Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » Here we go with the marriage stuff, more challenges.

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Here we go with the marriage stuff, more challenges.
CashCowMoo
Member


Member Rated:
3
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just read an article about the show called "sister wives" about the bigamous group on that TV show. The guy has a bunch of wives and 16 kids and there is a reality show about it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/05/sister-wives-law-suit-bigamy_n_1255622. html

Well, a DA in Utah is threatening to go after them because they are BREAKING THE LAW. Now, they are going to sue saying that they are "misunderstood" and that they have a right to marry whoever they want. Didnt see this one coming (sarcasm). Now bigamists will be citing the gay marriage outcome as their precedence for their "right" to have 4 wives.


"California gay marriage ban struck down, appeals court cites equal rights"


So, the people of California voted down gay marriage, but that doest matter? What is the point? This case opens up a can of worms for all sorts of situations now. This country is falling apart. Did you hear what Supremce Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said about our Constitution on Egyptian TV? A Clinton appointee I might add.

Now its their "right" to do this and that. Incest will be next, with NAMBLA getting a free pass from the press they will be saying its their right for older men to marry young boys. It WILL go there, because thats what being "progressive" is, lean forward, right?


Marriage is a covenant between God and mankind for the union of a man and woman. There is nothing wrong with having civil unions or something swimilar with equal benefits. Lets let the majority of people keep what they cherished. I dont think gay couples if they are official should be denied benefits traditional married couples get.

--------------------
"No civilization can survive the physical destruction of its resource base."

Posts: 6554 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
it's about religious freedom. if my religion say i can marry 9 wives adn whole flock of chickens, the govt cannot stop me... i do like those Brown Red Old English game hens [Big Grin]

as to gay rights to marriage? please explain how it is not about eqaul rights?

corporations can marry (merger) for all legal intents and purposes. they can even have childrne (spin-offs)

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 35833 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jordanreed
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for jordanreed     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I don't give a flying fukk who anyone marries...Lets say you can only marry intelligent people..ok?..cuz we want to produce an intelligent society. If you have idiots marrying idiots,,u produce idiots. Who has the right to tell me who i can marry>? In some states you can marry your first cousin..is that ok with you cash? This is all a bunch of irrelevant B.S. worry about you and yours and stay the fukk out of other peoples personal business!! It doesn't affect you one iota!

--------------------
jordan

Posts: 5812 | From: st paul,mn | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Member Rated:
3
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
EXACTLY, stay out of other peoples personal business. So why does Obama care force churches/Catholic hospitals etc to provide FREE birth control to employees? Why is government getting involved so much lately with peoples personal lives?


Dem Rep. Kathy Dahlkemper: I Wouldn't Have Voted for Obamacare If I'd Known About HHS Regulation

Former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, cast a crucial vote in favor of Obamacare in 2010. She lost her seat that November in part because of her controversial support of Obamacare. But Dahlkemper said recently that she would have never voted for the health care bill had she known that the Department of Health and Human Services would require all private insurers, including Catholic charities and hospitals, to provide free coverage of contraception, sterilization procedures, and the "week-after" pill "ella" that can induce early abortions.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dem-rep-kathy-dahlkemper-i-wouldnt-have-vote d-obamacare-if-id-known-about-hhs-regulation_626302.html

--------------------
"No civilization can survive the physical destruction of its resource base."

Posts: 6554 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jordanreed
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for jordanreed     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
is he forcing them to take birth control?..no!...

--------------------
jordan

Posts: 5812 | From: st paul,mn | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jordanreed
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for jordanreed     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
free birth control is great!!...why to go Barrack!! What a great prez!!!!!!!

--------------------
jordan

Posts: 5812 | From: st paul,mn | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
buckstalker
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for buckstalker     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Government has no constitutional right to tell anyone that they can or can't do anything with regards to themselves...

BTW cash the GOP is just as guilty as the dems in "contolling" what we do

--------------------
***********************

It's all in the timing...

Posts: 4223 | From: DSA | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ganesha is a god that is worshiped. His worshipers marry. There is no objection.

Satan is a god that is worshiped. His worshipers marry, There is no objection.

Buddhists marry, No objection. Muslims marry, No objection. Sikh's marry, no objection. Baha'i marry, no objection. Druid's marry, no objection. Eckankarians marry, no objection. Scientologists marry, no objection. Taoist marry, no objection. Shinto's marry, no objection, Caodist's marry, no objection.

Atheists marry, no objection!

Gay people want to marry and suddenly the Christian God's definition of marriage (which is not the first definition of marriage) trumps all.

Hypocrisy.

I have said it before and I will say it again, as long as marriage is not strictly a Christian activity the state CANNOT use a strictly Christian definition in legislating marriage laws. Marriage is a contract between two people that affords certain rights according to government services, nothing more.

As to the "can of Worms"...in Saudi Arabia they think it will open a "can of worms" if they allow women to drive. In Afghanistan many think it will open a "can of worms" if women are educated and allowed to show their faces in public. China thinks it will open a "can of worms" if the government doesn't censor the press and the internet.

Being afraid of critical review of our methods and laws is not a legitimate reason to remove rights from a segment of the population in a democratic society who believes in equality.

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Member Rated:
3
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by jordanreed:
free birth control is great!!...why to go Barrack!! What a great prez!!!!!!!

free birth control has been accessible very easily well before Obama was President, a little late on that one.

--------------------
"No civilization can survive the physical destruction of its resource base."

Posts: 6554 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jordanreed
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for jordanreed     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
great prez!!!!....his next term will be even better!! Sweet!!

--------------------
jordan

Posts: 5812 | From: st paul,mn | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Member Rated:
3
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
yeah, what a great term. people are cheering in the streets, oh wait...thats the occupy movement and oh....throwing bricks at law enforcement.

--------------------
"No civilization can survive the physical destruction of its resource base."

Posts: 6554 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I actually agree with cow on that one. Birth control should be easily accessible for all who seek it out but because of places like Planned Parenthood, it is.

However, I think these pot shots at the healthcare bill are nothing but gamesmanship. We all know full well that it is the unique nature of a religious organization running a health organization that brought this into conflict. This was not and has never been an attack on the Catholic religion.


quote:
“I’ve been confident from the start we could work out a sensible approach here,” the president added. “Some folks in Washington may want to treat this as another political wedge issue, but it shouldn’t be. I never saw it that way. It’s people with goodwill on both sides of the debate sorting through a complicated issue to find a solution that works for everyone. Today’s announcement has done that.”

...

Although the White House had initially given itself more than a year to determine the details of the new birth control coverage requirement for religious employers, Obama said that the situation had become unsustainable and called for a swift solution.

Religiously-affiliated non-profit employers like schools, charities, universities, and hospitals will be exempt from the new required birth control coverage rule, but insurance companies with birth control plans will have to offer those employees the opportunity to get additional contraceptive coverage directly with no additional charge.

However churches are fully exempted from the new requirement and their workers will not have the option of getting separate contraceptive coverage under the new compromise.

Also, as an edit to my statement above

quote:
I have said it before and I will say it again, as long as marriage is not strictly a Christian activity the state CANNOT use a strictly Christian definition in legislating marriage laws. Marriage is a contract between two people that affords certain rights according to government services, nothing more.
I would like to change that second sentence to
quote:
"Governmentally Speaking" marriage is a legal contract between two people that affords certain rights according to government services, and can be nothing more.
I personally believe my marriage holds a spiritual value beyond that, but that is 'my' belief and that is 'my' marriage. I do not require the Atheists to recognize the spirituality of my bond with my wife, but I do require them to recognize that she is my wife.

That is all homosexual people want. They do not care if you approve or disapprove of their relationship. They just want our system of government to recognize it the same as they recognize Alabama 'shotgun' weddings and Arizona 'Drunken Elvis' weddings. You CANNOT tell me these situations are any less godly than a homosexual relationship and yet one form is strenuously objected to while the other is tacitly approved and gossiped about.

That's a sin by the way, gossip...

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

Posts: 5178 | From: Up North | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2013 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share