Thoughts

Once again, for the record, I am for the institution of marriage remaining between a man and a woman. If gays want their civil unions let them have it but keep the language separate. Why do I have to acquiesce to having my beliefs minimized so that a gay couple can feel empowered by forcing their agenda down my throat when there is a simple alternative. Here's the deal. Just like every other people group in America. They want to be equals until it is politically expedient not to be. If you don't want to be singled out don't put yourself on the podium. If you think I'm saying this out of left field you are wrong. I have personal experience with being in a situation where someone just wanted to be normal but obviously manipulated the situation to where they could accuse me and others of discriminating against them(a woman and her * year old son that she put in inappropriate situations in order to cause problems...In a volunteer position of all places. The entire process was carried out in order to file suit against the non-profit organization I was volunteering for. Fortunately the woman's previous successful attempts at doing the same thing elsewhere were brought to light and her plan with us was foiled. The point is I'm skeptical when it comes to the real motives behind gays that want to redefine marriage when they already have a perfectly acceptable alternative. Originally Posted by boardman

Hot damn brother bm, you can't take that out on the gays! You had a bad case of the bat shit crazy fucking cunt, biting your ass. You gotta be careful of those She Devils, they make shit up all the time to suit their fancy. I been going head to head with them for years, first in the old High Dorrar Hottie forum and later in D&T. They ever get a moderator dick in their mouth and you're toast!

So leave them poor limp wristed gays alone and let them marrying 'till they are as sick of it as us straights are!

You need any She Devil spooky dust, let me know!

There may be hope for you yet! LOL!

. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

I keep telling you Tea Sippers that I voted for Ron Paul! The GOP keeps electing these numb nuts though for the general!

Everyone is bumping up against a couple of the nuclear rules, lets be real careful. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

I ain't never heard so many people wanting to eat'em some cabrito since I was last down in Tijuana Mexico scaring up some talent!

If you ever get into a contest with WTF where you have to use your brain you would be so far behind it would be like he is at the finishing line and you have barely started. Originally Posted by BigLouie

Big Louie, you forgot the link again!

OK folks, if you do not believe Louis's brilliant summary of a brilliant mind, go to WTFisabranic.com. Modesty has prevented me from posting my fan club info before..

Let us end this thread on song from the great philosopher Mac Davis , "Oh Lord its hard to be humble, when you're perfect in every way..."

I think we should date first. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

No whirlwind, Internets courtship?!?

Not in this country, if you want to move to India then yes arranged marriages happen. In this country you do not have to enter into an arranged marriage.
Originally Posted by WTF

Marriages are arranged in this country all the time amongst immigrant cultures that do so. No, the couple does not HAVE to get married, but they better if they want to remain within the fold of the family, culture and family’s wealth.

The government has no business in who you choose to play sports with nor who you choose to marry. That includs both the state and Federal government. It should protect kids from getting married and folks that do not consent in these matters , nothing more IMHO.

Of course the state should not intervene in sports nor should it in marriage. That is why it was wrong for states to ban blacks and whites from marrying just like it is wrong for them to ban gays from marrying

Some of us are more linear on that thought process than others. Originally Posted by WTF

Marriage is a civil and religious union that goes back to the dawn of time. It is a ritual, one of many other rituals, that the government allows tax benefits to the married, allows an atmosphere where transfer of assets is a non-taxable event, permits, records, maintains the records of and manages the disbursement of assets after the union is no longer viable therefore they have the right to DEFINE what marriage is.

btw gay marriage is not co-ed. Originally Posted by WTF

I was referring to the status of marriage as it is defined now. I really don’t care if gays marry, call it a civil union, don’t marry or any combination of the aforementioned. I just don’t care. It’s not, in my mind, something that needs to be in the forefront of a presidential election, and definitely when we are in the midst depression and on the verge of a currency collapse across the Pond.

The point I am making is that when you allow that to be redefined then it is subject to being redefined again and again to accommodate those that feel they are being discriminated against. The results are unintended consequences that we can no longer control once the precedent has been set. Originally Posted by boardman

You are defining the ravages of PC on our society. Personally, I don’t care if two gay people get married, but if you coach it in terms of PC vs society, as you have here, I’d have to come down on the side of civil unions and not marriage. Damnit! Why’d you make me think this early in the morning.?!?!?

You are defining the ravages of PC on our society. Personally, I don’t care if two gay people get married, but if you coach it in terms of PC vs society, as you have here, I’d have to come down on the side of civil unions and not marriage. Damnit! Why’d you make me think this early in the morning.?!?!? Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

+1
It really is a PC issue. Civil Unions suffice, but the LBGT community insists on effrontery. The next step would be suing Baptist, Catholic, etc., preachers/priests/etc., who refuse to conduct same sex services, for discrimination.

Somebody please do the research on the legal differences between civil unions and marriage. If thetr is no difference then there is no discrimination. If my memory serves me correctly there are huge benefit differences. Thus imho discrimination. No different than women not being able to vote Olivia, I gurss you would be ok with that seei.g how that is a govrrnment power. You women and blacks easily forget what it was like I suppose.

Hot damn brother bm, you can't take that out on the gays! You had a bad case of the bat shit crazy fucking cunt, biting your ass. You gotta be careful of those She Devils, they make shit up all the time to suit their fancy. I been going head to head with them for years, first in the old High Dorrar Hottie forum and later in D&T. They ever get a moderator dick in their mouth and you're toast!

So leave them poor limp wristed gays alone and let them marrying 'till they are as sick of it as us straights are!

You need any She Devil spooky dust, let me know! Originally Posted by WTF

I just saw thar bitch again today after two years or more. Chalk it up to Karma I guess. She's up to her same ole tricks and the kid who had a disfigurement and was actually a sweet kid a few years ago but was being used as her pawn has apparently learned how to play the game. Send spooky dust!

Olivia, I could be persuaded.

In civil unions can your civil union partner receive your social security benefits if you die like married folks? If not that sounds like discrimination to me. That is one question, I have plenty more. Off to play golf. I hope Torrey Pines , a city owned golf course does not let women play there. They keep the record of who plays there and should be able to define that women cant play with men. They have a shitty putt putt course to play so no bitching from da bitches. Afterall the country has more pressing matters!

Ultimately, it is about money as always.

So is it that the existing laws do not recognize civil unions for the purpose of beneficiaries? Why not be able to name your beneficiary like you dop with most everything else instead of having the government dictate who gets your benefits. You could have that as the default should you fail to elect your beneficence.
Is the current system just another form of government control over the individual. Was this program of Social Security not intended to be an INSURANCE program? How may private insurance programs dictate who you select as your beneficiary.

Why not make the existing laws right instead of creating a new one. The less laws we have the better. The more laws there are the more control the government has over each and every one of us. We need control over the government and from the shape our government is in, there doesnt seem to be much control.

Olivia, I could be persuaded. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

maybe you two can have a civil union. Sorta research how discriminatory that is as oppossed to marriage. Anybody google....civil union vs marriage yet? Tells u over 1000 ways how this seperate but equal crap some of you believe is a bald face lie.

Ultimately, it is about money as always.

So is it that the existing laws do not recognize civil unions for the purpose of beneficiaries? Why not be able to name your beneficiary like you dop with most everything else instead of having the government dictate who gets your benefits. You could have that as the default should you fail to elect your beneficence.
Is the current system just another form of government control over the individual. Was this program of Social Security not intended to be an INSURANCE program? How may private insurance programs dictate who you select as your beneficiary.

Why not make the existing laws right instead of creating a new one. The less laws we have the better. The more laws there are the more control the government has over each and every one of us. We need control over the government and from the shape our government is in, there doesnt seem to be much control. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Do what ever is needed to not discriminate. But quit discriminating against the gays and saying that wr aren't. Right now that is wtf some posters are doing. I feel that once people understand that they in fact are supporting discrimination, they will rethink their position.

WTF, once again, your truth is thruthie. The states have the right to define marriage and pass laws allowing civil unions. They do not, however, have the right to superced federal law. It is a FEDERAL (The Defense of Marriage Act passed in 1996) that prohibits same-sex couples from receiving federal MARRIAGE rights benefits. The way I read that is that even if a marriage, not just a civil union, was granted by the state of xyz, the feds would still deny the benefit.

Because it is a state’s right issue, some states may not view a same-sex civil union if a couple moves to a state that does not grant civil unions.

And it was a Democrat, Bill Clinton, not a Republican, that signed the Defense Marriage Act.

WTF, once again, your truth is thruthie. The states have the right to define marriage and pass laws allowing civil unions. They do not, however, have the right to superced federal law. It is a FEDERAL (The Defense of Marriage Act passed in 1996) that prohibits same-sex couples from receiving federal MARRIAGE rights benefits. The way I read that is that even if a marriage, not just a civil union, was granted by the state of xyz, the feds would still deny the benefit.

Because it is a state’s right issue, some states may not view a same-sex civil union if a couple moves to a state that does not grant civil unions.

And it was a Democrat, Bill Clinton, not a Republican, that signed the Defense Marriage Act. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

And you are deflecting. It is discrimination. If you are ok with that, then fine. I am looking at people that opppse gays now, not the history of their discrimination. Should states be able to deny women the right to vote or their right divorce. Would it be ok if states only allowed men the right to petition divorce?

I just saw thar bitch again today after two years or more. Chalk it up to Karma I guess. She's up to her same ole tricks and the kid who had a disfigurement and was actually a sweet kid a few years ago but was being used as her pawn has apparently learned how to play the game. Send spooky dust! Originally Posted by boardman

She devils should be hit upside the head with a 2x4 at least twice a day. Those man haters are the real problem with marriage, not gays!