WTF Kansas....and Arizona.....and Missouri.....and Georgia....

[cadaverdog]

The rich sugar daddies steal the prime women. Who wants to open the door to that bullshit?

Open a door that's already open? Gold diggers dig gold that's why they're called gold diggers.

[cadaverdog]

How many of these states immediately moved to disrupt voting after Fat Tony Scalia and his 4 BCE pals gutted the Voting Rights act of 1964?

Now stop trying to derail the thread, Socky.

I'm talking about the situation in Kansas and you're talking about the BCE again but I'm derailing the thread?

[cadaverdog]

If you can't win an argument by debating the issue try calling people cute little names like socky or claim they're derailing the thread that always works real good.

[FORD]

I tell people if they want to legalize non-traditional marriage they better get ready for more polygamy. It only works if you have more females than males. Unless you have the males killed off in a war or something male and female populations tend to be equal. What happens is the guys with the power and money keep getting younger trophy wives and the poor young guys have the young women stollen from them. Then they often get booted from the pack. You end up with a Colorado City type situation or what you often see in some middle east countries. The rich sugar daddies steal the prime women. Who wants to open the door to that bullshit?

A friend of mine used to work with a Mormon guy who got around the polygamy laws his own way. He would marry one woman at a time, then divorce her and marry another one, and kept doing this until he had married several women. Legally, he was only married to one, but he still considered all of them to be his wives, and since he was a rich insurance executive, he could afford to support all of them, and was convinced that they would be one big happy family when he became God of his own planet.

OK..... whatever. At least he was technically within the law. He can argue the rest of it with Elohim, his Heavenly Father, I guess.

It's not for me, and I don't think I'd want multiple mothers in law, but as long as he's supporting the "wives" and kids and not asking for multiple married tax privileges, I don't have any reason to worry about it.

[cadaverdog]

If the only way you can be happy is to post biased political commentary 24/7 on a site where nobody gives a hairy rat's ass about it enough to do anything other than talk about it keep on truckin'. You can rant and rave till the cows come home and nothing's going to change because you do it. I can also see I'm fueling you're obsession by debating your observations too. Post whatever you want. I'll just have to try and ignore it no matter how much I disagree.

[FORD]

[Nickdfresh]

There's no laws on the books as far as I know making it illegal for members of the same sex to live together so other than the legal ramifications why do they need to be legally married anyway? Pass a law that says any two people can form a legal partnership reguardless of sex or sexual orientation and take the morality out of it altogether. Two hetero men or women living together and sharing assets should have the same rights as everbody else.

Because they own shit, have children, sometimes get in serious accidents and go on life-support or die and might want to decide who gets their shit before that happens, etc. So, with life's messy financial, legal, and family issues, some people might just want the same legal standing to decide who gets to do what with their lives or some shit like that. you know? like basic civil liberties?

[FORD]

Religious Reich Repukes are slitting their own throats with their support of bigotry.

[cadaverdog]

That's the same thing I think everytime I see one of your unbiased political commentaries. Keep telling yourself you're making the world a better place. Maybe you can convince yourself you're not just rambling on about the same old shit day after day year after year to a bunch of people who aren't going to even attempt to do a damn thing about it anyway.

[cadaverdog]

Because they own shit, have children, sometimes get in serious accidents and go on life-support or die and might want to decide who gets their shit before that happens, etc. So, with life's messy financial, legal, and family issues, some people might just want the same legal standing to decide who gets to do what with their lives or some shit like that. you know? like basic civil liberties?

That's why I suggested a legal partnership. That way any two people same sex or not gay or straight can form a legal union without having to get married. If two straight men or women want equal rights that married people have they should have them too.

[Nickdfresh]

By David Ferguson
Thursday, February 27, 2014 15:48 EST

...
“Or should a photographer be required to photograph a homosexual wedding where the participants decide they want to be nude or engage in sexual behavior?” he asked. “Would they force a Jewish photographer to work a Klan or Nazi event? How about forcing a Muslim caterer to work a pork barbecue dinner?”
...

If there are any lesbian weddings that require a slave photographer, I'm like totally available for bookings...

[FORD]

I'd be willing to bake some pussy shaped cakes for Lesbian weddings, since apparently they are required (according to teabagger Judson Philips anyway)

Just not a red velvet pussy cake though..... that would just be...... wrong

[FORD]

That's why I suggested a legal partnership. That way any two people same sex or not gay or straight can form a legal union without having to get married. If two straight men or women want equal rights that married people have they should have them too.

So wait a minute.......

Are you actually making the argument that platonic roommates who are NOT in a relationship with each other should be the equivalent of a married hetero OR homo couple?

Is this an attempt to get on your amputee friend's health care plan, or something?

[Nickdfresh]

That's why I suggested a legal partnership. That way any two people same sex or not gay or straight can form a legal union without having to get married. If two straight men or women want equal rights that married people have they should have them too.

I used to kind of think that too. But then I said, "fuck it! what's the difference? what's the point?" If they want to get married, let them get married FFS. They're consenting adults that are educated and have every right to their own institutional misery that is marriage...

[cadaverdog]

So wait a minute.......

Are you actually making the argument that platonic roommates who are NOT in a relationship with each other should be the equivalent of a married hetero OR homo couple?

Why not? Why shouldn't single people get the same priviledges married people get?