Chuckle head speaks...

Rocketdork · Post by **Rocketdork** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 8:23 am

Marriage is for straight people...

Morons. I can't believe that they are actually considering an AMENDMENT to the constitution for this.

All this BS about the sanctity of marriage. 50% of them end in divorce, how many of the remaining 50% are any good? Half of the men have cheated on their wives, almost half of the women have cheated on their husbands...Spousal abuse, "we stay together for the kids". Fuck me, Marriage doesn't have any sanctity left.

Face it, homophobes are pushing this. Most often I hear "it’s just wrong". Fuck'em. Let the illegal’s in, get rid of the fuck-tards pushing this amendment.

so what do you think?

Post by **bio** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 10:18 am

I think we need to build heavy machinery at a wartime rate, drive it to the midwest, and dig the entire region, with the exception of the state of Kansas, down to a depth of 200 feet.

Then, we'll harness the runoff from global warming and flood the whole area, making an inland sea.

We'll leave the state of Kansas (now known as the country of Oz) as an island and relocate the populations of the other states there.

Post by **miftah** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:05 am

Actually its not homophobes pushing it. Its Bush making a political maneuver. Truth be told, the Republicans know that they have a lock on the Evangelicals and an issue like this fires them up. Gets them out to vote.

Republicans don't care at all about Gay marriage. Most of them would take a gay vote the same as a Christian vote. But when it comes to voting, the Christians show up and are visible where gay people, well, they're like anyone. Hard to count their actual impact and most of them don't exactly want you to know what they do in their bedrooms.

Its a bullshit issue and its timing is designed to distract you from the multitude of failures the Bush would like you to forget on the way to the polls this November. Do yourself a favor and forget about this issue. Just as on the first Wednesday in November the Republicans surely will.

Post by **miftah** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:24 pm

Holy crap, I just read Bio's post. We don't want the damn Idahos!

Painted · Post by **Painted** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:08 pm

I don't think that we should be making everybody follow the morals of religion. Some people don't have religion. They shouldn't make it illegal just because it's against THEIR morals. People have to learn that their morals aren't everyone elses. Pro-Choice baby!

Post by **eddiecanuck** » Mon Jun 05, 2006 9:42 pm

It's a tough call cause marriage really is (in my opinion) more of a religious ceremony, but society has made it the basis for legal rights. I'm all for couples (however you define it) getting the legal rights, so maybe I'm in favor of the "social union" or whatever you want to call it.

Painted · Post by **Painted** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 12:30 am

I don't know if they would really care what it is named as long as it is basically the same thing as marriage. But then again I am not seeing through that perspective.

Rocketdork · Post by **Rocketdork** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:06 am

eddiecanuck wrote:It's a tough call cause marriage really is (in my opinion) more of a religious ceremony, but society has made it the basis for legal rights. I'm all for couples (however you define it) getting the legal rights, so maybe I'm in favor of the "social union" or whatever you want to call it.

I really don't think its such a tough call. In regards to the government, Marriage is either religious or its not.

If Marriage is religious, then the Government should have nothing to do with it, offer it to all, or none, allow gay marriage or dis-allow marriage entirely, really those are the two options in my mind...Churches could continue to marry people, each church could decide on its own to allow gays to marry or not. Just take away the legal standing of marriage with regards to the government. The religious aspect of marriage is totally preserved, and the decision of gay marriage is left to the church(s).

If its not religious, then its about LEGAL standing among society. Morallity and its many definitions doesn't even enter into the equation. You never hear this side of the argument...From the gov't point of view, the rights given to a couple have nothing to do with religion...ie, death benefits, medical decisions, tax deductions, etc. So why do we care if the couple is of the same sex...

I bet you can't even come up with a definition of male or female that fits all the cases...if we can't even define male or female, how the hell can we make laws that diferentiate between the sexes?

Post by **bio** » Tue Jun 06, 2006 10:28 am

miftah wrote:Holy crap, I just read Bio's post. We don't want the damn Idahos!

Oh...yes you do!

They're great for playing skeet with.

"Pull!"

*BANG*