Active Users:512 Time:17/06/2026 06:41:33 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage LadyLorraine Send a noteboard - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM
and discussing it as a legal and romantic bond between individuals (i don't mean romantic as in roses and candles, but that sort of love as opposed to familial or friendly love), then there's not that much wrong with incest or polygamy either.

In the end, I believe marriage should be about bringing people who love each other into one whole and complete family, with all the various benefits families tend to have. Of course, an incestuous marriage would be rather redundant in this respect and defeat the purpose. Anyway, if this was merely about titles (wife/husband) and ceremonies, then this wouldn't be an issue at all, so I think that an incestuous marriage is a different situation as your family is already your family.
Still Empress of the Poofy Purple Pillow Pile Palace!!
Continued Love of my Aussie <3
Reply to message
Let's ban all Christian Marriage. Dannymac - 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM 1802 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me. Helene - 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM 1185 Views
One small problem... Phelix - 07/08/2010 08:02:34 AM 1190 Views
Re tax. Rebekah - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1237 Views
That seems sensible to me. SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 1134 Views
Not sure what you mean by "demoted." Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:50:02 PM 1261 Views
Nice. *NM* Camilla - 07/08/2010 08:58:20 AM 681 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people. Cannoli - 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM 1443 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there! Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM 1265 Views
Who else should make those decisions? Cannoli - 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM 1206 Views
I'd totally... Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 1114 Views
I'd totally... ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1274 Views
You'd defend this idiot? *NM* Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 06:40:34 AM 568 Views
Indeed ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 1214 Views
I used to think Joel was the biggest rambler on this site. I am seriously reconsidering. everynametaken - 08/08/2010 05:24:56 AM 1217 Views
And my assessment of one poster as the most content-poor, non-contributing slug is unchanged Cannoli - 08/08/2010 07:17:02 PM 1125 Views
Um, ok. *NM* everynametaken - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 567 Views
*Shakes Head* Dannymac - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 1082 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM* ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM 602 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense. Great Lord of Chaos - 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM 1188 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 1142 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! Vodalus - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 1087 Views
whoops *NM* ßelals Girl - 09/08/2010 02:22:49 AM 526 Views
Re: *Shakes Head* Cannoli - 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM 1144 Views
I still do not see how you think marriage is a "pointless" institution LadyLorraine - 08/08/2010 08:05:45 PM 1258 Views
No, I was referring to same-sex marriage. Real marriage hardly counts as a novelty. *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 02:28:43 PM 505 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about. Dannymac - 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM 1075 Views
You cannot be that stupid. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM 1356 Views
There's a lot of ridiculous arguments here, but I'll focus on just one of them... Legolas - 11/08/2010 03:38:05 PM 1297 Views
Incorrect. Genders are not treated equally. Dreaded Anomaly - 11/08/2010 07:53:00 PM 1470 Views
all you need is enough support to pass an amendment random thoughts - 08/08/2010 02:46:08 PM 1063 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM 1122 Views
And what is wrong with polygamy? *NM* Ectheledhel - 09/08/2010 10:36:53 AM 577 Views
Did I say there was anything? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:03:10 AM 1225 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 1164 Views
Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 1090 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 1084 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 1195 Views
Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 1051 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 1177 Views
Re: Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 02:14:43 PM 1046 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 03:06:31 PM 1233 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM 1225 Views
... Camilla - 11/08/2010 03:22:50 PM 1113 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 11:25:39 AM 1110 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:51:50 AM 1082 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:18:35 PM 1175 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 02:54:19 PM 1200 Views
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM 1236 Views
Re: Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:24:06 AM 1044 Views
Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Dannymac - 10/08/2010 04:09:43 PM 1159 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Isaac - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 1058 Views
Great post Danny SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 922 Views
It should be noted again... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM 1206 Views
and how is it not a right? LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM 1110 Views
My definition of rights... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 1204 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM 965 Views
+1 Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:11:22 AM 1263 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM 1068 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM 1215 Views
If we need a more specific resolution... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM 1399 Views
No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 05:25:57 AM 1094 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:04:39 PM 1407 Views
That's really a ridiculous stance, you do realize. Legolas - 10/08/2010 03:23:02 PM 1006 Views
The point is that marriage IS a right, one which cannot be denied based upon sexual orientation *NM* Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:04:16 PM 796 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:46:56 PM 1254 Views
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though. Dreaded Anomaly - 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM 1079 Views
It also doesn't say they can Isaac - 10/08/2010 04:41:18 AM 1079 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. Legolas - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 1100 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 1088 Views
I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:09:32 PM 1056 Views
Re: I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point. Isaac - 10/08/2010 06:33:56 PM 998 Views
It's mentioned as a right in some SC decision quoted in that Walker opinion. *NM* Legolas - 10/08/2010 06:51:13 PM 521 Views
To clarify for you SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM 1065 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM 1453 Views
I'm not sure that I would call the Security Council the 'Enforcement Body' SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:43:02 PM 1070 Views
The fact that it is capable of authorizing the use of military force makes it an enforcement body Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 10:33:59 PM 1350 Views
Disagree - but it's most a matter of definition there SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:31:53 PM 1223 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless.... Jeordam - 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM 1018 Views
and the Constitution dictates nothing about marriage. *NM* LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 11:46:24 PM 552 Views
That means it is up to the people. And they say "No." *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:13:12 PM 561 Views
No, but it does dictate things about rights and discrimination SilverWarder - 12/08/2010 03:48:02 PM 1257 Views
Why don't YOU back up your assertion that the right to marry exists? *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:16:02 PM 558 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right. Dreaded Anomaly - 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM 1188 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction... Vodalus - 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM 1246 Views
I agree LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:11:19 PM 945 Views
Yeah but this can't be used to prove that it IS a right... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:30:57 PM 1371 Views
Note it all you want... Dannymac - 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 940 Views
No, they seek to expand the terms of the partnership. Homosexuals can & do get married normally *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:14:25 PM 601 Views
The best one yet. Camilla - 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM 1199 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM 1065 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM 1168 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM 1082 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM 1209 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM 1185 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel Camilla - 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM 1127 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes