Miss California Assailed By Gays For Defending Marriage

[OPTIONAL777]

Are you unable to read?

I have already stated that sex with children is wrong in America because in America children are deemed not capable of informed consent. That is our concept and the basis of our statutory laws regarding rape.

What is your problem, you the one thinking about having sex with children???

Quote from jem:

that is some of the most disjointed shit I have ever read on the internet.

I hope this is not sort of manifesto against statutory rape laws. Sex with children is sick and it is wrong and it is an unpardonable sin in my opinion. (perhaps God will forgive but society should not)

 

[OPTIONAL777]

Quote from Mercor:

Why not pick and choose the legal benefits you wish.
Its done now with prenuptials.

Whatever is done now, it would be reasonable to allow the same rights for same sex marriages.

In your world you would allow marriage for any reason for consenting adults.

Sure, as long as the contract was legal and deemed entered into on grounds that were not fraudulent or an attempt to defraud in any way. A man marrying a woman so that the woman can get a green card can come into question legally, etc.

If one adult wanted to get married to sell his health insurance rider, that same person may not want to give that spouse power to pull the plug.

That can be stipulated in a prenup and then the prenup can be challenged in a court of law. Contracts are challenged all the time in courts of law.

As much as Homo's want to pretend State marriage is about affirming a loving relationship, it only exists to apply legal benefits.

Marriage was initially about legal benefits, or family benefits through arranged marriages, etc. Do some research...love had little to do with a marriage contract for much of history.

Joseph Campbell, in the Power of Myth, mentions that the Twelfth century troubadours were the first ones who thought of courtly love in the same way we do now. The whole notion of romance apparently didn't exist until medieval times, and the troubadours.

http://marriage.about.com/cs/generalhistory/a/marriagehistory.htm

 

[jem]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Are you unable to read?

I have already stated that sex with children is wrong in America because in America children are deemed not capable of informed consent. That is our concept and the basis of our statutory laws regarding rape.

What is your problem, you the one thinking about having sex with children???

You are the one who would state sex with children was wrong. Now at least you are saying it is wrong in America.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

I have repeatedly stated it is wrong in America, as children are not capable of informed consent. Nor are animals capable of informed consent, nor are the mentally disabled capable of informed consent, etc.

Is it right in other countries?

That is none of my business, and it should be none of our business as a country to be making law or determining values for other countries...

We surely don't want other countries to legislate our laws and values for us, do we?

Quote from jem:

You are the one who would state sex with children was wrong. Now at least you are saying it is wrong in America.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

...

We surely don't want other countries to legislate our laws and values for us, do we?

No we don't, which is why we should not ratify such feel-good treaties as the UN's Rights of the Child pact. That would expose state laws regarding the family relationship to interference from international bodies.

It's also why Obama's selection of Dean Koh from Yale Law as the State Department's top lawyer is troubling. He is at the forefront on a number of issues where our laws and Constitution would be either sublimated to or interpreted by international standards. Fro example, capital punishment would be unconstitutional, not because the Framers intended it to be which they obviously did not, but because western european countries don't practice it.

 

[hapaboy]

Quote from jem:

that is some of the most disjointed shit I have ever read on the internet.

I hope this is not sort of manifesto against statutory rape laws. Sex with children is sick and it is wrong and it is an unpardonable sin in my opinion. (perhaps God will forgive but society should not)

Amazing, isn't it, that anyone can defend pedophilia anywhere in the world on the basis that it may not be a law in that country? By this standard, if there is no law against slavery in a particular country, or forced child labor, we should not speak out against those horrors.

Must be one sick piece of shit with pedophile tendencies to make that argument.

 

[Cutten]

Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:

Gays make LESS than men with children. Considerably. Gays like any other childless person enjoy greater disposable income but earnings lag.

http://www.urban.org/publications/900631.html

I pay taxes at higher rate than a welfare recipient. So why shouldn't I too get food stamps? Or a government contract? Or stimulus money? I pay higher property taxes than my neighbor who at least sends a child to the public school that I subsidize. There's all kinds of "inequalities" in the world of government. Grin and bare it.

An unmarried homosexual receives the exact same social security benefits as any other single person or anyone in a "common law" marriage. Death benefits were created under the assumption that married women were mothers who sacrificed earnings for family. Yes childless, married women with careers "beat the system" when they collect the check for their dead husbands. not exactly a big class of woman though, eh?

So if two gays getting married resulted in no additional government expenditure, would you still think it should be made illegal? I.e. is your objection based on tax issues or sexuality issues.

As for it being a mental illness, what criteria of mental illness does it fulfil? Just because something is outside the norm doesn't mean it is insane. What other sexual behaviours do you think are evidence of insanity - a bit of S&M? Anal? Doing it doggie style? Failure to read from the Bible before intercourse?

 

[Cutten]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:


That is none of my business, and it should be none of our business as a country to be making law or determining values for other countries...

We surely don't want other countries to legislate our laws and values for us, do we?

That's a dangerous line of thinking. What if a neo-Hitler came to power in the USA with a neo-Nazi group behind him, and started a repeat of the 1930s and 40s. Would you seriously claim that non-Americans had no right to protect the victims of such a regime? At first, no, but if things got serious enough (e.g. 10%+ of the population gassed to death) then the rights of the remaining victims become far more important than your patriotic foibles.

If the government in my country becomes sufficiently oppressive, then anyone anywhere on earth has every right to stop it. I would rather be liberated by a Chinaman than enslaved or killed by a Brit.

 

[Cutten]

Quote from IShopAtPublix:

Polygamy destroys societal structure, some men end up with 10 wives and some with none. Western societies (and others) had the foresight to ban this nonsense.

What's wrong with destroying societal structure?

 

[jem]

I like the societal structure.
It worked for my family.
My parents came out of the great depression as kids with families that had lost it all. One generation later I grew up in Greenwich Ct.

I lost a bunch of money in real estate in florida and now I am rebuilding in San Diego - doing pretty well.

I love that opportunity.

I am concerned that shit head never worked smart or hard at anythings are agitating for the destruction of the framework that allows such mobility.

You have every right as a American to vote for whatever you wish.

I have every right to think you might be a fool if you do not agree with me. (this is not directed at you cutten, as I know you are not a fool.)