Active Users:746 Time:16/02/2026 08:33:56 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though. Dreaded Anomaly Send a noteboard - 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM
and granted, the UN is not the US, but the US falls under the UN, does it not? I've never really understood exactly how that relationship works out, but we're really not supposed to violate the UN declarations of human rights, are we?


Article 16 (UDHR)
1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

So, emphasis mine, clearly comments on age, race, nationality and religion, does not mention sexual preference.
Reply to message
Let's ban all Christian Marriage. Dannymac - 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM 1733 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me. Helene - 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM 1130 Views
One small problem... Phelix - 07/08/2010 08:02:34 AM 1139 Views
Re tax. Rebekah - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1179 Views
That seems sensible to me. SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 1077 Views
Not sure what you mean by "demoted." Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:50:02 PM 1208 Views
Nice. *NM* Camilla - 07/08/2010 08:58:20 AM 655 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people. Cannoli - 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM 1390 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there! Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM 1207 Views
Who else should make those decisions? Cannoli - 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM 1142 Views
I'd totally... Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 1061 Views
I'd totally... ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1222 Views
You'd defend this idiot? *NM* Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 06:40:34 AM 544 Views
Indeed ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 1153 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 1164 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 1062 Views
Um, ok. *NM* everynametaken - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 542 Views
*Shakes Head* Dannymac - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 1033 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM* ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM 582 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense. Great Lord of Chaos - 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM 1127 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 1080 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! Vodalus - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 1032 Views
whoops *NM* ßelals Girl - 09/08/2010 02:22:49 AM 498 Views
Re: *Shakes Head* Cannoli - 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM 1072 Views
I still do not see how you think marriage is a "pointless" institution LadyLorraine - 08/08/2010 08:05:45 PM 1176 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 484 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about. Dannymac - 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM 1012 Views
You cannot be that stupid. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM 1303 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 1229 Views
Incorrect. Genders are not treated equally. Dreaded Anomaly - 11/08/2010 07:53:00 PM 1402 Views
all you need is enough support to pass an amendment random thoughts - 08/08/2010 02:46:08 PM 1004 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM 1046 Views
And what is wrong with polygamy? *NM* Ectheledhel - 09/08/2010 10:36:53 AM 551 Views
Did I say there was anything? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:03:10 AM 1165 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 1111 Views
Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 1038 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 1027 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 1139 Views
Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 1002 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 1129 Views
Re: Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 02:14:43 PM 999 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 03:06:31 PM 1174 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM 1164 Views
... Camilla - 11/08/2010 03:22:50 PM 1067 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 11:25:39 AM 1069 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:51:50 AM 1031 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:18:35 PM 1121 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 02:54:19 PM 1142 Views
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM 1178 Views
Re: Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:24:06 AM 984 Views
Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Dannymac - 10/08/2010 04:09:43 PM 1103 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Isaac - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 991 Views
Great post Danny SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 864 Views
It should be noted again... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM 1153 Views
and how is it not a right? LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM 1043 Views
My definition of rights... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 1148 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM 912 Views
+1 Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:11:22 AM 1208 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM 1005 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM 1154 Views
If we need a more specific resolution... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM 1339 Views
No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 05:25:57 AM 1036 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:04:39 PM 1350 Views
That's really a ridiculous stance, you do realize. Legolas - 10/08/2010 03:23:02 PM 962 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 764 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:46:56 PM 1203 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 1023 Views
It also doesn't say they can Isaac - 10/08/2010 04:41:18 AM 1022 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. Legolas - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 1036 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 1036 Views
I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:09:32 PM 1004 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 935 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 497 Views
To clarify for you SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM 1014 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM 1399 Views
I'm not sure that I would call the Security Council the 'Enforcement Body' SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:43:02 PM 1016 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 1286 Views
Disagree - but it's most a matter of definition there SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:31:53 PM 1170 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless.... Jeordam - 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM 956 Views
and the Constitution dictates nothing about marriage. *NM* LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 11:46:24 PM 524 Views
That means it is up to the people. And they say "No." *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:13:12 PM 532 Views
No, but it does dictate things about rights and discrimination SilverWarder - 12/08/2010 03:48:02 PM 1204 Views
Why don't YOU back up your assertion that the right to marry exists? *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:16:02 PM 534 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right. Dreaded Anomaly - 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM 1132 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction... Vodalus - 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM 1193 Views
I agree LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:11:19 PM 888 Views
Yeah but this can't be used to prove that it IS a right... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:30:57 PM 1265 Views
Note it all you want... Dannymac - 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 886 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 569 Views
The best one yet. Camilla - 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM 1143 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM 1002 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM 1121 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM 1021 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM 1154 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM 1127 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel Camilla - 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM 1076 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes