Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 131

Thread: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

  1. #121
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    10-30-14 @ 12:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,908

    re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    1.) didnt claim you did in any of my questions but you have many times in your post history, i even have a qoute of you in my sign that proves this fact
    2.) never asked you to, nor do you have to

    now back to the topic and questions

    are you against all legal contracts?
    are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
    what is your solution to the marriage contract?
    are there other groups of people who's equal rights dont matter to you?

    You claimed a lot of bull**** homie.

    No more !'s and 2's either - the just don't work.

  2. #122
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.Nick View Post
    1.)You claimed a lot of bull**** homie.

    No more !'s and 2's either - the just don't work.
    please point these claims out and then factually prove them to be BS, thanks, my guess is this request will be dodged also because its another posted lie. Each time you dodge these question it further proves you cant defend you claims and just results in another post of yours failing to be supported.

    are you against all legal contracts?
    are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
    what is your solution to the marriage contract?
    are there other groups of people who's equal rights dont matter to you?
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #123
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    Sorry for being Dutch. It is nice to hear that freedom of speech and the world wide web is only there for you and people you want to post here.

    If you don't like me posting, don't read my messages/ignore my messages.
    translation: you cant defend your failed and reidiculous post so you deflect and try to use ANOTHER strawman that also fails

    hint: never even HINTED that i don't like you posting or that your speech isnt welcome LMAO

    ill will ask again since you dodged the question: remind us all again why the word has to be in there? we wait your answer.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #124
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

    re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    translation: you cant defend your failed and reidiculous post so you deflect and try to use ANOTHER strawman that also fails

    hint: never even HINTED that i don't like you posting or that your speech isnt welcome LMAO

    ill will ask again since you dodged the question: remind us all again why the word has to be in there? we wait your answer.
    I apologize and will remove my last post, just woke up after a very bad night with heavy bouts of trigeminus neuralgia (which I suffer from) and misread the word "word" with "world". Again, I apologize.

    And the word does not have to be in there, somebody states that gay marriage isn't in the constitution and I just responded that not even the word marriage is mentioned there. Not meant much of anything with that to be honest.
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  5. #125
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    I apologize and will remove my last post, just woke up after a very bad night with heavy bouts of trigeminus neuralgia (which I suffer from) and misread the word "word" with "world". Again, I apologize.

    And the word does not have to be in there, somebody states that gay marriage isn't in the constitution and I just responded that not even the word marriage is mentioned there. Not meant much of anything with that to be honest.
    LOL it happens
    apology 100% accepted AND respect is always earned and given for anybody that admits a mistake, it shows integrity!

    seems we both made mistakes and misunderstood!
    you are correct the word does not have to be in there
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  6. #126
    Global Moderator
    Silent Bob for President!

    RedAkston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    33,809
    Blog Entries
    4

    re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Moderator's Warning:
    Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]The level of baiting, flaming, trolling and personal attacks in this thread are ridiculous. Knock off the crap or else. Moderator actions may still be issued for posts prior to this warning depending on the severity.
    Welfare (Food Stamps, WIC, etc...) are not entitlements. They are taxpayer funded handouts and shouldn't be called entitlements at all. Social Security and Veteran's benefits are 'Entitlements' because the people receiving them are entitled to them. They were earned and paid for by the recipients.

  7. #127
    Sage
    Peter King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,029

    Re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    LOL it happens
    apology 100% accepted AND respect is always earned and given for anybody that admits a mistake, it shows integrity!

    seems we both made mistakes and misunderstood!
    you are correct the word does not have to be in there
    If you cannot apologize for making a genuine blunder, then what can you apologize for. Do not get me wrong, no need to go all Japan on the world but the world would be a much better place if those in charge got to knew the word "I am sorry" a bit more rather than waging a war of words that leads to a road to nowhere.

    But you are right, marriage does not need to be in the constitution but a law regulating marriage might be a good idea (and I am talking about a civil procedure, not a religious one, that is totally down to the religion of your choice). That is why Dutch people marry at least once and a lot twice. One time you get legally married by going to a city hall or go to a registered marriage location in front of a civil administration officer who's main function it is to marry people. Then and only then in a purely ceremonial (at least in the eyes of the law/government) they have a choice to get married in church or in front of a religious functionary. That second marriage has no legal standing with the government but is purely a personal choice.

    For the first marriage there is full and total marriage equality (in that it is a union between 2 human beings of 18 years or older, even though there are a few legal ways to get married even sooner but that is not the norm) and for the second marriage that equality is totally down to the religion of choice (or the vicar/priest/father/imam/rabbi).
    Former military man (and now babysitter of Donald Trump) John Kelly, is a big loud lying empty barrel!

  8. #128
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,968

    Re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by Summerwind View Post
    Same as they are once the marriage is in divorce, legal contracts, which is how they should have started imo.
    Which makes everything more expensive and less efficient overall for no legitimate reason.

    Plus, since the marriage license acts similar to a birth certificate or adoption record, it is mainly used to set up a legal kinship between two people, that of spouse, which comes with certain rights/benefits/privileges due to being the closest next of kin.
    Last edited by roguenuke; 10-27-14 at 10:39 PM.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  9. #129
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter King View Post
    1.)If you cannot apologize for making a genuine blunder, then what can you apologize for. Do not get me wrong, no need to go all Japan on the world but the world would be a much better place if those in charge got to knew the word "I am sorry" a bit more rather than waging a war of words that leads to a road to nowhere.

    2.) But you are right, marriage does not need to be in the constitution but a law regulating marriage might be a good idea (and I am talking about a civil procedure, not a religious one, that is totally down to the religion of your choice).

    3.) That is why Dutch people marry at least once and a lot twice. One time you get legally married by going to a city hall or go to a registered marriage location in front of a civil administration officer who's main function it is to marry people. Then and only then in a purely ceremonial (at least in the eyes of the law/government) they have a choice to get married in church or in front of a religious functionary. That second marriage has no legal standing with the government but is purely a personal choice.

    4.)For the first marriage there is full and total marriage equality (in that it is a union between 2 human beings of 18 years or older, even though there are a few legal ways to get married even sooner but that is not the norm) and for the second marriage that equality is totally down to the religion of choice (or the vicar/priest/father/imam/rabbi).
    1.) I agree 100% and thats exactly how I am but unfortunately around here there are many that will never do that . . . .15 posters and 20 links could prove them wrong and they would simply deny it, lie, personally attack or run away. I have been wrong on this board a number of times and I just simply admitted it, i have even PM'd the person to make sure they saw I admitted and given an apology when I was misinformed or was kneejerk.

    2.) maybe but at this point its not needed with precedence of marriage being a right and precedence of many court cases declaring bannings unconstitutional because of the 14th. I mean dont get me wrong it be a nice EXTRA move to shut up some more bigots or those not in support of equal rights but there will still be some left just like those still opposed to equal rights for minorities women and interracial marriage.

    3.) well thats the way it is here also. The religious marriage has ZERO legal standing and is strictly a personal choice also. But many people are allowed to conduct a legal marriage so many times religious marriages and legal ones are done together but they have zero impact on each other. People can choose to do them together but they are 100% separate.

    Someone brought the idea up the other day though that maybe its best to totally separate them. Not allow them to be blended because obviously it confuses the people uneducated about how the law works.

    4.) again similar to how it is here, id need more details on the "2 human beings of 18 years or older" but similar. ANd yes religious marriage here is totally the same way as it should be. Churches right now turn away straight couples, gay couples, interracial couples, minority couples, nonreligious enough couples etc etc and they have that 100% right. And I support that because it has nothing to legal marriage.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  10. #130
    Hot Flash Mama
    Summerwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Seen
    01-23-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,010

    Re: Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Which makes everything more expensive and less efficient overall for no legitimate reason.

    Plus, since the marriage license acts similar to a birth certificate or adoption record, it is mainly used to set up a legal kinship between two people, that of spouse, which comes with certain rights/benefits/privileges due to being the closest next of kin.
    Yes, except our current divorce rate suggests that there are many other contractual issues that would cost less to hash out, as unromantic as it is, before getting married. So really it isn't generally cost effective for either party in the long run, it's just makes the divorce cost more. Though I've never had one, and because I never had one, I am very much in favor of pre-nups. But truly, marriage should have to be a legitimate contract for those benefits and priveleges as far as the state is concerned and the benefits that the state and the feds give married people.
    jallman: "It's all good. At least you have a thick skin and can take being poked fun back at without crying. "

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •