Actually, TH, Section 3 of DOMA has been ruled unconstitutional. So, you're wrong.
That is exactly right.
You can marry a man, but not two men?
Gays are not fighting for true marriage equality. They are fighting for what they "think" marriage should be like.
In the end, gays are no different than traditional marriage supporters. What "they" think marriage should be is the only thing important to them.
I feel like Texashiker and nehalem are paid shills for the marriage equality movement, as their arguments against SSM are SO bad that they could only possibly result in more people agreeing that same-sex marriage should be legal. "Well, I've always been opposed to it from a moral perspective, but there's these guys ranting about whores and toasters... fuck it, let 'em get married."
wtf laws are you even referring to, btw?
I've never heard of a person forced to marry another without their consent in Canada.
So, in short, you have no answer for my questions.
Does it not make you feel dumb to hold an opinion you can't successfully defend?
but that's 0 party consent, not 1-party consent such as your toaster marriage.
if you and your toaster move to BC and live as common-law spouses for several years, I fully support the government forcing you to marry eachother.
several US states also have common law marriage on the books, so you can move to Alabama, Colorado, District of Columbia, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas or Utah and hope for the best... but again, this is no-party consent, not one-party.
Alabama
A valid common law marriage exists when there is capacity to enter into a marriage, the man and woman must be at least 16 with legal parental consent and present agreement or consent to be husband and wife, public recognition of the existence of the marriage after 181 days, and consummation
Iowa
The three elements of a common-law marriage are: (1) the present intent and agreement to be married; (2) continuous cohabitation; and (3) public declaration that the parties are husband and wife.[17] The public declaration or holding out to the public is considered to be the acid test of a common-law marriage
I feel like Texashiker and nehalem are paid shills for the marriage equality movement
There is a measure of personal morality in law/Government because humans simply have morality in built into them.
You're trying to split hairs between morality and Government as if one can be completely divorced from the other. That simply isn't really possible.
Debatable and beyond the scope of this thread. Morality is learned from many sources, including societal laws. With different opinions on the matter of SSM, the government's only real choice is to grant marriage licenses to two adults who are above the Age of Consent without regard to physical gender.
the government's only real choice is to grant marriage licenses to two adults who are above the Age of Consent without regard to physical gender.
Bull crap.
Tell me something, is there nothing in this world you find distasteful?
Maybe women who abandon their children, dead beat dads, people who refuse to work and live on welfare?
What about plural marriages?
You would deny someone the right to marry who they wanted?
I'm a mature adult who is capable of coming into contact with something I find distasteful without being reduced to a sputtering fit of apoplexy crying
On the other hand, who gives a shit? He raped a child. He SHOULDN'T fare well.
Abuse of the food stamp system infuriates me because I've watched every single one of my friends do it.
What about plural marriages?
You would deny someone the right to marry who they wanted?
why do you keep setting up these false arguments? who in this thread has spoken out against polygamy?
One I clearly answered. If Canadian law allows marriage without consent then clearly there is nothing stopping American law from doing the same. Except for bigoted liberals that is.
As for the other what obligation of marriage do you think a marriage cannot perform.
As alzan posted, marriage is between "two" people.
Yall are still isolating certain groups from marriage equality.
Really?
Really?
Yes, because child rape and defrauding the government are on the same level as homosexuality.
Really scraping the bottom of the barrel, huh?
It's y'all - contraction for you all.
You should create a new threal for plural marriages, this thread concerns SSM
Debatable and beyond the scope of this thread. Morality is learned from many sources, including societal laws. With different opinions on the matter of SSM, the government's only real choice is to grant marriage licenses to two adults who are above the Age of Consent without regard to physical gender.
Jesus Christ, you're right. I'm a bubbling cauldron of rage. Using words like "infuriates" or CAPITALIZING words in the middle of sentences. I'm so ashamed I lost my temper in such a humiliating public fashion. Clearly I have issues.
Same sex marriages are losing support because the public is realizing the movement is a shame.
Gays proudly proclaim they are for marriage equality, but still refer to marriage as between two people.