View Single Post
Old 04-28-2015   #9
1ViciousGSX
Admin
 
1ViciousGSX's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Sportsman's Paradise, LA.
Posts: 5,382
Re: Supreme Court hears arguments for Gay Marriages

Quote:
Originally Posted by polishmafia View Post
^ That might be the stupidest thing I've seen all week. People need to get out of this 2000 year old, outdated definition.

His response about a thruple or quaduple (or whatever) doesn't fit into what the guy is asking. He is just circumventing the actual question with a bogus scenario.

Change the law so that "marriage" is defined as a union of two people, not a man and a woman - and not this stupid ass thruple crap.

If one person wants to enter a union of marriage with a member of the same sex, why not let them? How is that going to impact my life? I might see them in public!? GASP!

Yes, you could argue that if we let them get married, then they can file taxes jointly and not pay in as much, and that would take money out of the system. Our tax dollars are already blown on dumb shit already that this wouldn't even make a dent.



I could not agree with this sarcastic statement more. This is so not important that it shouldn't even be at the Supreme Court level. Let them get married, be happy or be miserable. This shouldn't even be an issue.
Oh, so the definition of "marriage" is the problem and not the fact that what he wants is really a "civil union"? Wrong. I love how all these "oppressed what-ever wannabes" need to rewrite everything to suit their wants. He is 100% correct that a "marriage is the joining of two complimentary sexes to form a family". You don't have to like it one bit, but it is a fact. And no matter how you want to divert from that, it's still a fact. And that was the point he was making. And he is correct that nobody is stopping him from getting married. It is his choice to be with another man, nobody is forcing that on him. He has the choice to get married to a person of the opposite sex, but chooses not to. So you can call it what ever you want, but is not a marriage by DEFINITION.

I do agree that the SCOTUS should leave this alone, its not their call to make. And you know why? Because nobody's Constitutional right are being violated.

At some point we need to look at the bigger picture of what's really important, and this ain't it.
__________________

"You don't have a clue. You couldn't get a clue during the clue mating season in a field full of horny clues if you smeared your body with clue musk and did the clue mating dance."

When she get's bitchy, SPANK THAT ASS!
(#Y#)
1ViciousGSX is offline   Reply With Quote