Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Just when you think the GOP can't any more Derp to the gay marriage bonfire: "Gay couples cannot become accidentally pregnant and thus do not need access to marriage"   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 52
    More: Asinine, GOP, same-sex marriages, Loyola Law School, Paul Clement, friend of the courts, Oregon Ducks football, couples, same-sex couples  
•       •       •

2980 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Mar 2013 at 3:40 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-03-04 03:30:10 PM  
10 votes:
Sounds to me like he's arguing that straight couples need access to safe and affordable abortions.
2013-03-04 04:22:45 PM  
5 votes:

cman: Its a friggin contract, guys. You dont have to have the wedding in your damn church. Why does it matter to you when two people wish to enter into a contract deal?


That's not the point. The point is what marriage means to society: Marriage is the Great Legitimizer. Marriage turns that punk who's slipping it to your precious princess every night into your beloved son-in-law. Marriage is what turns that shameless whore who moved into your son's apartment into your lovely daughter-in-law. Marriage is what keeps your unplanned grandchildren from being bastards. Marriage is society saying that this relationship is valid and a good thing.

That is the point. That is what they are fighting against.
2013-03-04 03:25:58 PM  
5 votes:
This is how stupid you sound when you attempt to defend the indefensible.
2013-03-04 04:47:21 PM  
4 votes:
andremvale.files.wordpress.com
2013-03-04 03:57:06 PM  
4 votes:

kid_icarus: I'm always a little confused on how their arguments against gay marriage invoke the "children" angle so much. Since when has bearing children ever factored into legal marriage for  anyone?I have a female friend who lost her ability to bear children when she was very young. Should she similarly be banned from marrying?


The best part about people making these arguments is that there's usually a "We need more white babies" utterance just underneath the surface, lying in wait. Say the right key words and you'll get it.
2013-03-04 03:48:34 PM  
4 votes:
Hey Republicans!

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

We don't care that your God supposedly hates gays.
2013-03-04 03:34:23 PM  
4 votes:
Yes Yes Yes! Couples who are unable to have children, whether biologically or old should not be allowed to marry. They cannot form stable family units or naturally produce offspring.

"Only a man and a woman can beget a child together without advance planning, which means that opposite-sex couples have a unique tendency to produce unplanned and unintended offspring,"

"...the state's interest in responsible procreation and childrearing.


Doesn't sound like very responsible procreation to me
2013-03-04 03:33:46 PM  
4 votes:

Eddie Adams from Torrance: Sounds to me like he's arguing that straight couples need access to safe and affordable abortions.


It sounds like he's saying divorce should be illegal for couples with children.
2013-03-04 05:52:35 PM  
3 votes:
Can someone please explain to me why the GOP gives a shiat about this?

The only difference I see between gay and straight marriage are:

1) the adjective describing the marriage
2) 2 penises/vaginas as opposed to 1 of each.

That's it. They work hard, they pay taxes, they are American citizens, they should be given equal protection under the law. Equal EVERYTHING, for that matter.

As far as any societal impact goes, nobody who has intelligence cares what gays do behind closed doors. It is none of your God damned business. Stop being an asshole.
2013-03-04 04:41:34 PM  
3 votes:
Reposted for relevance...

Top Ten Reasons to Make Gay Marriage Illegal

01) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.

02) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.

03) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.

04) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all like many of the principles on which this great country was founded; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.

05) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of marriages like Britney Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.

06) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.

07) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.

08) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.

09) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.

10) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
2013-03-04 03:55:36 PM  
3 votes:
Cordy argued that providing the benefit of legally recognized marriage coaxes straight couples into forming stable family relationships when they have children, which helps society as a whole.

So when the First Lady encourages young children to exercise more and eat healthier, that's unreasonable nanny-state interference into parenting, but apparently it's completely reasonable to adopt laws denying rights to one group in order to coax another group to do the right thing.

The twisted logic of right wingers never ceases to amaze.
2013-03-04 03:50:33 PM  
3 votes:
This again?

"So what about straight infertile couples?" is always the next question, to which the fundie will state that that is different, because they aren't gay.
2013-03-04 03:47:46 PM  
3 votes:
Uh, don't good little Christians not have sex before marriage? Accidental pregnancy that results in a couple having to get married shouldn't even be an issue.
2013-03-04 03:47:14 PM  
3 votes:

serial_crusher: Y'all know my position on this is that the government shouldn't recognize anybody's marriage,


But amazingly people like you only seem to bring this up when it's about gays marrying. What a surprise.

Hey I got an idea how about YOU not marry anyone and stop wanting to force everyone else to live by your rules?
2013-03-04 03:45:01 PM  
3 votes:
Surprise preggered, the only reason a devout Christian Republican ever gets married.
2013-03-04 03:14:51 PM  
3 votes:
So the purpose of marriage is to be forced to spend a lifetime with someone just because you accidentally a whole babby?
2013-03-04 05:10:38 PM  
2 votes:
Because the only reason to get married is because you got a gal accidentally pregnant?

That says a damn lot about the folks who put this particular line of thought together...
2013-03-04 05:10:33 PM  
2 votes:

coeyagi: No I misread it.  Mea culpa.  I guess that's what happens when a Farker supports the party of Rape, Homophobia, and Theofascism, I kinda got assume that it's a package deal since there is so much wrong in the GOP I can only assume that you support all of it because so many planks of their platform by themselves should be enough to drive sane people away.


He's mentioned before that the only reason why he's no longer a homophobe is because his sister came out. You know, "The only moral abortion is my abortion" syndrome. So, yeah, you're not exactly wrong. :P
2013-03-04 04:04:58 PM  
2 votes:
The great thing about this particular pile of dogshiat is that it's both homophobic and misogynistic ("Women exist only as breeding stock"). It's like a drunk driver trying to talk himself out of killing family of three by saying "But I had to drive twice the speed limit to get away from that liquor store I just robbed" - you're just making yourself look worse, asshole.
2013-03-04 03:43:41 PM  
2 votes:
There is nothing wrong with being gay.  Get over it.
2013-03-04 03:43:19 PM  
2 votes:
so marry your rapist!
2013-03-04 03:42:37 PM  
2 votes:
My reaction now almost every time a member of the GOP speaks:
img.photobucket.com
2013-03-04 03:27:32 PM  
2 votes:
WE GOT NUTHIN' !
2013-03-04 03:17:24 PM  
2 votes:
I'm sure that makes their children feel so good about themselves.
2013-03-05 06:14:20 AM  
1 votes:
My 13 year daughter goes to a Christian private school here in Wisconsin.  She wrote a letter to Tammy Baldwin because her class was assigned to write letters to local politicians.  She wrote to Tammy about gay marriage.  Before I read the letter, I was upset because the way she explained it to me sounded like the school was actively trying to change her mind about gay marriage.  In our household, we have made it clear that gay marriage is as acceptable as heterosexual marriage.  She gave me the letter that she wrote to Sen. Baldwin.  In the letter she discussed how she was the only Democrat in her class and that her friends were all Republicans. My daughter also expressed to Sen. Baldwin that it wasn't easy being the lone voice in the room in favor of gay marriage, but that she was proud to do it because she believes that it is the right thing to do.  I was so proud of my daughter.
2013-03-04 08:29:16 PM  
1 votes:

xria: If marriage is religious, shouldn't government get out of it and let each religion decide who they will and won't marry for themselves?


You are conflating the legal institution of marriage with the ceremony of a wedding. Religious groups already get to decide who they hold weddings for.
2013-03-04 08:11:36 PM  
1 votes:
Lets kick this up a notch.  Since breeding is mandatory, no more child tax credits(and no more upping of welfare either).  Close that tax loophole and the entitlement.  We have a cut in spending and increase revenue.  Less debt!  Both parties are happy.  Its win/win.
2013-03-04 07:30:25 PM  
1 votes:

shotglasss: There is no law preventing homosexuals from getting married. All a gay man has to do is find a woman to marry. Lesbians can do the same. David Crosby is ready and standing by with a 55 gallon drum of jerk sauce to help out any way he can.


i.imgur.com
2013-03-04 06:09:15 PM  
1 votes:

Lord_Baull: mainstreet62: Can someone please explain to me why the GOP gives a shiat about this?


For the same reasons they gave a shiat about interracial marriage in the 50's. They haven't matured yet.


4.bp.blogspot.com
2013-03-04 06:06:49 PM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: coeyagi: cman: Its a friggin contract, guys. You dont have to have the wedding in your damn church. Why does it matter to you when two people wish to enter into a contract deal?

You know that by getting said contract, which they can't in most states, they can get benefits that you can get?  It's almost like you think they're lesser people.

Why do you hate them, bigot?

See, this is the cognitive dissonance I love in gay marriage threads.
Denying the marriage license based on sexual orientation makes you a bigot because of the perks associated with it, but denying the perks based on lack of a marriage certificate is acceptable.
Equality for me, fark everybody else.


Let me guess, you're one of those people bitter that married people get perks that you, as a single person, don't get. Sorry, but your argument is fatally flawed for one specific reason - you aren't being legally prevented from entering into marriage. (Assuming you're straight.) It is an option for you, one that you can exercise at any time. If you choose not to exercise it, then that's also your choice. While you may not get the perks you get from marriage, you are also not on the hook for the responsibilities. I fail to see anything wrong with that.

Look at it this way. Right now I'm playing the Bioware Star Wars MMO. It's pretty good, and right now I'm a free-to-play player. There are a lot of perks that I just don't get. Now, I could whine and complain that I don't get the same perks as the players who subscribe and pay the monthly fee, but nothing is stopping me from doing that myself. If I was denied the ability to upgrade, I'd be upset. But if I choose not to pay the premium, I shouldn't expect to get all the cool perks. This isn't an unfair system, it's how it works.

So no, you don't get to feel all oppressed because you don't get married perks as a single person. If you want married perks, get married. They are for married people, and nothing is stopping you from being one of them.
2013-03-04 05:43:24 PM  
1 votes:
i258.photobucket.com
2013-03-04 05:31:33 PM  
1 votes:

alienated: In other news, SE Cupp has pulled out of cpac

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/se-cupp-on-cpac-gay-right_n _2 806373.html  . So, not all of the gop are completely clueless


The existence of gay Republicans never ceases to amaze me.

It's not bad enough that you're aligning yourself with a group that's been working for decades to deny you your civil rights, but the reason that most give "I'm a fiscal conservative" is completely removed from anything that even resembles Republican policy since Eisenhower.
2013-03-04 05:18:38 PM  
1 votes:
I would be fine with stripping back marriage privileges to only couples supporting dependent children, actually.

But yeah, so long as shiat like visitation rights, property sharing, tax bracketing, and so on are tied to the institution this argument doesn't really hold up.
2013-03-04 05:01:34 PM  
1 votes:

alienated: In other news, SE Cupp has pulled out of cpac

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/se-cupp-on-cpac-gay-right_n _2 806373.html  . So, not all of the gop are completely clueless


Please be because she's had some sapphic porn leaked, please be because she's had some sapphic porn leaked...
2013-03-04 04:32:18 PM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: I'm not really the jealous type.


Horseshiat. You bring it up in every one of these threads.
2013-03-04 04:31:33 PM  
1 votes:
 FTFA: The opponents to gay marriage also argue it's possible the public perception of marriage would change if gay couples were allowed to wed, discouraging straight people from marrying.

This is the REAL problem. There's no way men are going to marry those annoying women with their gross vaginas and weird boobs if they have the option of marrying another dude and getting the sweet, sweet man-on-man action! I mean, I'm not even a closet homosexual or anything, and it's completely obvious to me!
2013-03-04 04:25:53 PM  
1 votes:

serial_crusher: Lord_Baull: serial_crusher: Fluorescent Testicle: The great thing about this particular pile of dogshiat is that it's both homophobic and misogynistic ("Women exist only as breeding stock").

huh?
It's also racist ("black people are less intelligent than white people").
Hey, I like how that works.  Just put whatever ridiculous statement you want in parenthesis and quotes, and it's just like TFA actually said it!


If you study it out, you'll grasp the notion that a couple would/should only get married for procreation is what's being argued here.

I'll agree to that statement, but you've still got a pretty big inferential leap between that and women as breeding stock.  Unless you're also concluding that men are nothing but sperm donors.

The claim is that there's no reason to get married other than to produce kids.  So, does that infer that being unmarried (and therefore not having children) is a problem?  Even if it does, where does that problem only apply to one gender and not both?


Strictly speaking that would be true. But given the context (Republicans) I can see how he got there.
2013-03-04 04:20:36 PM  
1 votes:

Corvus: serial_crusher: Y'all know my position on this is that the government shouldn't recognize anybody's marriage,

But amazingly people like you only seem to bring this up when it's about gays marrying. What a surprise.

Hey I got an idea how about YOU not marry anyone and stop wanting to force everyone else to live by your rules?


Because by not being married, we are still being discriminated against.  Some of us, gay or straight, don't have a state approved sex partner, some have more than one partner, some are trying out different partners trying to find the right one...  And some of us, when we fill out our required government documents, do not want to check single, or married, but "none of your damn business".
2013-03-04 04:09:52 PM  
1 votes:

12349876: Close2TheEdge: Cordy argued that providing the benefit of legally recognized marriage coaxes straight couples into forming stable family relationships when they have children, which helps society as a whole.

My editing shows what the conservative mantra should be: pro gay marriage to discourage promiscuity.  Assuming you're not letting a 2000 year old book get in your way.


Assuming that you aren't beholden to a 2000-year old book, then the State has NO compelling interest in marriage whatsoever. If you truly want to be a conservative, then the Government has no business deciding what constitutes a marriage.  All committed relationships, gay and straight, should be defined as civil unions under the law.  Marriage is the religious institution that binds the union spiritually.  Go find the church of your choice and let them marry you.  And if the church of your choice doesn't approve, go find one that does.
2013-03-04 04:07:55 PM  
1 votes:
And as an aside, wth is with this being tagged Oregon Ducks Football?

i457.photobucket.com
2013-03-04 04:05:04 PM  
1 votes:
So, by this "logic" the elderly, infertile, or those who just don't want to have kids shouldn't be allowed to marry. Actually, scratch that last one because I'm sure they'd agree. Clearly, the solution is mandatory fertility tests as a prerequisite to marriage with periodic check ups. If no children are produced within the allotted time frame, the marriage will be annulled.

Sadly, there are people who would take what I just said to be a great idea rather than hyperbole.
2013-03-04 04:02:22 PM  
1 votes:

kid_icarus: I'm always a little confused on how their arguments against gay marriage invoke the "children" angle so much. Since when has bearing children ever factored into legal marriage for  anyone?I have a female friend who lost her ability to bear children when she was very young. Should she similarly be banned from marrying?


GOP: That's sad. Why do you hate straight people who are unable to bear children? She can still adopt.

/facepalm
2013-03-04 03:57:05 PM  
1 votes:

HotWingConspiracy: This again?

"So what about straight infertile couples?" is always the next question, to which the fundie will state that that is different, because they aren't gay.


Any same-sex marriage opponent who relies upon an argument based upon the concept of child raising should advocate a civil marriage system that provides benefits only upon demonstration of pregnancy or application for adoption and that terminates a set time after a child is no longer a dependent of the parents. That absolutely none do suggests that such argumentation is not being presented honestly.
2013-03-04 03:56:51 PM  
1 votes:

thismomentinblackhistory: The remarks from the Yahoo! commentariat would have been totally different even 3-5 years ago. Amazing.


Actually it's usually pretty terrible. This is a pleasant surprise that the first 5 top comments arent "DURR GAYS SUCK AND ARE GOING TO HELL!" I've had fun in Yahoo comments shooting down people's dumbass reasons for hating gays, and 99% of the time it devolves to "Hurr scottydoesntknow is gay because he's defending gays!" And I just laugh.
2013-03-04 03:56:29 PM  
1 votes:
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
2013-03-04 03:53:39 PM  
1 votes:
So because homosexuals can not have children w/o someone interfering with the way god has arranged things, it means that gays can't marry. That's just *so* smart and original. I bet no one has tried that line of argument before becuase otherwise we would have closed this debate by now...

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.
-Leon Bazil, Judge (Loving v. Virigina)
2013-03-04 03:53:28 PM  
1 votes:
Clement added in his brief to the Supreme Court arguing to uphold that law that the government has a legitimate interest in solely recognizing marriages between men and women because it encourages them to form stable family units.

Perhaps he should explain why recognizing marriages between same sex couples would DIScourge men and women from forming stable family units?
2013-03-04 03:51:38 PM  
1 votes:
So let's mandate fertility tests once a year, and those who fail don't get to marry or if already married are forced to divorce if they don't have biological minor children.

/just taking this derp to its logical conclusion
2013-03-04 03:50:51 PM  
1 votes:

LarryDan43: Surprise preggered, the only reason a devout Christian Republican ever gets married.



F'in this. Worked for Levi and Bristol. Oh wait...
2013-03-04 03:48:52 PM  
1 votes:
Its a friggin contract, guys. You dont have to have the wedding in your damn church. Why does it matter to you when two people wish to enter into a contract deal?
2013-03-04 03:35:46 PM  
1 votes:
#9 is the WINNAR!!!

Well done, Eddie Adams... well done!
2013-03-04 03:23:07 PM  
1 votes:
I hope that lawyer is getting paid handsomely for his big bucket of I-got-nothin'.
 
Displayed 52 of 52 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report