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.

(Washington Post)   Scalia's worst nightmare realized: Supreme Court ruling striking down DOMA immediately results in influx of bears into DC seeking federal benefts   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 88
    More: Sappy, DOMA, supreme court ruling, MacArthur, National Zoo, search teams, d.c. police, sliding glass doors  
•       •       •

8517 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jun 2013 at 2:45 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



88 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-06-26 02:02:34 PM  
Bear trifecta in play?
 
2013-06-26 02:15:05 PM  
Bear Thread!

upload.wikimedia.org

bbsimg.ngfiles.com

www.cutewithchris.com

www.jacobzflores.com
Bear thread!
 
2013-06-26 02:21:49 PM  
Stephen Colbert was right!
 
2013-06-26 02:23:56 PM  
24.media.tumblr.com

www.projectqatlanta.com

bearmythology.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-06-26 02:31:56 PM  
i249.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-26 02:43:29 PM  
This means Tom of Finland is President!
 
2013-06-26 02:56:41 PM  
Yeah subby, except that he's an ultra conservative, which means that it's less of a nightmare and more of a shame filled fantasy. Scalia is going to be walking around town with a micro chubby - not that anyone will notice.
 
2013-06-26 02:57:06 PM  
I was bit once by a migrating San Francisco bear. At first I felt bad but now I feel fabulous!
 
2013-06-26 02:57:50 PM  
Scalia's not above packing his canolis into the back seat.
 
2013-06-26 02:59:47 PM  

Ego edo infantia cattus: Yeah subby, except that he's an ultra conservative, which means that it's less of a nightmare and more of a shame filled fantasy. Scalia is going to be walking around town with a micro chubby - not that anyone will notice.


I always wonder if people realize how homophobic they sound when they say stuff like this.
 
2013-06-26 03:00:47 PM  
So, the authorities say a young black bear is "very harmless". How... authoritative.
 
2013-06-26 03:00:48 PM  
No love for Otters?
 
2013-06-26 03:01:15 PM  
This is, of course, the same ultra-liberal Scalia who killed California's Prop 8.
 
2013-06-26 03:05:57 PM  
I LOL'd so hard!
 
2013-06-26 03:07:11 PM  

meanmutton: Ego edo infantia cattus: Yeah subby, except that he's an ultra conservative, which means that it's less of a nightmare and more of a shame filled fantasy. Scalia is going to be walking around town with a micro chubby - not that anyone will notice.

I always wonder if people realize how homophobic they sound when they say stuff like this.


I also wonder if the authors of such fantasies realize the peak inside their own minds they offer.
 
2013-06-26 03:09:24 PM  
No one yet?  300bps.org
 
2013-06-26 03:09:46 PM  
Funny stuff above.  So what's wrong with Polygomy now?
 
2013-06-26 03:09:48 PM  

meanmutton: Ego edo infantia cattus: Yeah subby, except that he's an ultra conservative, which means that it's less of a nightmare and more of a shame filled fantasy. Scalia is going to be walking around town with a micro chubby - not that anyone will notice.

I always wonder if people realize how homophobic they sound when they say stuff like this.


I don't think it's homophobic to imply that all ultra conservatives are closeted homosexuals as much as it's really stupid and old to imply that.
 
2013-06-26 03:10:16 PM  
I see what you did there
 
2013-06-26 03:10:24 PM  

knbwhite: Funny stuff above.  So what's wrong with Polygomy now?


because 1 gomy is a enough
 
2013-06-26 03:10:34 PM  

Cythraul: Bear Thread!

[upload.wikimedia.org image 450x660]

[bbsimg.ngfiles.com image 591x700]

[www.cutewithchris.com image 480x319]

[www.jacobzflores.com image 300x300]
Bear thread!


Now I know how guys feel about lesbians.
 
2013-06-26 03:12:59 PM  
So when do we start the beastiality marriage rights movement?

I demand equality for my Human-Turtle relationship brethren!

/this is what conservatives actually believe will happen.
 
2013-06-26 03:13:48 PM  
I think we can see this as an ursine of progress.
 
2013-06-26 03:15:30 PM  
simpsonswiki.net
 
2013-06-26 03:16:05 PM  
don't they pretty much still pretty much keep to Dupont Circle?
 
2013-06-26 03:16:39 PM  
www.coverbrowser.com
It was inevitable.
 
2013-06-26 03:18:53 PM  
DOMA confirmed to be completely struck down.
 
2013-06-26 03:19:37 PM  
img.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-26 03:20:15 PM  
Great things come in bears...
breakingkayfabe.files.wordpress.com


 
2013-06-26 03:21:45 PM  

vernonFL: This means Tom of Finland is President!


I can get behind that.
 
2013-06-26 03:22:20 PM  

skullkrusher: I don't think it's homophobic to imply that all ultra conservatives are closeted homosexuals as much as it's really stupid and old to imply that.


Ultra conservatives are largely stupid and old, too, so it fits.

/in their butts! LOL
 
2013-06-26 03:31:26 PM  

Dahnkster: Great things come in bears...
[breakingkayfabe.files.wordpress.com image 600x1408]


Oh no. That's can't be real. Can it?
 
2013-06-26 03:33:31 PM  

FARK rebel soldier: Dahnkster: Great things come in bears...
[breakingkayfabe.files.wordpress.com image 600x1408]

Oh no. That's can't be real. Can it?


Yeah.  That was a real poster.  The mind wobbles.
 
2013-06-26 03:35:07 PM  

meanmutton: I always wonder if people realize how homophobic they sound when they say stuff like this.


I've always just assumed they don't, at which point I just sigh and move on.
 
2013-06-26 03:35:23 PM  

FARK rebel soldier: Dahnkster: Great things come in bears...
[breakingkayfabe.files.wordpress.com image 600x1408]

Oh no. That's can't be real. Can it?


Yeah, that had a Fark thread a few years ago - it was real.
 
2013-06-26 03:35:28 PM  
s3-ec.buzzfed.com
 
2013-06-26 03:36:25 PM  
www.geekosystem.com
 
2013-06-26 03:36:38 PM  
Scalia thinks corporations deserve personhood and all the rights (but none of theresponsibilities) that come with it, but teh gays shouldn't marry.
 
2013-06-26 03:41:17 PM  
All right, Farkers, I think this is as good a thread as any to bust this out. I found this pic a while back, and am quite sure it would make a good advice animal, but my brain cannot produce the funnies like that. So I'll just leave this here. (Actually, it has been languishing with the filename "worst advice animal".)

i215.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-26 03:46:47 PM  

hardinparamedic: So when do we start the beastiality marriage rights movement?

I demand equality for my Human-Turtle relationship brethren!

/this is what conservatives actually believe will happen.


It is sad the number of people who have used that argument as to why same-sex marriage should be illegal.  I hope that no one could be so stupid as to actually believe that the legalization of same-sex marriage will lead to the legalization of inter species marriages. But after some of the replies such people give to other topics (such as evolution, and the crocoduck is a perfect example!) I do not have high hopes on that.  So, I just give this reply to those morans, "As soon as animals evolve and develop the intelligence of humans and can legally consent to marriage you will have that right.  Until then stop farking your dog.  Your god can see what you do in your garage."
 
2013-06-26 03:53:50 PM  

poot_rootbeer: skullkrusher: I don't think it's homophobic to imply that all ultra conservatives are closeted homosexuals as much as it's really stupid and old to imply that.

Ultra conservatives are largely stupid and old, too, so it fits.

/in their butts! LOL


hehe
 
2013-06-26 03:54:03 PM  

Shrapnel: All right, Farkers, I think this is as good a thread as any to bust this out. I found this pic a while back, and am quite sure it would make a good advice animal, but my brain cannot produce the funnies like that. So I'll just leave this here. (Actually, it has been languishing with the filename "worst advice animal".)

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]


Uh. You trying to get the mods to ban you for posting porn?
 
2013-06-26 03:54:58 PM  

Mock26: It is sad the number of people who have used that argument as to why same-sex marriage should be illegal. I hope that no one could be so stupid as to actually believe that the legalization of same-sex marriage will lead to the legalization of inter species marriages. But after some of the replies such people give to other topics (such as evolution, and the crocoduck is a perfect example!) I do not have high hopes on that. So, I just give this reply to those morans, "As soon as animals evolve and develop the intelligence of humans and can legally consent to marriage you will have that right. Until then stop farking your dog. Your god can see what you do in your garage."


It's a slippery slope argument, taken to a pretty ridiculous length.  Although the polygamy thing has a bit of merit.  My problem with polygamy is that it has a pretty poor record in terms of it being a consenting union between people.  The FLDS does a pretty solid job of treating girls like marriage objects and brainwashing them from birth.  However if several truly free, competant and equal people decided to marry, I'm not sure how I could reasonably object while maintaining my "who you marry is none of my business" stance that makes me approve of gay marriage.

It bothers me.
 
2013-06-26 03:56:26 PM  

hardinparamedic: Uh. You trying to get the mods to ban you for posting porn?


Does that count as pron?  No naughty bits are showing.
 
2013-06-26 03:57:57 PM  
Sorry, wrong species.
 
2013-06-26 03:58:48 PM  
OhpleasenotTHATbearpicture
OhpleasenotTHATbearpicture
OhpleasenotTHATbearpicture
OhpleasenotTHATbearpicture
OhpleasenotTHATbearpicture

*whew*

/you know the one
 
2013-06-26 03:59:04 PM  

Aidan: Cythraul: Bear Thread!

[upload.wikimedia.org image 450x660]

[bbsimg.ngfiles.com image 591x700]

[www.cutewithchris.com image 480x319]

[www.jacobzflores.com image 300x300]
Bear thread!

Now I know how guys feel about lesbians.


that's cute and all....but you don't really
 
2013-06-26 04:03:29 PM  

fireclown: hardinparamedic: Uh. You trying to get the mods to ban you for posting porn?

Does that count as pron?  No naughty bits are showing.


I've always erred on caution. I got a 24 hour time out for posting a skeleton as Andrew Breitbart.
 
2013-06-26 04:09:44 PM  

Shrapnel: All right, Farkers, I think this is as good a thread as any to bust this out. I found this pic a while back, and am quite sure it would make a good advice animal, but my brain cannot produce the funnies like that. So I'll just leave this here. (Actually, it has been languishing with the filename "worst advice animal".)

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]


What language is this?  I understand the words, but I do not understand the sentences.
 
2013-06-26 04:11:59 PM  
late to the game...
now this is a peaceful way to the right to bear arms

/have fun, you crazy bears
 
2013-06-26 04:14:15 PM  

tamsnod27: Aidan: Cythraul: Bear Thread!

[upload.wikimedia.org image 450x660]

[bbsimg.ngfiles.com image 591x700]

[www.cutewithchris.com image 480x319]

[www.jacobzflores.com image 300x300]
Bear thread!

Now I know how guys feel about lesbians.

that's cute and all....but you don't really


Eh, I know. I lack the hormones to allow me to compartmentalize some folks as bangable but not dateable. :P But still, I did get this weird kind of whiplash from looking at those pictures. Like holding a set of allen wrenches and standing in front of a car thinking "Okay somehow this works for someone, but..."
 
2013-06-26 04:17:00 PM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: Shrapnel: All right, Farkers, I think this is as good a thread as any to bust this out. I found this pic a while back, and am quite sure it would make a good advice animal, but my brain cannot produce the funnies like that. So I'll just leave this here. (Actually, it has been languishing with the filename "worst advice animal".)

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]

What language is this?  I understand the words, but I do not understand the sentences.


500memes.com

i215.photobucket.com

Make sense now to you now?

/Me neither
 
2013-06-26 04:17:29 PM  

No Time To Explain: late to the game...
now this is a peaceful way to the right to bear arms

/have fun, you crazy bears


Personally, with the way people are in the United States, I think every homosexual individual, transgendered individual, and anyone who is of "alternate sexuality" - like pansexuality or bisexuality, should be the ones attending concealed carry permit classes in mass.
 
2013-06-26 04:18:29 PM  

bennett311: No love for Otters?


25.media.tumblr.com

www.jimbo.info

farm7.static.flickr.com

Hot, just like the links

/fap
 
2013-06-26 04:18:49 PM  

hardinparamedic: So when do we start the beastiality marriage rights movement?

I demand equality for my Human-Turtle relationship brethren!

/this is what conservatives actually believe will happen.


Well, we already have furries. It's pretty much the same thing.
 
2013-06-26 04:23:48 PM  
This thread needs more Mark Sanchez' naked butt.

Yer welcome, wimmins and gays

NSFW

http://deadspin.com/mark-sanchez-looks-like-he-had-a-grand-old-time- la st-ni-573703698
 
2013-06-26 04:24:19 PM  

Richard C Stanford: Well, we already have furries. It's pretty much the same thing.


Point of order: Scalies, not furries. Scalies.
 
2013-06-26 04:33:04 PM  

Parthenogenetic: The All-Powerful Atheismo: Shrapnel: All right, Farkers, I think this is as good a thread as any to bust this out. I found this pic a while back, and am quite sure it would make a good advice animal, but my brain cannot produce the funnies like that. So I'll just leave this here. (Actually, it has been languishing with the filename "worst advice animal".)

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]

What language is this?  I understand the words, but I do not understand the sentences.

[500memes.com image 407x405]

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]

Make sense now to you now?

/Me neither


Why would you do that?
 
2013-06-26 04:35:30 PM  

LoneWolf343: Why would you do that?


Do what?

i215.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-26 04:42:39 PM  
Yummy BEARS.
 
2013-06-26 04:42:48 PM  

Shrapnel: quite sure it would make a good advice animal



0-media-cdn.foolz.us
 
2013-06-26 04:49:28 PM  

Aidan: tamsnod27: Aidan: Cythraul: Bear Thread!

[upload.wikimedia.org image 450x660]

[bbsimg.ngfiles.com image 591x700]

[www.cutewithchris.com image 480x319]

[www.jacobzflores.com image 300x300]
Bear thread!

Now I know how guys feel about lesbians.

that's cute and all....but you don't really

Eh, I know. I lack the hormones to allow me to compartmentalize some folks as bangable but not dateable. :P But still, I did get this weird kind of whiplash from looking at those pictures. Like holding a set of allen wrenches and standing in front of a car thinking "Okay somehow this works for someone, but..."


Yeah, my wife works with several lesbian couples (nursing) and one of the other husbands was torn UP for saying some of the things we all were thinking, so I will not make that mistake, out loud at least...
 
2013-06-26 05:27:04 PM  
Finocchio eating bears?

www.simplyrecipes.com
 
2013-06-26 05:27:37 PM  

The All-Powerful Atheismo: LoneWolf343: Why would you do that?

Do what?

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]


For some reason the phrase "contact dermatitis" just sprang to mind.
 
2013-06-26 05:36:04 PM  

fireclown: Mock26: It is sad the number of people who have used that argument as to why same-sex marriage should be illegal. I hope that no one could be so stupid as to actually believe that the legalization of same-sex marriage will lead to the legalization of inter species marriages. But after some of the replies such people give to other topics (such as evolution, and the crocoduck is a perfect example!) I do not have high hopes on that. So, I just give this reply to those morans, "As soon as animals evolve and develop the intelligence of humans and can legally consent to marriage you will have that right. Until then stop farking your dog. Your god can see what you do in your garage."

It's a slippery slope argument, taken to a pretty ridiculous length.  Although the polygamy thing has a bit of merit.  My problem with polygamy is that it has a pretty poor record in terms of it being a consenting union between people.  The FLDS does a pretty solid job of treating girls like marriage objects and brainwashing them from birth.  However if several truly free, competant and equal people decided to marry, I'm not sure how I could reasonably object while maintaining my "who you marry is none of my business" stance that makes me approve of gay marriage.

It bothers me.


Marriage is a very tidy way of defining a legal relationship between two people. When you start in with inheritance, power of attorney and whatnot, adding more people gets very, very messy. Add into that the power inequalities that have been inherent in just about any setting where polygamy has been practiced... It's nowhere near the same as gay marriage, polygamous marriage would demand radical alterations in how those rights inherent to marriage are structured. Gay marriage doesn't demand any changes except for changing where and how gender is indicated on a few forms- inheritance rights and whatnot are still going to be structured the same way.
 
2013-06-26 05:37:45 PM  

skullkrusher: meanmutton: Ego edo infantia cattus: Yeah subby, except that he's an ultra conservative, which means that it's less of a nightmare and more of a shame filled fantasy. Scalia is going to be walking around town with a micro chubby - not that anyone will notice.

I always wonder if people realize how homophobic they sound when they say stuff like this.

I don't think it's homophobic to imply that all ultra conservatives are closeted homosexuals as much as it's really stupid and old to imply that.


Well, I'm glad someone got that it was a joke. As for being old and stupid, I tried to spruce it up with micro-penis bit, but guess it didn't help.
 
2013-06-26 05:51:04 PM  

Shrapnel: All right, Farkers, I think this is as good a thread as any to bust this out. I found this pic a while back, and am quite sure it would make a good advice animal, but my brain cannot produce the funnies like that. So I'll just leave this here. (Actually, it has been languishing with the filename "worst advice animal".)

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]



Yeah.. thanks for that.
 
2013-06-26 05:54:16 PM  

Ego edo infantia cattus: Yeah subby, except that he's an ultra conservative, which means that it's less of a nightmare and more of a shame filled fantasy. Scalia is going to be walking around town with a micro chubby - not that anyone will notice.


Scalia was the dissenter who struck down the act.  Today he deserves a little respect.

Not much.But a little.
 
2013-06-26 05:58:36 PM  
This seems germane to the discussion. Well, not really. I just really like this video and wanted to share it.Homophobes should not watch! You will be outraged at the deprivations of these perverts.
 
2013-06-26 06:09:09 PM  

Lady Beryl Ersatz-Wendigo: For some reason the phrase "contact dermatitis" just sprang to mind.


For some reason the odor "vinegar and parmesan cheese" just sprang to mind.
 
2013-06-26 06:15:32 PM  
dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-06-26 06:30:51 PM  

bennett311: No love for Otters?


dl.dropboxusercontent.com
 
2013-06-26 06:43:51 PM  
... but also realized his greatest dream of being able to strike down critical civil rights legislation, and have it be forgotten only a few days later.
 
2013-06-26 07:01:05 PM  
Well-played subby, well played.
 
2013-06-26 07:28:37 PM  
Maybe polar bears should be worried too. Here are ten ways traditional marriage is affected by the repeal.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/26/10-ways-doma-repeal-affects -m arriage_n_3503775.html?ref=topbar
 
2013-06-26 07:36:46 PM  

Cythraul: Bear Thread!

[upload.wikimedia.org image 450x660]

[bbsimg.ngfiles.com image 591x700]

[www.cutewithchris.com image 480x319]

[www.jacobzflores.com image 300x300]
Bear thread!


I have a sudden urge to be in my bunk....
 
2013-06-26 07:45:25 PM  

Aidan: Cythraul: Bear Thread!

[upload.wikimedia.org image 450x660]

[bbsimg.ngfiles.com image 591x700]

[www.cutewithchris.com image 480x319]

[www.jacobzflores.com image 300x300]
Bear thread!

Now I know how guys feel about lesbians.


Hey, if I slather myself with honey, do you think one of them might turn bisexual for an hour or two?
 
2013-06-26 07:47:01 PM  

Shrapnel: All right, Farkers, I think this is as good a thread as any to bust this out. I found this pic a while back, and am quite sure it would make a good advice animal, but my brain cannot produce the funnies like that. So I'll just leave this here. (Actually, it has been languishing with the filename "worst advice animal".)

[i215.photobucket.com image 467x317]


It's not really advice animal, but I'm pretty sure that one should be captioned "At least he died happy."
 
2013-06-26 07:49:36 PM  

Mock26: It is sad the number of people who have used that argument as to why same-sex marriage should be illegal.  I hope that no one could be so stupid as to actually believe that the legalization of same-sex marriage will lead to the legalization of inter species marriages. But after some of the replies such people give to other topics (such as evolution, and the crocoduck is a perfect example!) I do not have high hopes on that.  So, I just give this reply to those morans, "As soon as animals evolve and develop the intelligence of humans and can legally consent to marriage you will have that right.  Until then stop farking your dog.  Your god can see what you do in your garage."

www.elevenwarriors.com

It IS God.
 
2013-06-26 08:18:23 PM  

knbwhite: Funny stuff above.  So what's wrong with Polygomy now?


Nothing. Same as yesterday.
 
2013-06-26 08:52:06 PM  
In case you were wondering:

s22.postimg.org
 
2013-06-26 08:56:18 PM  

fireclown: My problem with polygamy is that it has a pretty poor record in terms of it being a consenting union between people.


Of course, that's true of monogamous hetero relationships, too.  Why do you think the concept of church and state approval of private relationships was considered so important?
 
2013-06-26 09:58:09 PM  

Macular Degenerate: In case you were wondering:

[s22.postimg.org image 525x288]


I consider both of them 'bears.' I don't like the idea of discriminating against a man because he may be 'overweight' or if he has a little less body hair than the poster boy image of a gay bear.
 
2013-06-26 11:48:16 PM  

cptjeff: fireclown: Mock26: It is sad the number of people who have used that argument as to why same-sex marriage should be illegal. I hope that no one could be so stupid as to actually believe that the legalization of same-sex marriage will lead to the legalization of inter species marriages. But after some of the replies such people give to other topics (such as evolution, and the crocoduck is a perfect example!) I do not have high hopes on that. So, I just give this reply to those morans, "As soon as animals evolve and develop the intelligence of humans and can legally consent to marriage you will have that right. Until then stop farking your dog. Your god can see what you do in your garage."

It's a slippery slope argument, taken to a pretty ridiculous length.  Although the polygamy thing has a bit of merit.  My problem with polygamy is that it has a pretty poor record in terms of it being a consenting union between people.  The FLDS does a pretty solid job of treating girls like marriage objects and brainwashing them from birth.  However if several truly free, competant and equal people decided to marry, I'm not sure how I could reasonably object while maintaining my "who you marry is none of my business" stance that makes me approve of gay marriage.

It bothers me.

Marriage is a very tidy way of defining a legal relationship between two people. When you start in with inheritance, power of attorney and whatnot, adding more people gets very, very messy. Add into that the power inequalities that have been inherent in just about any setting where polygamy has been practiced... It's nowhere near the same as gay marriage, polygamous marriage would demand radical alterations in how those rights inherent to marriage are structured. Gay marriage doesn't demand any changes except for changing where and how gender is indicated on a few forms- inheritance rights and whatnot are still going to be structured the same way.


I really don't see what the legal argument for not permitting marriage between:

1. Multiple partners (polygamy)
2. Siblings
3. People under a state's age of consent (If they are old enough to enter a legally binding contract to work and pay taxes, they should be able to make up their minds about being married)

Not trolling here, I just don't see how someone can say "Marriage is between two consenting people  who want to form a legally recognized union" and be AGAINST the 3 scenarios above.

Even if you say siblings shouldn't get married for the health of potential children, what if it's 2 brothers who say they want to get married?
 
2013-06-26 11:53:31 PM  

Cythraul: he has a little less body hair


amateurs

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

/Woof
 
2013-06-27 12:22:40 AM  

Cythraul: Bear couples no longer designated second class citizens by Federal law thread!


dl.dropboxusercontent.com

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

/d'aww
 
2013-06-27 10:10:56 AM  

fat_free: 1. Multiple partners (polygamy)


I gave you a reason for that. It would require a dramatic restructuring of the legal rights and obligations that come with marriage- it would have to be an entirely different legal arrangement from what we call marriage altogether. Along with the reinforcing power inequalities thing.

fat_free: 3. People under a state's age of consent (If they are old enough to enter a legally binding contract to work and pay taxes, they should be able to make up their minds about being married)


People under the age of majority are NOT old enough to enter a legally binding contract. That's kind of what it means. And just about every state has provisions that allow minors to get married with the consent of parents.

fat_free: 2. Siblings


Not really sure what to go with there, but other may have a better idea. Not an issue I've ever really bothered thinking about.
 
2013-06-27 05:32:53 PM  

fat_free: cptjeff: fireclown: Mock26: It is sad the number of people who have used that argument as to why same-sex marriage should be illegal. I hope that no one could be so stupid as to actually believe that the legalization of same-sex marriage will lead to the legalization of inter species marriages. But after some of the replies such people give to other topics (such as evolution, and the crocoduck is a perfect example!) I do not have high hopes on that. So, I just give this reply to those morans, "As soon as animals evolve and develop the intelligence of humans and can legally consent to marriage you will have that right. Until then stop farking your dog. Your god can see what you do in your garage."

It's a slippery slope argument, taken to a pretty ridiculous length.  Although the polygamy thing has a bit of merit.  My problem with polygamy is that it has a pretty poor record in terms of it being a consenting union between people.  The FLDS does a pretty solid job of treating girls like marriage objects and brainwashing them from birth.  However if several truly free, competant and equal people decided to marry, I'm not sure how I could reasonably object while maintaining my "who you marry is none of my business" stance that makes me approve of gay marriage.

It bothers me.

Marriage is a very tidy way of defining a legal relationship between two people. When you start in with inheritance, power of attorney and whatnot, adding more people gets very, very messy. Add into that the power inequalities that have been inherent in just about any setting where polygamy has been practiced... It's nowhere near the same as gay marriage, polygamous marriage would demand radical alterations in how those rights inherent to marriage are structured. Gay marriage doesn't demand any changes except for changing where and how gender is indicated on a few forms- inheritance rights and whatnot are still going to be structured the same way.



I really don't see what the legal argument for not permitting marriage between:
1. Multiple partners (polygamy)
2. Siblings
3. People under a state's age of consent (If they are old enough to enter a legally binding contract to work and pay taxes, they should be able to make up their minds about being married)
Not trolling here, I just don't see how someone can say "Marriage is between two consenting people  who want to form a legally recognized union" and be AGAINST the 3 scenarios above.
Even if you say siblings shouldn't get married for the health of potential children, what if it's 2 brothers who say they want to get married?



The age at which you can sign a legally binding contract is 18.  Getting a job at some place like Burger King does not require nor is it a legally binding contract.
 
Displayed 88 of 88 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report