Supreme Court delivers wins for gay marriage movement

Is the chance of children with flippers a valid reason?

Pretty much my thoughts. Although flippers would actually be cool. Especially if they joined the swim team.
Seriously though birth defects or a chance there of would be an issue.

Ok, I realize some here think I'm actually serious.LOL

You know what they do in Mississippi on Halloween? Pump kin.

he also said the we dont need the voting rights act. that was for when there was racism in the south. now a days the south is no more racist then me. what an out of touch douche

Not to stray off topic but racism is, unfortunately, very alive still. The things that come out of the mouths of people i think i know on a regular basis make me want to live on another planet. I live in New Jersey too. I can only imagine what bubbles beneath the surface in the south.

Not to stray off topic but racism is, unfortunately, very alive still. The things that come out of the mouths of people i think i know on a regular basis make me want to live on another planet. I live in New Jersey too. I can only imagine what bubbles beneath the surface in the south.

Racism in the South is not like it used to be. But compared to the north, it is more direct and not hidden when it happens.

Racism in the South is not like it used to be. But compared to the north, it is more direct and not hidden when it happens.
Yes - i meant that there are so many people - north and south- that are racist "inside", but i am sure it is worse in the south. More "closet racists".
Edit: bubbles beneath the surface of individuals

Pretty much my thoughts. Although flippers would actually be cool. Especially if they joined the swim team.
Seriously though birth defects or a chance there of would be an issue.

Yup, again, however, if consenting adults decide that their love is worth the risk, who are you to deny them their rights? If two individuals (unrelated) are likely to have unhealthy children, are they denied the right to marry? Nope. In fact, two unrelated people who are medically certain to have a child with birth defects can get married - as long as they are mentally/legally capable of granting consent. Why can't two consenting adults who are only likely have a child with birth defects get married.

Further, by simply aborting any fetus which exhibits birth defects, they completely avoid the possible unhealthy ramifications. Very simply, through modern science, we can remove any of the traditional health related objections to such a contract.

Other than a majority of people finding it repulsive, explain to me why two or more consenting adults cannot enter into a marriage contract (an agreement to provide lifelong mutual support). How is the prohibition of incestuous or polygamous marriage, b/c we find it repulsive anything other than another attempt "to disparage and to injure" a group of people through marriage laws. Under the logic of the DOMA ruling, doesn't it logically follow that by "treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others [a statute prohibiting incestuous/polygamous marriages] is in violation of the Fifth Amendment." ?? [If it is a State law it would be the 14th Amendment].

Quoted language is from the majority opinion in the DOMA ruling.

Yup, again, however, if consenting adults decide that their love is worth the risk, who are you to deny them their rights? If two individuals (unrelated) are likely to have unhealthy children, are they denied the right to marry? Nope. In fact, two unrelated people who are medically certain to have a child with birth defects can get married - as long as they are mentally/legally capable of granting consent. Why can't two consenting adults who are only likely have a child with birth defects get married.

Further, by simply aborting any fetus which exhibits birth defects, they completely avoid the possible unhealthy ramifications. Very simply, through modern science, we can remove any of the traditional health related objections to such a contract.

Other than a majority of people finding it repulsive, explain to me why two or more consenting adults cannot enter into a marriage contract (an agreement to provide lifelong mutual support). How is the prohibition of incestuous or polygamous marriage, b/c we find it repulsive anything other than another attempt "to disparage and to injure" a group of people through marriage laws. Under the logic of the DOMA ruling, doesn't it logically follow that by "treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others [a statute prohibiting incestuous/polygamous marriages] is in violation of the Fifth Amendment." ?? [If it is a State law it would be the 14th Amendment].

Quoted language is from the majority opinion in the DOMA ruling.

I guess at the end of the day having sex with my daughter when she comes of age is so far removed from the world of righteousness and her being a lesbian is not. Im not one to easily dismiss something as wrong, and am extremely open minded. If it makes you happy is a beautiful law to live by. There is always a line though and insest crosses it imo.
Give me an example of two unrelated people who are likely to have unhealthy children?
In most cases those people would be advised by doctors and there is some discretion used, but darryl, his brother darryl, and his other brother darryl are throwing caution to the wind and probably dont take regular visits for consultation on such life decisions.
Edit: polygamy imo is fine. I have no issues with it at all. If u are single and dating a couple of girls that are aware and not bothered by it than why not live together happily ever after?

One could make the argument that no known society in human history has tolerated incest. For sure, societies define what "incest" means differently. But anthropologists tell us that every society has some sort of incest taboo. Perhaps for Darwinian reasons, being human through history is fairly synonymous with incest avoidance.

The same argument cannot be made at all for homosexuality, either now or in the past. Some societies have even institutionalized it in religious and/or coming of age rituals.

You know what they do in Mississippi on Halloween? Pump kin.

I thought that was West Virginia.

No , not in anyone's mind.

I will admit someone else said this but I do agree with it .


"
Equal civil rights and gay marriage help to promote a stable community whereas polygamy and incest do not.

The short answer:
No. To promote stability in a community, defending a stabilizing factor such as gay marriage does not require one to also defend the unstable practices of polygamy and incest.

How does gay marriage make for a stable community?