Active Users:688 Time:16/02/2026 10:23:18 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder Send a noteboard - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM
Today's "Say what" section of <a href="http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html">Doonesbury</a> was perfect in its insanity:

"I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to be extinct, and none of us wants to be. So we don't want genocide. We don't want to destroy the sacred institution of marriage...Marriage between one man and one woman remains the guard against human extinction."
-- MLK niece Alveda King on gay marriage


OMG! Letting people marry each other who cannot procreate - that will be the END OF THE HUMAN RACE!

THE END IS NIGH!

<goes and puts on Rorschach outfit and parades around outside someplace>

Hello Alveda - Those folks are not going to procreate ANYWAY! Whether they marry or not is unimportant!
May God stand between you and harm in all the empty places you must walk.

Old Egyptian Blessing
Reply to message
Let's ban all Christian Marriage. Dannymac - 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM 1734 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 1140 Views
Re tax. Rebekah - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1180 Views
That seems sensible to me. SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 1078 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 1391 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 1143 Views
I'd totally... Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 1062 Views
I'd totally... ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1223 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 1154 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 1165 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 1063 Views
Um, ok. *NM* everynametaken - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 542 Views
*Shakes Head* Dannymac - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 1034 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 1128 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 1081 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! Vodalus - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 1033 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 1073 Views
I still do not see how you think marriage is a "pointless" institution LadyLorraine - 08/08/2010 08:05:45 PM 1178 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 1403 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 1166 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 1112 Views
Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 1039 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 1028 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 1140 Views
Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 1004 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 1130 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 1032 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 1104 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Isaac - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 992 Views
Great post Danny SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 865 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 1044 Views
My definition of rights... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 1149 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 1023 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. Legolas - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 1037 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 1037 Views
I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:09:32 PM 1005 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 1015 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 1205 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 1133 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 889 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 1003 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