serious gay marriage question

“Your homophobe 'jokes' aren't funny.”

“How do you get 4 gay guys on one barstool?


Turn it upside down.”

“We can always depend on Hyway to lower the bar. ;-)”

“bada bing!”

““Sarge, are you making assumptions about my beliefs (as concerning age of consent, etc?)” - Limpy

No Limpy. Speaking of, what do you think of a 30 year old hooking up with a 5 year old?”

“Well Sarge, I feel one of them is victimized? How did you feel?”

“I feel your belief system finds victimizing people sinful, so if the shoe fits ...”

“You are grasping at vapors, Sarge! You "feel" my belief system...???”

“I have a serious gay marriage question now that it's legal. Do any of you guys want to marry any other of you?”

“You're doing everything you can Limpy to not face the reality of your hypocricy.

Need a few moments to think about your position again, or are you going to continue with the double standard?”

“Pass that bottle over here, I think I need to catch up. Are you asserting that its okay for a 30y/o and a five y/o to hook up as long as they are different genders? If not, then you'd agree its not the gender, but the ripe young age which causes the problem. I think we are in agreement here.”

“Yes, we are in agreement that the age causes the problem. "Age" is the measure that the two of us have decided society should come to a conclusion on as to whether or not it's a factor in wrong behavior.

But, if they are a "devoted" couple, shouldn't they "be afforded the same rights/protections under the law?" I mean, our belief systems shouldn't dictate their life, should they?”

“One thing that really cracks me up - Santorum was the latest bonehead to say this, is somehow they argue that a constutional amendment against gay marriage is a defense of religious freedom!

It's this almost psychotic twist that says, allowing us to forebid people from doing something that goes against my religious beliefs is defending my freedom!

I mean if you think its necessary to defend morality or civilization by amending the constitution to say that two people must have complementary, not matching, genitals in order to be married - I'll disagree. But don't try to tell me that enshrining such a view in the constitution defends religious freedom.”

“quote please?”

“But, if they are a "devoted" couple, shouldn't they "be afforded the same rights/protections under the law?" I mean, our belief systems shouldn't dictate their life, should they?”
Sarge
9:52:46 PM


Absolutely not. Five year old children are not mature enough to make that kind of decision for themselves Sarge. A five year old will take an hour to decide what kind of sandwich they want for lunch and can't tie their own shoes. To think they are capable of always choosing what is a safe and/or healthy relationship for themselves is ridiculous.

Adults are a different matter. It's not a matter of hypocrisy.
last edited: 6/07/06 9:08:43 PM”

“Thanks Sass. Want to enter into a lesbian relationship with me?”

“Tell me how any of that negates or contradicts any of this:

“Life, Liberty, and THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

Why shouldn't devoted couples, regardless of age, be afforded the same rights/protections under the law?
Because YOUR belief system finds them sinful???

Who am I directing that to??? If the shoe fits...”

__________

The answer: None of it.

You believe "Absolutely not" because of YOUR belief system. Right? You do believe that, don't you?

For example, take this quote: "To think they [5 year old children] are capable of always choosing what is a safe and/or healthy relationship for themselves is ridiculous."

Two questions:

1. Based upon what exactly?

2. Are adults capable of always choosing what is a safe and/or healthy relationship for themselves?”

“Naw, I'm married (and faithful). Thanks anyways. I'll keep you in mind just in case something happens to Birch, since Buddur's taken now). ;)”

“pedxing - While Sassafras tries to think of how she's not using a moral standard for determining who should not get married, are you looking up that Santorum quote?”

“1)I guess I base that statement on common sense Sarge. Five year old kids don't even know what sex is or for that matter how long ten years is. How could they possibly be able to make an informed choice about a partner for sex and life?

2) No, but they have many more tools for making an informed choice and most fully realize they will suffer the consequences of poor choices. Five year old children equate a consequence with a time out.”

“1) But who are you to take away their Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, just because you don't think they're capable of such a decision? What gives you the moral-right to do so?

2) There are adults in our country who have the same "tools" by your standard as they are "adults". They choose to have sex with animals. Should they be allowed to marry?”

“2) If the animal can say "I do", then yes!”

“Limpy, are you against mute human marriage?”

“Are you inferring that animals do not speak because they suffer a handicap?”

“The bottom line here folks is you guys want to have moral absolutes too.

The question you (guys/gals) keep asking of those who are against gay-marriage is not the right question. You keep asking "What gives you the right to decide that based on your morals?" The same thing can be asked of you. We just use different moral standards.

I have my standard for moral rules - and you have yours. You want laws based on your moral rules, I want laws based on mine.

The question will get us nowhere.

The real question (if this were to ever be solved, which it won't, but if) is: "Which moral standard is correct?"
last edited: 6/07/06 9:44:04 PM”

“Limpy - when you're done trolling, let me know. I prefer real debate. I'll go tit-for-tat for a little while, but just for fun, but it gets old quick.”

“can apples and oranges marry?”

“dogs and cats living together”

“Go cat, go!!!”

“"A five year old will take an hour to decide what kind of sandwich they want for lunch and can't tie their own shoes."

Holy cow! Sass just described Bush! LOL!”

“OMG! Nigal, you just inserted fuego into this thread. It is the end of the world.”

“you just inserted fuego into this thread

Sounds kinda gay.”

“Not that there's anything wrong with that”

“http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314564,00.html

That's just sad.”

“i read some time ago that some judge ruled that even tho a mother might give up her rights to child support after accepting a donation from a sperm bank, the child never entered into an agreement, and is therefore owed any and all child support. what i didnt know is that you could retroactively sue for it on your own behalf”

“Sperm Donor Ordered to Pay Child Support for 18-Year-Old

The war against men continues.....
(No good deed goes unpunished)”

“but what does this have to do with gay marriage? as a matter of fact, if gays were allowed to marry, the boy wouldnt have been able to sue, since he had the support of two married parents”

“Gays are allowed to marry.”

“I agree with Crash. If the couple had been able to marry and the woman who wasn't the mother allowed to legally assume parental responsibilities (adopt?) the doctor would be off the hook.”

“Gays are allowed to marry.

Anyways, pretend like the gay "partner" never existed. Is it fair for the doctor to be "on" the hook then? Of course not.”

“Gays are allowed to marry

they can marry, but i believe its only in california is the marriage legally recognized

Is it fair for the doctor to be "on" the hook then? Of course not

no. AND IF THE GAY COUPLE WERE ABLE TO HAVE A LEGALLY SANCTIONED MARRIAGE, THE DOCTOR WOULD BE OFF THE HOOK”

“It's not right - regardless - of the gayness of the mom's friend.”

“It's not right - regardless - of the gayness of the mom's friend.¡±

CORRECT whether or not anyone in this scenario is gay or not, its not right, i agree

so again, why did you bring this up under the gay marriage thread?”

“Because this proves that gays aren't responsible enough to get married.”

“Hey crash, rumor has it that Jackson is going to direct the Hobbit, and it will be released in 2 films, in 3D.”

“this proves jack sht-all.first, if gays could have legally sanctioned marriages, this couldnt have happened. secondly, youre taking an isolated case, and expanding it to say that this proves that all gays......maybe it proves that this particular couple isnt responsible enough, but it hardly proves one thing about the entire gay population. third, whether or not theyre gay has nothing to do with it. this could have been an unmarried straight couple, and this still could have happened. plenty of straigt couples are unfit for marriage and parenthood. this is just more of your silly bullsht crusade
last edited: 12/02/07 7:16:59 PM”

“Hey crash, rumor has it that Jackson is going to direct the Hobbit, and it will be released in 2 films, in 3D

umm last i heard, the spiderman guy was announced as the director of the hobbit”

“announced, or just rumored?

http://derhobbit-film.de/indexengl.shtml”