same sex marriage hearing
- Thread starter fdd2blk
- Start date
misshestermoffitt
New Member
Only if your name is TBT, seeing how that is who I was quoting...... I don't believe I said anything about you.........
So since prop 8 isn't distracting anyone, how is the CA state government doing? Do they have time to squeeze that in on the news?
The government always uses bait and switch to distract people from what is really going on, I can't believe you haven't noticed......
So since prop 8 isn't distracting anyone, how is the CA state government doing? Do they have time to squeeze that in on the news?
The government always uses bait and switch to distract people from what is really going on, I can't believe you haven't noticed......
yeah, that's it. they are using prop 8 as a distraction.
did you just call me a sheep?
yeah, i'm so dumb i get distracted by the gays.
- TOP STORY IN THE BAY AREA TODAY -
http://www.kron.com/News/ArticleView/tabid/298/smid/1126/ArticleID/658/t/California-Delayed-Payments-Released-Residents-Could-Receive-Tax-Refunds-Soon/Default.aspx
well look at that, it's NOT about the gays but the budget.
now it looks like you are the sheep, just following a different Sheppard.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Must have something to do with small minds...
I'm perfectly capable of tracking more than one thing at a time.
Like the fact that Obama's citizenship is under attack by at least 18 lawsuits, even after 8 - 9 were dismissed.
Like the fact that apparently the only reason why a college or a city hasn't released any documentation is because Obama's been employing teams of lawyers to make people shut up.
Like the fact that there was a Dumb Ass Republican Senator who seems to think that by electing him the American People some how magically made him eligible.
And that's just on Obama's Lack of Proof about his Citizenship, which really wouldn't be ALL THAT FUCKING HARD FOR HIM TO RESOLVE BY JUST AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF THE DAMN THING, unless there really is something to hide.
Then there's the stuff that you mentioned about AIG getting another G$30 (though that was in the NY Times)
Then there's Gold which is rebounding after falling to near 900
and silver which is now back above $13/troy oz after a brief 2 - 3 day dip under it.
And copper might be above $1.6x/lb still, but I'm not sure, not really interesting.
Corn's still in the $3.50/bushel range.
Wheat's in the high range of $5 - $6 dollars ($5.50 - $5.80 depending on if you're talking about Kansas City Board of Trade Futures Contracts or Chicago Board of Trade Futures Contracts.
Oil is still steady in the $42 - $46 range, but WTI (West Texas Intermediate, or Sweet Crude) is finally higher in price than Brent Crude for the first time in many months.
Which might mean we can expect to see prices to start rising again, probably due to the inflationary policies being pursued by Obama's Administration.
In another thread your talking about an African Tribe that was making astrographical charts, which really isn't anything impressive when you consider the fact that most old advanced civilizations (Babylon (Mesopotamia), Mayans, Chinese) had that ability.
Of course the Incans and Mayans also practiced human sacrifice to appease their Gods and to guarantee their continued existence.
Though the Romans did have the vestal virgins, and the Sacred Hearth Fire of Rome, which strangely enough had a prophecy surrounding it foretelling Rome's doom if it ever went out. Ironically, 100 years after the Roman Empire became Christian Rome was sacked for the last time, and the Western Empire fell.
Returing to Fdd's comment, no, I didn't see it, what happened?
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
So put it in simple terms, Boring Bureaucratic Bullshit, or the typical stuff shown on CNNa lot of blah diddty blah. and a few justices giggled.
channel 4 news, LIVE, all morning. i don't think the gays even know what they are fighting for. i think all they really want is to be able to say "we are married". it has nothing to do with rights and property and hospital visitation. they just want to be seen as "the same" and accepted. look below the surface and it's pretty obvious. careful how you say it though.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Why do they need the state then?channel 4 news, LIVE, all morning. i don't think the gays even know what they are fighting for. i think all they really want is to be able to say "we are married". it has nothing to do with rights and property and hospital visitation. they just want to be seen as "the same" and accepted. look below the surface and it's pretty obvious. careful how you say it though.
marriage is more a state of mind than anything else...
Which is probably why so many marriages end in divorce. People automatically assume that a piece of paper will automatically, some how, magically, make them love each other more, and be capable of ignoring the annoying habits of their spouse.
When it does nothing of the sort...
i tried to say from the beginning that they are going about this all wrong, i was called a gay basher.
we need a "new term". that gays and straights can both fall under. why should two people be "forced" into marriage just to get rights? my wife and i have been together for almost 20 years. not "legally" married. i could be screaming the same thing as the gays only with a new twist, " i don't have rights unless i'm married. i DO NOT want to be married though."
"joint ownership of liabilities and properties", like legal rights, not loving rights. - or something.
medicineman
New Member
Sorry fdd, you are married in the eyes of the law, common law marriage, after 7 years of co-habitation, you're a goner. she is entitled to all your crap if you die, or get divorced, welcome to married life. I don't think it applies to Gays though, and basically that is what they want. The right to their spouses property, the ability to pull the plug on a comotose partner, all the rights of married folk.i tried to say from the beginning that they are going about this all wrong, i was called a gay basher.
we need a "new term". that gays and straights can both fall under. why should two people be "forced" into marriage just to get rights? my wife and i have been together for almost 20 years. not "legally" married. i could be screaming the same thing as the gays only with a new twist, " i don't have rights unless i'm married. i DO NOT want to be married though."
"joint ownership of liabilities and properties", like legal rights, not loving rights. - or something.
Roseman
Elite Rolling Society
Who are you to dicate who can and can't spend their life together?
quote]
I agree, anyone should be able to marry anyone, so let me marry my sister for the tax benefits!
Let me ask,
What is PERVERSION?
Traditionally, Marriage for thousands of years, was the union, a contract, a covenant of a, or between a male and female. Now, those traditions are changing to allow perversions.
Perversion in the Dictionary says:
per ver sion
Spelled Pronunciation[per-vur-zhuh
n, -shuh
n]Show IPA
noun 1.the act of perverting.
2.the state of being perverted.
3.a perverted form of something.
4.any of various means of obtaining sexual gratification that are generally regarded as being abnormal.
5.Pathology. a change to what is unnatural or abnormal: a perversion of function or structure.
And what is "abnormal" ?
People are allowing the courts to decide what Perversion is and should it be allowed.
To address the question
Who are you to dicate who can and can't spend their life together?
Am I to assume you mean I should legally be allowed to marry whoever? My Collie? My Golden Retriver?
And how about marrying my Brother or Sister? Don't I have a civl right to do that?
And Marrying my Mother or Father? Why don't I have the civil right to marry anyone I want to marry? Isn't that what is being debated?
And IF I have the civil right to marry the same sex person as I am, why can't I marry a child? a dog? a relative? a monkey?
Where do you draw the line?
Perversion IS Perversion. Abnormal IS Abnormal.
If we legislate PERVERSION OR PERVERTED MARRIAGES, and ABNORMAL UNIONS, where will it stop? If a man has the civil right to marry a same sex man, he ought to have the same right to marry a chimpanzee, a child, or one of his relatives. We either accept and approve of Abnormal perversions, or we don't.
We discussed this at work this week, where I work with my two grown STRAIGHT single sons. They agreed to marry each other, if these laws are passed, so they can file a joint tax return, and get discounts on health insurance and take advantage of all the rights and priviledges afforded to married men and women.
And I am going to start a business of helping these STRAIGHT SINGLE PEOPLE find a same sex spouse, and take advantage of the new laws so they can also get married and have the same priviledges as married people share.
Why was homosexuality and perversion wrong for 3000 years, and hidden, and now it is OK? WHY ?
,
Roseman
Elite Rolling Society
If you going to draw any line, as in your example, between two consenting adults, for thousands of years, the line was already drawn as "between a man and a woman".that is a ridiculous argument. Where do we draw the line, umm how about between two consenting adults. Pretty simple. I dont see whyy children dogs or monkeys have to come in play
And if we are going to move that line, or change that line, HOW FAR WILL WE GO? You know we will move the line, and move the line again and again, as we have on anything connected to or concerning morality.
If we change the definition of Marriage, we will change it again and again.
TheBrutalTruth
Well-Known Member
Corporate Rights,i tried to say from the beginning that they are going about this all wrong, i was called a gay basher.
we need a "new term". that gays and straights can both fall under. why should two people be "forced" into marriage just to get rights? my wife and i have been together for almost 20 years. not "legally" married. i could be screaming the same thing as the gays only with a new twist, " i don't have rights unless i'm married. i DO NOT want to be married though."
"joint ownership of liabilities and properties", like legal rights, not loving rights. - or something.
I really wish I knew a good Corporate Lawyer. I've been trying to figure out if there's anyway to incorporate myself, and sell all my assets to the corporation in exchange for shares. Then have all my employers contract through the corporation, which conveniently (for tax purposes) treats me as "Office Equipment; Software Engineer; 1" so I can escape payroll taxes.
Though I supposed technically that that'd be tax evasion, knowing my luck. If I was lucky, it'd just be Tax Avoidance, which is legal.
no common law in cali, http://www.cadivorceonline.com/calpages/Alimony/commonlawmarriage.asp
i want my fucking rights and i don't want to be FORCED into marriage to get them.
misshestermoffitt
New Member
Roseman We all know that marrying our sister is not acceptable. We don't want offspring with 3 heads or no brain. Way to take an argument out of context.
Marriage is not a sacred institution anymore, just ask that guy I know that's on his 5th marriage. If marriage was sacred, then he'd still be with wife number one.
Marriage is if anything laughable these days, "lets get married, spit out a few kids then go our separate ways and then re-marry and spit out some more kids, then find a new spouse, spit out a few more kids, then hit the road looking for number 4"
Religion should not define marriage, there is SUPPOSED to be a separation of church and state, which means the bible should not be allowed to define who gets married, especially since the bible is a WORK OF FICTION. It's like letting a Stephen King book run your life. I can't believe in this day and age people still hold so tight to ancient superstitions.
We all know that marrying our sister is not acceptable. We don't want offspring with 3 heads or no brain. Way to take an argument out of context. Marriage is not a sacred institution anymore, just ask that guy I know that's on his 5th marriage. If marriage was sacred, then he'd still be with wife number one.
Marriage is if anything laughable these days, "lets get married, spit out a few kids then go our separate ways and then re-marry and spit out some more kids, then find a new spouse, spit out a few more kids, then hit the road looking for number 4"
Religion should not define marriage, there is SUPPOSED to be a separation of church and state, which means the bible should not be allowed to define who gets married, especially since the bible is a WORK OF FICTION. It's like letting a Stephen King book run your life. I can't believe in this day and age people still hold so tight to ancient superstitions.