Active Users:453 Time:01/08/2026 08:31:35 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla Send a noteboard - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM
Today's "Say what" section of Doonesbury 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>


Oooooh. Rorschach.
Although he never wears his Rorschach outfit when he carries the sign...

Hello Alveda - Those folks are not going to procreate ANYWAY! Whether they marry or not is unimportant!
*MySmiley*
structured procrastinator
Reply to message
Let's ban all Christian Marriage. Dannymac - 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM 1829 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me. Helene - 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM 1210 Views
One small problem... Phelix - 07/08/2010 08:02:34 AM 1213 Views
Re tax. Rebekah - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1261 Views
That seems sensible to me. SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 1156 Views
Not sure what you mean by "demoted." Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:50:02 PM 1279 Views
Nice. *NM* Camilla - 07/08/2010 08:58:20 AM 701 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people. Cannoli - 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM 1470 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there! Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM 1318 Views
Who else should make those decisions? Cannoli - 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM 1237 Views
I'd totally... Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 1141 Views
I'd totally... ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1303 Views
You'd defend this idiot? *NM* Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 06:40:34 AM 587 Views
Indeed ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 1234 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 1236 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 1147 Views
Um, ok. *NM* everynametaken - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 591 Views
*Shakes Head* Dannymac - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 1111 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM* ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM 614 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense. Great Lord of Chaos - 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM 1223 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 1164 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! Vodalus - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 1106 Views
whoops *NM* ßelals Girl - 09/08/2010 02:22:49 AM 546 Views
Re: *Shakes Head* Cannoli - 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM 1166 Views
I still do not see how you think marriage is a "pointless" institution LadyLorraine - 08/08/2010 08:05:45 PM 1307 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 520 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about. Dannymac - 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM 1110 Views
You cannot be that stupid. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM 1374 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 1320 Views
Incorrect. Genders are not treated equally. Dreaded Anomaly - 11/08/2010 07:53:00 PM 1501 Views
all you need is enough support to pass an amendment random thoughts - 08/08/2010 02:46:08 PM 1100 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM 1161 Views
And what is wrong with polygamy? *NM* Ectheledhel - 09/08/2010 10:36:53 AM 601 Views
Did I say there was anything? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:03:10 AM 1246 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 1191 Views
Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 1116 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 1105 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 1218 Views
Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 1068 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 1196 Views
Re: Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 02:14:43 PM 1065 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 03:06:31 PM 1252 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM 1264 Views
... Camilla - 11/08/2010 03:22:50 PM 1142 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 11:25:39 AM 1133 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:51:50 AM 1104 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:18:35 PM 1201 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 02:54:19 PM 1226 Views
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM 1258 Views
Re: Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:24:06 AM 1065 Views
Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Dannymac - 10/08/2010 04:09:43 PM 1183 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Isaac - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 1095 Views
Great post Danny SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 962 Views
It should be noted again... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM 1224 Views
and how is it not a right? LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM 1134 Views
My definition of rights... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 1224 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM 990 Views
+1 Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:11:22 AM 1281 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM 1087 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM 1246 Views
If we need a more specific resolution... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM 1431 Views
No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 05:25:57 AM 1117 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:04:39 PM 1430 Views
That's really a ridiculous stance, you do realize. Legolas - 10/08/2010 03:23:02 PM 1023 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 815 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:46:56 PM 1279 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 1100 Views
It also doesn't say they can Isaac - 10/08/2010 04:41:18 AM 1099 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. Legolas - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 1135 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 1114 Views
I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:09:32 PM 1082 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 1020 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 540 Views
To clarify for you SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM 1090 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM 1485 Views
I'm not sure that I would call the Security Council the 'Enforcement Body' SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:43:02 PM 1098 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 1369 Views
Disagree - but it's most a matter of definition there SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:31:53 PM 1245 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless.... Jeordam - 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM 1050 Views
and the Constitution dictates nothing about marriage. *NM* LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 11:46:24 PM 567 Views
That means it is up to the people. And they say "No." *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:13:12 PM 579 Views
No, but it does dictate things about rights and discrimination SilverWarder - 12/08/2010 03:48:02 PM 1281 Views
Why don't YOU back up your assertion that the right to marry exists? *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:16:02 PM 573 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right. Dreaded Anomaly - 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM 1212 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction... Vodalus - 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM 1268 Views
I agree LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:11:19 PM 967 Views
Yeah but this can't be used to prove that it IS a right... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:30:57 PM 1420 Views
Note it all you want... Dannymac - 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 976 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 620 Views
The best one yet. Camilla - 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM 1223 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM 1087 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM 1192 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM 1103 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM 1236 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM 1208 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel Camilla - 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM 1150 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes