dottedmint: Wow Bonnie...It would be so much better if this page wasn't used at all. Right???Or would it be better if only comments that you agreed with were posted?Personally I enjoy debating with "retard dolls" like detfrost1 who think things are so much better in Canada.
wildsnowllama: Does anyone have that cartoon that's a bar graph with President's sitting on their tax percentage, Eisenhower to Obama?
Schfanzst!: wtf is this shiat?
Soup4Bonnie: Here, let me Google that for you.
Saiga410: You may want to constrain the argument so that someone can converse against your postulate.
dottedmint: I was more interested in having Cleveland-Steamer explain why it is unconstitutional instead of doing a google search.So lets say that Iowa (sorry. had to pick a state) decides that it is legal for a man to marry his (adult) daughter. Should every other state in the US be required to recognize that "marriage" as legal? This is if you are arguing on the basis of the full faith and credit clause.The same question can be asked if you are arguing on the basis of the equal protection clause.IF it should be legal for two men to marry then should it also not be legal for a man to marry his brother?IF you cannot limit who can or cannot marry then basically ANYONE can marry ANYONE.If you are going to say that there should be "limits" on who can marry then there is nothing wrong with saying gays cannot marry.Right?
dottedmint: "Just like there was no compelling government purpose to criminalizing interracial marriage, similarly there is no compelling government purpose to defining marriage as between a man and a woman, and choosing your partner in marriage is a fundamental right."OK so if a man chooses to marry his brother that should be his "right"?
dottedmint: wyrlss "Are you concerned they might inbreed?"I don't think it is possible for a man and his BROTHER to reproduce.In any case I was told that people have a fundamental right to marry the person that they want. So I am simply trying to ask if that means a man can marry his brother or not. IF it is indeed a right then that would apply to everyone equally. Right?And if a man married his sister that does not mean they would automatically reproduce. So should they be able to marry?
dottedmint: Cleveland-Steamer "I see valid government reasons to ban incestuous marriage and polygamy,"Such as?"I don't see any valid government reason for banning gay marriage. Gay marriage is purely a moral/religious hangup. It's not the government's job to outlaw things that make you squeamish."Except for the fact that society does not want it? As I have pointed out before "bans" on gay marriage have passed by more than 2 to 1 in some states. In fact has gay marriage been passed by any legislature? It seems like in every state that allows gay marriage it has been made legal by judicial fiat not by the will of the people.IF my state bans gay marriage should it be forced to recognize gay marraige?
CtrlAltDelete: I'll just leave this here for you crazy cats.
Stinkyy: When will a topic be posted about Rep. Johnson's comments that under the weight of additional Marines, the island of Guam might capisize????This is Fark, and there's no greenlight on this yet?????
Stinkyy: Today's politics roll-up: Two from the Daily KOmmuniSt, lots of GOP hate, no Guam capsizing? Guess it's a non-story when Dems say something dumb. Since dems "never say anything dumb," you would think this would be newsworthy.
Soup4Bonnie: Raul Castro and Obama defy EU
dottedmint: So instead of society deciding you have a judge deciding what society must allow.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jun 28 2017 02:47:52
Runtime: 2.381 sec