Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Does Obama's 'Marriage Equality' Mean for Bisexuals?
Townhall.com ^ | June 27, 2012 | Terry Jeffrey

Posted on 06/27/2012 8:15:05 AM PDT by Kaslin

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

1 posted on 06/27/2012 8:15:09 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What Does Obama’s ‘Marriage Equality’ Mean for Bisexuals?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Good question. And what does it mean for me and my pet sheep?

Just’ wonderin’....


2 posted on 06/27/2012 8:17:28 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Marriage laws typically have adultery as a justification of divorce.

That still the case for homosexuals who are non-monogomous in most cases?


3 posted on 06/27/2012 8:21:28 AM PDT by TigerClaws (He)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It still means that they still have twice as many chances of getting laid when they walk into a bar as the rest of us.


4 posted on 06/27/2012 8:25:36 AM PDT by Steamburg (The contents of your wallet is the only language Politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Bisexuals shouldn’t have any marital rights, because by nature they would be adulterers, right? They have to have more than one partner to fully “express themselves”. I read a few years ago that homosexuals really resent bisexuals because of this.

This is where those sophisticates who believe that LGBT is harmless find that they are not evolved as far as they thought. Even if there is no “judging” and people can do whatever they want in bed... Betrayal still hurts. Ambiguity still breeds lack of trust and insecurity. People still need steadfast love and security in their most intimate lives.

Bisexuals would by definition be heartbreakers, to any in the LGBT community who are still aware that they have hearts.


5 posted on 06/27/2012 8:28:29 AM PDT by married21 (As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

It’s not even a slippery slope anymore. This is a cliff face covered in axle grease.


6 posted on 06/27/2012 8:28:29 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Once you discard THE definition, then there’s really NO definition besides what the current societal “norms” are.

This is exactly what the left wants, though - total destruction of traditional morality in favor of their “zeitgeist”.


7 posted on 06/27/2012 8:30:26 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Why not seek a Writ of Mandamus seeking to force Obama to enforce all the laws, not just the ones he likes or panders about.


8 posted on 06/27/2012 8:33:03 AM PDT by Inwoodian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

The gay activists eventually want to have legalized polygamy/group marriage, with marriages composed of any number of partners, and any gender of partners.

They look at monogamous homosexual marriage as a transitional step to their final goal, which is the obliteration of marriage as we know it.

Once we have institutionalized 50 state monogamous homosexual marriage, then they will move on to their other agenda items in the area of marriage and family.

It’s obvious with a “bi-sexual”, that such person by definition can’t have just one partners. Such person needs a partner or partners of each sex. And since we’re supposed to be liberal and non-judgemental about these things, per liberal theology, future court rulings will mandate that outcome.


9 posted on 06/27/2012 8:33:55 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

The gay activists eventually want to have legalized polygamy/group marriage, with marriages composed of any number of partners, and any gender of partners.

They look at monogamous homosexual marriage as a transitional step to their final goal, which is the obliteration of marriage as we know it.

Once we have institutionalized 50 state monogamous homosexual marriage, then they will move on to their other agenda items in the area of marriage and family.

It’s obvious with a “bi-sexual”, that such person by definition can’t have just one partners. Such person needs a partner or partners of each sex. And since we’re supposed to be liberal and non-judgemental about these things, per liberal theology, future court rulings will mandate that outcome.


10 posted on 06/27/2012 8:36:38 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

If we allow gay marriage, then we have no justification left to disallow polygamy — a form of marriage recognized in over half the world for thousands of years. On what basis can we recognize a gay marriage, and refuse to recognize the marriage of a Muslim man coming to the US with two wives?


11 posted on 06/27/2012 8:37:49 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (If I can't be persuasive, I at least hope to be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; Responsibility2nd
The issue of just saying everyone deserves to be treated equally does create some strange entanglements when legal arguments are raised.

The question I always try to find an answer for is, "What privileges or rights do my wife and I have that a gay couple joined in a civil union do not have?" In my view if they can share investment, own community property and real estate, enjoy survivor benefits and have hospital visitation, then they have every right and benefit of marriage without destructing the idea of marriage being the joining of "one man and one woman".

One thing that bothers me in all of this is that the idea of gay marriage is being marketed as one of the most important things to the liberal community. However, the liberal community tends to look down upon or ignore traditional marriage altogether. They seem to prefer to live together and use hyphenated surnames to show their contempt or disrespect for marriage in one way or another. Thus, I get the impression this is all not about marriage as much as it is about destructing a tradition they see as a societal norm.

12 posted on 06/27/2012 8:40:48 AM PDT by Baynative (REMEMBER: Without America there is no free world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What is it supposed to mean? If this debate follows the usual “incremental” pattern, you will - at first - be ridiculed and belittled for asking such an absurd question, because “no one” is proposing such a thing, and everyone wishes that you would not raise such inflammatory questions.

But as the newfound “right” becomes entrenched in law and in the culture, sure enough, the newfound “right” will be extended to its next logical conclusion. Politicians and professors will “evolve” a new level of understanding and compassion for bigamists and polygamists, and BGLT (bi-group-largegroup-tribal) unions. And you will be ridiculed and belittled for your obsolete morality and your inability to see how ALL people should have the same rights as people with a “binary” (single spouse) orientation.


13 posted on 06/27/2012 8:42:55 AM PDT by manforallseasons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; Revolting cat!

Polygamy means two girls for every boy, just like the Beach Boys sang.


14 posted on 06/27/2012 8:44:22 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (The media ignored the 40th anniversary of Bill Ayers' Pentagon bombing but not Watergate. Ask Why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

15 posted on 06/27/2012 8:45:32 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (The media ignored the 40th anniversary of Bill Ayers' Pentagon bombing but not Watergate. Ask Why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: manforallseasons

The goal is to smash monogamy and devalue the institution of marriage.

The same “pioneers” who brought us same sex marriage are busy waging the war against laws in Texas for things like same sex divorce.


16 posted on 06/27/2012 8:47:14 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (The media ignored the 40th anniversary of Bill Ayers' Pentagon bombing but not Watergate. Ask Why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; stephenjohnbanker; NFHale; ...
RE :”President Barack Obama, occupant of the bully pulpit, set aside the past month to celebrate a most peculiar thing.
“Now, each June since I took office,” Obama said in a June 15 speech at the White House, “we have gathered to pay tribute to the generations of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans who devoted their lives to our most basic of ideals — equality not just for some, but for all.”
Among the places our president said he wanted “equality not just for some, but for all” — that is, presumably, including “bisexuals” — is in the institution of marriage.
“We've supported efforts in Congress to end the so-called Defense of Marriage Act,” Obama said. “And as we wait for that law to be cast aside, we've stopped defending its constitutionality in the courts.”
“And Americans may be still evolving when it comes to marriage equality,” Obama said, “but as I've indicated personally, Michelle and I have made up our minds on this issue.”
So, what does Obama’s “marriage equality” mean for bisexuals?

I heard Levin throw out this question a few months ago and it is a great one. Why can't bisexuals marry both sexes at the same time? Were they not 'born that way' too? Liberty for bisexuals who just want 'their love recognized by the law' (a Chris Matthews line)...This is just like race restrictions on marriage in the 1960s :)

A shame you hear no congressional Republicans bringing this up to make fun of Obama. Notice Romney is AWOL on this fight, Oh, but he said he believes in traditional marriage, WHOOPIE.

17 posted on 06/27/2012 8:50:49 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is a liberal. Just watch him closely try to screw us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: married21
Bisexuals shouldn’t have any marital rights, because by nature they would be adulterers, right? They have to have more than one partner to fully “express themselves”. I read a few years ago that homosexuals really resent bisexuals because of this.

If someone is bi-CURIOUS they are automatically encouraged to go whole hog homosexual. No counseling or discussion that it MAY NOT be right for them. Nope, supposedly only heterosexual marriages that break apart are "living a lie". Anne Heche is considered a lesbian "Uncle Tom" for settling down with a MAN.

18 posted on 06/27/2012 8:52:19 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (The media ignored the 40th anniversary of Bill Ayers' Pentagon bombing but not Watergate. Ask Why.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"we have gathered to pay tribute to the generations of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans who devoted their lives to our most basic of ideals -- equality not just for some, but for all"

Generations? Ummm, how does that work?
19 posted on 06/27/2012 8:53:13 AM PDT by davius (You can roll manure in powdered sugar but that don't make it a jelly doughnut.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
What Does Obama's 'Marriage Equality' Mean for Bisexuals?

They get one of each?
20 posted on 06/27/2012 8:54:25 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson