Marriage is between two people. DOMA was the law change that specified that marriage was "between one man and one woman." All subsequent state laws that have adopted same-sex marriages have done so based on their state constitutions, that define marriage between two people.Wrong, Sol. Read the Act.
-
No, ADR is wrong, in western civilization marriage has always been defined as between a man and a woman, only recently have some malicious idiots tried to promote their own political agenda's by changing it. Doma, was teh DEFENSE of marriage act and was approved to DEFEND the traditional marriage definition. Anyone who tells you differently is a revisionist idiot.
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 9:04 am
Read it again, if you continue to foolishly insist that "western civilization marriage has always been defined as between a man and a woman" ... because up until DOMA, it legally had not. That's a fact.
- NO ADR IS WRONG , ... AGAIN (not surprising in the least). You are an idiot ADR, I didn't say "legally" because prior to DOMA, it was undefined in a legal sense. All DOMA did was codify into law what the definition was since the advent of western civilization. - There simply is NO LEGAL PRECEDENT acknowledging it was anything other than 1 man 1 woman, but because of revisionist idiots, DOMA was required to legally define it. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 10:51 am
NO ADR IS WRONG , ... AGAIN (not surprising in the least). You are an idiot ADR, I didn't say "legally" because prior to DOMA, it was undefined in a legal sense. All DOMA did was codify into law what the definition was since the advent of western civilization.So because YOU think something was always a certain way that means it should not change? |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 1:40 pm
So because YOU think something was always a certain way that means it should not change?
- This has nothing to do with my opinion of the matter there killer. It has to do with precedent. I say, show me where a marriage in the US before you Libtards went nuts, say before 1995, that involved some other combination other than Man-Woman, and I'll show you where you can find 50,000 man-woman ones. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 1:44 pm
It has to do with precedent. I say, show me where a marriage in the US before you Libtards went nuts, say before 1995, that involved some other combination other than Man-Woman, and I'll show you where you can find 50,000 man-woman ones. Prior to 1967, you would have said the same thing about interracial marriage. You would have been accurate, but wrong just the same in the thought that it should stay that way. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:17 pm
but wrong just the same in the thought that it should stay that way.
- Purely opinion and ignorantly speculative in it's worth. But before you go all "BIGOT" on me, I do not base any of my own opinion on moral, religious, nor phobic grounds. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:34 pm
Purely opinion and ignorantly speculative in it's worth. But before you go all "BIGOT" on me, I do not base any of my own opinion on moral, religious, nor phobic grounds.Regardless of the grounds, then, am I to deduce that your opinion is that interracial marriage is bad in some way? Or do you agree with American society as a whole that it is ok? |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:42 pm
Even if he is a bigot, so what?? the only people that try to convert others are christians and vegeterians... i am neither, so i dont need to convert anyone into believing what i do...
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:49 pm
the only people that try to convert others are christians and vegeteriansVery true. Good point. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:04 pm
the only people that try to convert others are christians and vegeteriansVery true. Good point. - You forgot about Scientologists. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:10 pm
never met anyone brave enough to admit they are a scientologist, so i did not know they too try to convert others...
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:57 pm
You forgot about Scientologists.And Jews. And Muslums. And Atheists. And Buddhists. And Mormons. And Agnostics. And Jehova's Witnesses. They can all get preachy about their beliefs. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:03 pm
Regardless of the grounds, then, am I to deduce that your opinion is that interracial marriage is bad in some way? Or do you agree with American society as a whole that it is ok?
- As long as it is man-woman, as fits the historic definition of marriage, I'm fine with it, no matter anyone's "color". - No, my objection isn't against homosexuality, but rather A.) Redefining marriage, B.) preventing the erosion of the models of societal building blocks. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:14 pm
No, my objection isn't against homosexuality, but rather A.) Redefining marriage, B.) preventing the erosion of the models of societal building blocks.Words are redefined all the time and how is allowing two people of the same sex, who by the way were not going to get married anyway enter into a marriage an erosion of societal building blocks? If anything I would argue it enforces those models by persuading individuals to lead committed relationships instead of having multiple partners their whole life. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:16 pm
i didnt know marriage still existed, we call it pre-divorse where i come from. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:20 pm
What you are doing is saying "the earth is flat, it has been proven" even though everyone knows A.) You're an idiot, and B.) You are lying.I don't know about that. I have given this much thought and wouldn't put them in that category. I would put them in the category of people who think the moon landing never happened and actually took place in some studio somewhere OR that the holocaust never really happened and it was all a lie. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:26 pm
people who think the moon landing never happened and actually took place in some studio Wait, are you saying it didn't take place in a studio??? |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:17 pm
Words are redefined all the time and how is allowing two people of the same sex, who by the way were not going to get married anyway enter into a marriage an erosion of societal building blocks? If anything I would argue it enforces those models by persuading individuals to lead committed relationships instead of having multiple partners their whole life.
- I will answer this in the proper venue. The NFL-General board is not that venue. I am already amazed this hasn't been Off-Topiced yet/. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:20 pm
<strong> </strong>
<blockquote class="QuoteMessage"> <strong> Words are redefined all the time and how is allowing two people of the same sex, who by the way were not going to get married anyway enter into a marriage an erosion of societal building blocks? If anything I would argue it enforces those models by persuading individuals to lead committed relationships instead of having multiple partners their whole life. </strong> <br /> -<br /> I will answer this in the proper venue. The NFL-General board is not that venue. I am already amazed this hasn't been Off-Topiced yet/</blockquote> What a cop out.
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:29 pm
No, my objection isn't against homosexuality, but rather A.) Redefining marriage, B.) preventing the erosion of the models of societal building blocks.Fair enough. So that means that you truly believe that by redefining marriage that the "societal building blocks" would be eroded. That is an interesting take, and I would be intrigued to know how you define a "societal buliding block." You mentioned plural, so I am also curious as to some other notions that are considered to be societal building blocks. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:53 pm
Wouldn't the societal building block model become outdated if not allowed to ever change? Part of the reason (not all) that this country is going down the chit shoot is because our educational system is still using 1950's models to educate our kids. Kids from other countries, not subjected to our educational models, on average, are vastly superior to us in math and science, as well as being fluent in 2 or 3 languages (or more) by the time they are ready for the work force.
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 5:25 pm
Part of the reason (not all) that this country is going down the chit shoot is because our educational system is still using 1950's models to educate our kids.UNTRUE.. you are a funny guy and clown though! Can I be your agent? |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 8:21 pm
It is definitely one component of the reason. You're the clown.
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 2:55 pm
This has nothing to do with my opinion of the matter there killer. It has to do with precedent. I say, show me where a marriage in the US before you Libtards went nuts, say before 1995, that involved some other combination other than Man-Woman, and I'll show you where you can find 50,000 man-woman ones.That reasoning is not sufficent to deny a person their right to marry another consenting adult. Good luck and I hope that is the argument the defense uses when arguing the case in the SCOTUS. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 2:59 pm
Well accorng to some if we allow gay marriage then sooner or later we will allow man-animal marraiges... i say that sheep looks like a good lay...
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:15 pm
Well accorng to some if we allow gay marriage then sooner or later we will allow man-animal marraiges... i say that sheep looks like a good lay...Those who say that are uneducated inbred morons. Can an animal give consent to enter a legal contract like marriage? |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:18 pm
Consent is overrated. |
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:21 pm
So looks like we win.
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 3:19 pm
That reasoning is not sufficent to deny a person their right to marry another consenting adult.
|
|
-
Homosexual NFL PlayerFebruary 12, 2013 4:10 pm
No one is denying ANYONE the right to marry a consenting adult since marriage is between a man and a woman. Show me one instance where a gay person has been refused the right to marry (man-woman), ... you can't.You have already been proven wrong about this several times. |