Skip to comments.
FReep this Poll: Should marriage be legally defined as only a union between a man and a woman?
CNN.com ^
| 8-03-03
| CNN
Posted on 08/04/2003 5:23:00 PM PDT by Salvation
Edited on 04/29/2004 2:02:54 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Should marriage be legally defined as only a union between a man and a woman?
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: baptist; bornagain; catholic; catholiclist; christian; christianlist; cnn; cnnlies; freep; fundamentalist; gay; gaymarriage; gayunions; genises; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexualmarriage; maleandfemale; man; manandwoman; marriage; poll; protestant; queer; tunnel; woman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 next last
Should marriage be legally defined as only a union between a man and a woman?
|
|
Yes
|
|
31%
|
264817 votes
|
|
No
|
|
69%
|
598953 votes
|
Total: 863770 votes
|
|
|
This QuickVote is not scientific and reflects the opinions of only those Internet users who have chosen to participate. The results cannot be assumed to represent the opinions of Internet users in general, nor the public as a whole. The QuickVote sponsor is not responsible for content, functionality or the opinions expressed therein.
|
1
posted on
08/04/2003 5:23:01 PM PDT
by
Salvation
To: Salvation
2
posted on
08/04/2003 5:24:19 PM PDT
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: Salvation
Looks like this one is being "Queered" by someone else--LOL!
3
posted on
08/04/2003 5:24:40 PM PDT
by
basil
To: Salvation
Poll needs freeping bump!
4
posted on
08/04/2003 5:26:44 PM PDT
by
jocon307
To: Salvation
Give it up already. The Gay Jihad has hijacked the poll and are crashing it into the Twin Towers of reason and morality.
-Jay
5
posted on
08/04/2003 5:27:04 PM PDT
by
Jay D. Dyson
(But I can't get nothin' that can be bought, so I'll just live with what I got... Lord, forgive me.)
To: basil
"This QuickVote is not scientific and reflects the opinions of only Homo's...
6
posted on
08/04/2003 5:29:33 PM PDT
by
jdontom
(BacktheBadge)
To: Salvation
Why should people be required to get a LICENSE from the GOVERNMENT to marry, anyway??
7
posted on
08/04/2003 5:30:06 PM PDT
by
FReepaholic
(My other tag line is hilarious.)
To: Salvation
I'll Freep the thing, but there are a lot more queers than there are FReepers.
8
posted on
08/04/2003 5:33:58 PM PDT
by
Nucluside
To: tscislaw
You don't.
Ever hear of "common law" marriage?
9
posted on
08/04/2003 5:34:11 PM PDT
by
PokeyJoe
(The great chickenhawk returned on Friday!)
To: tscislaw
"Why should people be required to get a LICENSE from the GOVERNMENT to marry, anyway??"
That's a good point.
To: Salvation
Once homosexuals are given the right to "marry", then will Mormons be given the right to legally have more than one wife? Or could two "married" homosexuals be given the right to marry a woman, thus affording them a way to have children? Or, could...
Ah, forget it! What a bunch of nonsense this whole thing is!!!
11
posted on
08/04/2003 5:37:38 PM PDT
by
Maria S
("This time I think the Americans are serious. Bush is not like Clinton. I think this is the end" Uda)
To: PokeyJoe
>>...Ever hear of "common law" marriage?...<<
Yes. But not all state's Governments "recognize" common law marriages.
12
posted on
08/04/2003 5:39:12 PM PDT
by
FReepaholic
(My other tag line is hilarious.)
To: Jay D. Dyson
**The Gay Jihad has hijacked the poll and are crashing it into the Twin Towers of reason and morality.**
But that is no reason for us to give up!
13
posted on
08/04/2003 5:42:07 PM PDT
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: Salvation
Give up CNN polls are rigged!
To: Nucluside
No, the deviants are just louder...
Freeped and bumped.
15
posted on
08/04/2003 5:43:51 PM PDT
by
TaxRelief
(Welcome to the #1 discussion board dedicated to the sustenance of a free republic.)
To: *Catholic_list; father_elijah; nickcarraway; SMEDLEYBUTLER; Siobhan; Lady In Blue; attagirl; ...
Action Ping!
16
posted on
08/04/2003 5:44:00 PM PDT
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: tscislaw
Of the 50 states, 40 no longer allow such marriages to be contracted within their borders. Nevertheless, most states will recognize a marriage that was valid in the state of the parties' residence at the time of marriage. See 1 Homer H. Clark, The Law of Domestic Relations in the United States 2.4 (2d ed. 1987); Annotation, Common Law Marriage, 92 A.L.R.2d 1102 (1963). This fact, combined with the mobility of modern society, continues to force courts in all states to confront common law marriage issues.
So move to Texas, shack up for a year, refer to each other as husband and wife in name and letter - and wala. =)
17
posted on
08/04/2003 5:44:05 PM PDT
by
PokeyJoe
(The great chickenhawk returned on Friday!)
To: drstevej; RnMomof7
Can you ping your lists?
I hate CNN, but this does not deserve to stand.
18
posted on
08/04/2003 5:45:02 PM PDT
by
Salvation
(†With God all things are possible.†)
To: tscislaw
They don't. God instituted marriage.
19
posted on
08/04/2003 5:47:46 PM PDT
by
gitmo
(We have left the slippery slope and we are now in free fall.)
To: tscislaw
Why should people be required to get a LICENSE from the GOVERNMENT to marry, anyway?? Three simple reasons:
- Legal record for inheritance and family involvement in related affairs.
(I sure don't want Jagoff Jones claiming inheritance on my estate without sufficient documentation.) - Legal record to inhibit and prosecute bigamy.
(Of course, bigamy has its own built-in punishment: two mothers-in-law.) - Legal record to assert paternal responsibility.
(So the rest of society doesn't get socked because some jackass can't keep it in his pants. Remember that the institution of marriage far predates blood and DNA tests.)
That's why the government issues marriage licenses.
-Jay
20
posted on
08/04/2003 5:53:14 PM PDT
by
Jay D. Dyson
(But I can't get nothin' that can be bought, so I'll just live with what I got... Lord, forgive me.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-82 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson