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.

(The Tennessean)   Tennessee Republicans affirm their belief that stopping adult gays from marrying is more important than stopping child molestation   ( tennessean.com) divider line
    More: Sick, Rep. Darren Jernigan, Marriage, Family Action Council, child marriages, Sen. David Fowler, obscure legal theory, Sen. Jeff Yarbro, gay marriage  
•       •       •

3275 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Mar 2018 at 1:10 AM (19 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-03-07 06:17:30 PM  
Gross Old Pedos at it again -_-
 
2018-03-07 06:19:20 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-03-07 06:20:37 PM  
every day the GOP sickens me more and more
 
2018-03-07 06:21:59 PM  
Disingenuous, sh*t-eating, child-f*cking cretins.
 
2018-03-07 06:29:39 PM  
Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?
 
2018-03-07 06:33:29 PM  

Dimensio: Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?


I think it all just falls under "Evil"
 
2018-03-07 06:34:52 PM  

Eclectic: Dimensio: Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?

I think it all just falls under "Evil"


Lawful Evil? Neutral Evil? Chaotic Evil? Stupid Evil?
 
2018-03-07 06:36:43 PM  

Dimensio: Eclectic: Dimensio: Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?

I think it all just falls under "Evil"

Lawful Evil? Neutral Evil? Chaotic Evil? Stupid Evil?


I'm inclined to go with lawful evil, since they keep using "rule of law" to be shiatty to gay people AND encourage pedos. But "pants-on-head-evil" also applies here I think.
 
2018-03-07 06:38:32 PM  

Dimensio: Eclectic: Dimensio: Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?

I think it all just falls under "Evil"

Lawful Evil? Neutral Evil? Chaotic Evil? Stupid Evil?


Live Evil.
 
2018-03-07 06:46:08 PM  
evil dead?

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-03-07 06:47:34 PM  
I still wonder why the palermo protocol a treaty the US is a signature to does not apply to the trafficking of children for marriage in Tennessee.
 
2018-03-07 06:50:15 PM  
I don't think there are words to describe the mixture of cringe-worthy horror on my face as I read that article. Subby's headline is spot on.
 
2018-03-07 07:03:06 PM  

SurfaceTension: I don't think there are words to describe the mixture of cringe-worthy horror on my face as I read that article. Subby's headline is spot on.


The final few paragraphs demonstrate a serious crime of logic:

Fowler's legal theory is that the Supreme Court's ruling essentially nullified all Tennessee marriage licences, as it required legal marriage to be opened up beyond just a man and a women.

Therefore, according to Fowler, if the state were to move forward with this logic in a legal argument against the ruling, modifying state marriage law could acknowledge its existence.

Jernigan questioned Fowler as to why this should affect his legislation,and Fowler responded, "Some people think the state should regulate marriage, and I do not."


Thus, Fowler does not believe that the state should regulate marriage because doing so might adversely affect the state's attempt to regulate marriage.
 
2018-03-07 07:07:28 PM  
They really expect Obergfell to be overturned or modified?
 
2018-03-07 07:16:50 PM  

Dimensio: Thus, Fowler does not believe that the state should regulate marriage because doing so might adversely affect the state's attempt to regulate marriage.


Better than the alternative: admit the religious world-view on which he and all the people he knows and loves have built their entire lives is actually just a load of bullshiat. This probably wouldn't even rank among the top 100 cognitive games people in his position have played in order to justify their own worldly importance.
 
2018-03-07 07:22:38 PM  
So they are being "Progressive" 'like California is.  California has no minimum age to marry either
 
2018-03-07 07:23:06 PM  
Actually, the GOP should just admit it and go with this:

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-03-07 07:53:17 PM  
That article and its ghatdam autoplay video made me ill. And a quite a bit angry.
 
2018-03-07 08:00:56 PM  

Azlefty: So they are being "Progressive" 'like California is.  California has no minimum age to marry either


Some states believe people have basic human decency and laws are not needed for somethings that are apparent as wrong by all sane people. Republicans have proved them wrong.
 
2018-03-07 08:23:29 PM  

eurotrader: Azlefty: So they are being "Progressive" 'like California is.  California has no minimum age to marry either

Some states believe people have basic human decency and laws are not needed for somethings that are apparent as wrong by all sane people. Republicans have proved them wrong.


CA is controlled by the Dems seems that they are also proving them wrong!  Wrong is wrong even when Dems do it
 
2018-03-07 08:53:32 PM  
They didn't want this because it could hurt a court case against gays.

See past the initial and look at the goal.
 
2018-03-07 09:22:21 PM  

Dimensio: Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?


vignette.wikia.nocookie.netView Full Size
 
2018-03-07 09:49:26 PM  
Bills do not often come back to be passed after they are sent to summer study sessions.

They get to play and frolic with all your old pets!
 
2018-03-07 10:35:47 PM  
"But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid me not, to come onto them: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." Moore 20:04
 
2018-03-07 11:58:28 PM  
What damn century is it down in Alabama?
 
2018-03-08 01:02:45 AM  

BizarreMan: They really expect Obergfell to be overturned or modified?


yes.  the religious right in this country sees same sex marriage as a sign of immorality and biblical disfavor.  they hate same sex marriage only slightly less than they hate abortion.
 
2018-03-08 01:18:58 AM  

whidbey: Dimensio: Eclectic: Dimensio: Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?

I think it all just falls under "Evil"

Lawful Evil? Neutral Evil? Chaotic Evil? Stupid Evil?

Live Evil.


+1 for a palindrome.
 
2018-03-08 01:19:44 AM  
Roy Moore was not an anomaly.
 
2018-03-08 01:21:32 AM  
They should have burned down a lot more shiat at the end of the civil war. As in whole-states-turned-into-charcoal.
 
2018-03-08 01:22:51 AM  

Smoking GNU: They should have burned down a lot more shiat at the end of the civil war. As in whole-states-turned-into-charcoal.


if we have to do this whole civil war thing all over again, I suspect that's exactly what's going to happen.  obviously, some people didn't get the message firmly enough the FIRST time around.
 
2018-03-08 01:26:37 AM  
Well, least they're being open about embracing child molesters instead of desperately trying (badly) to hide like another prominent Republican, of whom we shall say no moore.
 
2018-03-08 01:38:36 AM  
Argh... is this just a matter of not including a bit of language about "excluding marriages certified before such a date" ?
 
2018-03-08 01:40:12 AM  
"The national nonprofit Unchained at Last has cited marriages in the state involving minors as young as 10 years old, but the state has disputed that figure."

GOP: "No way she's 10, she's pushing at least 13, look at that figure!"
 
2018-03-08 01:42:02 AM  

eurotrader: I still wonder why the palermo protocol a treaty the US is a signature to does not apply to the trafficking of children for marriage in Tennessee.


"States Rights!"
 
2018-03-08 01:42:44 AM  

Dimensio: SurfaceTension: I don't think there are words to describe the mixture of cringe-worthy horror on my face as I read that article. Subby's headline is spot on.

The final few paragraphs demonstrate a serious crime of logic:

Fowler's legal theory is that the Supreme Court's ruling essentially nullified all Tennessee marriage licences, as it required legal marriage to be opened up beyond just a man and a women.

Therefore, according to Fowler, if the state were to move forward with this logic in a legal argument against the ruling, modifying state marriage law could acknowledge its existence.

Jernigan questioned Fowler as to why this should affect his legislation,and Fowler responded, "Some people think the state should regulate marriage, and I do not."

Thus, Fowler does not believe that the state should regulate marriage because doing so might adversely affect the state's attempt to regulate marriage.


That caught my eye, too. I wondered if Fowler actually believes that marriage should not be regulated by the state at all. In other words, it should only be a religious (OK, Christian church) matter with no state intervention whatsoever. The state has no say over marriage = churches can stop gay people from getting married (though obviously all you need to do to get around that is set up a church that marries gay couples).
That's the only way his statement would make any sense*. Otherwise there is, as you point out, a serious crime of logic.

*I use the word "sense" here in the loosest possible way. Perhaps I should say "would make any potato sense."
 
2018-03-08 01:56:05 AM  

wildcardjack: Argh... is this just a matter of not including a bit of language about "excluding marriages certified before such a date" ?


Nope. It's all about the D. Whoa sweet momma, you got those deep fella blues

Garcia & Weir on Letterman 4-13-1982, New York, NY (LoloYodel)
Youtube 6ss-i2VgcPw
 
2018-03-08 01:56:50 AM  

No Catchy Nickname: In other words, it should only be a religious (OK, Christian church) matter with no state intervention whatsoever. The state has no say over marriage = churches can stop gay people from getting married (though obviously all you need to do to get around that is set up a church that marries gay couples).


that's actually not a bad description of the evangelicals plan to get around Obergfell.  they figure if the state stops issuing marriage licenses and makes marriage a 'church only' sort of thing, then same sex marriage won't ever happen again.  it hasn't occurred yet to the evangelicals that they don't have a monopoly on religion.
 
2018-03-08 02:03:38 AM  

Dimensio: Eclectic: Dimensio: Many same-sex marriage opponents assured me that allowing same-sex couples to marry would open the way for legalization of other sorts of "deviant" marriages, including marriages between adults and children.

Tennessee, which already has legal child marriage, will not end child marriage for fear of losing a later ability to end same-sex marriage.

Were they lying, or just stupid?

I think it all just falls under "Evil"

Lawful Evil? Neutral Evil? Chaotic Evil? Stupid Evil?


All of them. They're like Blackguards. The religious nutjobs and the "Law and Order" types are Lawful Evil. The Tea Partiers, Neocons, and "libertarians" are Neutral Evil, and the Trumpers and other "alt-right" guys are Chaotic Evil.

They are also all Stupid Evil and/or Chaotic Stupid. A few may be Lawful Stupid, but I don't think it's very many.
 
2018-03-08 02:08:22 AM  

Azlefty: So they are being "Progressive" 'like California is.  California has no minimum age to marry either


How many child marriages have there been in California? Legislatures tend to put in laws only when they are needed. This line of reasoning might say a lot more about Tennessee's culture than anything.

\also you aren't fooling anyone with your handle, trying to point to CA to move the focus from Tennessee
\\BSABSVnotdemocrat, right?
\\\this space left intentionally blank
 
2018-03-08 02:13:13 AM  

Weaver95: Smoking GNU: They should have burned down a lot more shiat at the end of the civil war. As in whole-states-turned-into-charcoal.

if we have to do this whole civil war thing all over again, I suspect that's exactly what's going to happen.  obviously, some people didn't get the message firmly enough the FIRST time around.


I'm already preparing the torches. And I f*cking live here.
 
2018-03-08 02:14:06 AM  

Azlefty: So they are being "Progressive" 'like California is.  California has no minimum age to marry either


California is one of just a few states lacking a minimum age for marriage. However, minors (under the age of 18) must obtain both parental consent and a court order before they may legally tie the knot.
 
2018-03-08 02:16:20 AM  
its almost as if the evangelicals are starting to realize that this is as close to seizing power over this country as they are ever likely to get and its making them even crazier than normal.
 
2018-03-08 02:17:12 AM  

No Catchy Nickname: Dimensio: SurfaceTension: I don't think there are words to describe the mixture of cringe-worthy horror on my face as I read that article. Subby's headline is spot on.

The final few paragraphs demonstrate a serious crime of logic:

Fowler's legal theory is that the Supreme Court's ruling essentially nullified all Tennessee marriage licences, as it required legal marriage to be opened up beyond just a man and a women.

Therefore, according to Fowler, if the state were to move forward with this logic in a legal argument against the ruling, modifying state marriage law could acknowledge its existence.

Jernigan questioned Fowler as to why this should affect his legislation,and Fowler responded, "Some people think the state should regulate marriage, and I do not."

Thus, Fowler does not believe that the state should regulate marriage because doing so might adversely affect the state's attempt to regulate marriage.

That caught my eye, too. I wondered if Fowler actually believes that marriage should not be regulated by the state at all. In other words, it should only be a religious (OK, Christian church) matter with no state intervention whatsoever. The state has no say over marriage = churches can stop gay people from getting married (though obviously all you need to do to get around that is set up a church that marries gay couples).
That's the only way his statement would make any sense*. Otherwise there is, as you point out, a serious crime of logic.

*I use the word "sense" here in the loosest possible way. Perhaps I should say "would make any potato sense."


That's exactly what he means.
 
2018-03-08 02:18:02 AM  

Azlefty: eurotrader: Azlefty: So they are being "Progressive" 'like California is.  California has no minimum age to marry either

Some states believe people have basic human decency and laws are not needed for somethings that are apparent as wrong by all sane people. Republicans have proved them wrong.

CA is controlled by the Dems seems that they are also proving them wrong!  Wrong is wrong even when Dems do it


Is there wide-spread, culturally encouraged, child marriage occurring in California?

If the answer is no please feel free to fall on some polonium laced bullets for your horrible attempt at false equivalence.
 
2018-03-08 02:27:49 AM  
Guys, guys, I think I understand. They're confused between marriage and the death penalty. They say they want to be married to a 10 year old? Even Jesus would shoot them.

FTFA: The national nonprofit Unchained at Last has cited marriages in the state involving minors as young as 10 years old
 
2018-03-08 02:31:12 AM  
"Basically, what has happened is the Family Action Council wants to continue to let 13-year-olds get married in the state at the sake of their court case against same-sex couples," Jernigan said later.

Well THERE'S your problem.  WHat's that rule again, about organizations with the word "family" in them?

Family Research Council
American Family Association
Family Research Institute
Center for Family and Human Rights
Illinois Family Institute
etc
 
2018-03-08 02:39:11 AM  

Smoking GNU: They should have burned down a lot more shiat at the end of the civil war. As in whole-states-turned-into-charcoal.


There's still time.  It is technically the end of the Civil War, just the very, very, very, very, very end.
 
2018-03-08 02:46:54 AM  
"Bills do not often come back to be passed after they are sent to summer study sessions."

img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-03-08 03:11:27 AM  

ArcadianRefugee: "Basically, what has happened is the Family Action Council wants to continue to let 13-year-olds get married in the state at the sake of their court case against same-sex couples," Jernigan said later.

Well THERE'S your problem.  WHat's that rule again, about organizations with the word "family" in them?

Family Research Council
American Family Association
Family Research Institute
Center for Family and Human Rights
Illinois Family Institute
etc


The Family Action Council of Tn is associated with Focus on the Family.
 
2018-03-08 04:12:06 AM  
I wish hell existed.
 
Displayed 50 of 76 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  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