that is ENTIRELY different and FAR from consensual. You're using an extreme case to base your prejudices on. That's number one, number two as to where our morals come from? How about simple common sense? Is that so hard of a concept to grasp? If you're hurting someone else in your actions, then more than likely something is wrong with what you are doing. No religious belief system needed to figure that one out is there? Lastly, what if those kids have no other options? Would rather they have no parents at all to guide them? And who says the child they raise is gonna be automatically gay?? With your "logic" as long as the child doesn't object then that child can marry the parent...who are you to dictate who can love who? I'm not exactly sure a child can really make such a choice of their own volition though, with their minds being what they are. I'm not sure a person who goes against nature is qualified to make such decisions either. Well, I think most heterosexual men's nature is to fuck any woman that would say yes, and then some of them even fuck the ones that say no. So "marriage" isn't "natural". |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 1237750 United States 01/22/2011 08:32 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Nikki_LaVey User ID: 1120752 United States 01/22/2011 08:34 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
gamerprincess81 (OP) User ID: 1033168 United States 01/22/2011 08:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | They ought to cancel marriage altogether from the law and just call it a civil union, so that marriage becomes a social definition only. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1237750Now, there is an idea!! :gp81: "Staring down the hole again. Hands upon my back again. Survival is my only friend. Terrified of what may come.." PS3- PollyPlssyPants XBL- gamerprincss420 |
Nikki_LaVey User ID: 1120752 United States 01/22/2011 08:36 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
BRIEF AND TO THE POINT User ID: 1220677 United States 01/22/2011 08:37 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | ... Quoting: BRIEF AND TO THE POINTWith your "logic" as long as the child doesn't object then that child can marry the parent...who are you to dictate who can love who? I'm not exactly sure a child can really make such a choice of their own volition though, with their minds being what they are. I'm not sure a person who goes against nature is qualified to make such decisions either. Well, I think most heterosexual men's nature is to fuck any woman that would say yes, and then some of them even fuck the ones that say no. So "marriage" isn't "natural". Fine. It's always up to the female anyway...let's not redefine it then :) Poor people do poor people things, and rich people do rich people things. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! when you rob Paul to give to Peter ... ... ... you will always get Peters support! :Brieffromnativea: |