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

To: bigsigh
It is simple, homosexuals cannot mate and produce children, there is no potential at all for it. The desire to mate is biologically heterosexual.

Marriage is a religious rite, not a civil right, a public act and a matter of public record - - the public has a right to restrict it by statute, as we do with a statutory license...

"Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with practices..."

[Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 8 Otto 145, 24 L. Ed. 244 (1878).]

See also: Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1, 10 S.Ct. 792, 34 L. Ed. 478 (1890). Revised as 140 U.S. 665, 11 S.Ct. 884, 35 L. Ed. 592 (1891).

Now if you want to argue the Michael Jackson advocacy in defense of statutory rape, or that he should be able to marry that poor little kid, go somewhere else to do it... you are on the same page as he is...

88 posted on 01/22/2006 4:20:10 PM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]


To: Sir Francis Dashwood
Homosexuals CAN mate and have children. You are wrong again.

Heterosexuals who can't reproduce are allowed to get married. So spare us the sanctimonius dribble about the purpose of marriage.

This will be my last post to you because you are often irrationa and a spin master.

I just wanted to point out that your first reply was illogical and factually incorrect. It is my hope that some day you will clear your head and think about what you are saying.

89 posted on 01/22/2006 4:24:05 PM PST by bigsigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies ]

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