Posted on 06/26/2013 7:12:46 AM PDT by The Sons of Liberty
Edited on 06/26/2013 7:25:51 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Headline only
Text of decision here.
As I said, I don’t associate with sodomite enablers. Me being on your ping list is association.
Indeed, but it would help if everyone on our side pulled together.
Instead, we’ll get the national bill and then folks like cripplecreek will probably cheer Obama on so that it gets passed.
It was never about states rights, always about kneecapping social conservatives. Any social conservative worth his salt understands why DOMA was there - to attempt to protect the union.
But, I guess we don’t have a union. Then we get the enablers whining about secession. Because if they can’t force us into gay marriage - they are willing to use force of arms to weld the states together.
Like I said, States’ rights is really a smokescreen.
I asked about a legal requirement, not a moral requirement, not a religious requirement. A legal requirement codified into state law. If you have a list of states with that in their law, please provide a list including cites. I’ve see a supposed list, but, upon checking just a few of the states listed, found the list to be incorrect. So, we are talking about the LAW. After all, we are a nation of laws. Which states REQUIRE consummation of a marriage in order for the marriage to be valid? And include cites to the applicable law, otherwise I won’t believe you and it doesn’t count.
Seems to me that you’re the enabler. I’m not the one clinging to Federal marriage benefits and hiding behind morality.
Enjoy your plantation.
NO. You attempt to conflate two things; WHY people choose to marry with WHY marriage became the institution it is (was) recognized and granted privilege to by society.
You perhaps unwittingly are carrying water for the left who proclaim the love is love BS.
WHY the homosexual sex practitioners seek marriage matters not to myself nor does the WHY grant the State the power to impose upon society a new morality that is devoid of reality.
Let me know when Michigan passes Gay marriage so you can finally come out.
This is not a court of law, there is no judge who will decree your opinion sacrosanct. I gave you my opinion on the matter. You don't like it -OH WELL.
Your opinion is incorrect. Get over yourself.
Your basic contention is flawed. Marriage has often been based solely on economic realities, e.g. inheritance, acquisition or exchange of property, social mobility, etc. That has certainly been the case until relatively recently in western societies and in many places it is still the case. My original point however, is that there may be no reason to assume that homosexual couples would be more likely than heterosexual couples to wed only in order to obtain benefits.
The reason marriage has existed as a legal state for untold countless years is not just money. It’s about paternity, protection of women, and protection of the husband and wife relationship. It’s about recognizing natural law.
Are you a libertarian? They always try to boil everything down to money, and the freedom to engage in vice without any restraint.
Homosexuality is a sin, not a class of people (Leviticus 18:22).
It is a sin that needs to be repented of and forsaken like all other sins. The Supreme Court blew it big time and caused harm to America, our values, and our way of life.
Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Invite Him into your heart and repent of your sins today - He will come in, forgive you of your sins, make you new on the inside, and help you be the person He has called you to be.
Maybe those 20,000 illegal aliens at one address who collected $46million in tax returns were an extended couple.
How is my statement that marriage has been recognized as a legal state for thousands of years a lie?
It’s a fact.
I don’t mean “legally recognized by the US federal government” obviously. Most civilizations recognized that “husband and wife” meant something different than “a man spending the night with a prostitute”.
I, being a white, Christian, self employed male shoukld be considered a minority.
Where are my "goodies?"
“Site your source on this.”
1. My company (3,000 workers) buys our health insurance from a pool comprised of similar companies in the same industry. Two years ago, the firm that manages the insurance pool conducted an audit of the names, addresses, and marital status of all of the insured in the pool, and discovered that about 8% of the people who were listed as spouses or children on family policies were ineligible.
2. The nonpartisan Tax Foundation in an article from last February on the Heritage Foundation blog:
Right on! And he didn’t even know about all the justices and politicians being blackmailed.
I agree with you. I am glad this is for state’s rights only..not federal. I am a stong believer in state’s rights..thankfully this upholds them only. And each state voted for this.
The study had nothing to do with gay marriage. I get your point a certain percentage of people cheat on taxes and lie for benefits. You seem to imply that theses percentages will be higher for gay couples. That is what I thought we were talking about.
I do not agree. There are many asexual people who are married. Not sexually consummating a marriage does not make them less married than you and I...well, not you and I...you and your spouse and me and mine...sorry.
Wha???? Who??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.