Who’s laughing now?

Dave Richardson's picture

Last week a Peachtree City woman was arrested and charged with two felonies for bigamy. She allegedly married a second man under an assumed name so as to avoid the law.

But why do we care? Why is it even a crime for this woman to marry someone she loves? Why can’t she marry two men or even six if she wants?

More people today are coming to the conclusion that polygamous marriages don’t hurt anyone, and polygamous unions deserve the same recognition as heterosexual marriages. As I was sorting through this issue, I stumbled across a website which claimed that marriage laws should be changed to allow for polygamous marriage.

“Many polygamous couples want the right to legally marry because they are in love - many, in fact, have spent the last 10, 20 or 50 years with that person - and they want to honor their relationship in the greatest way our society has to offer, by making a public commitment to stand together in good times and bad, through all the joys and challenges family life brings.

Many parents want the right to marry because they know it offers children a vital safety net and guarantees protections that unmarried parents cannot provide. And still other people ... are fighting for the right of polygamous couples to marry because they recognize that it is simply not fair to deny some families the protections all other families are eligible to enjoy.”

Most reasonable people today understand that marriage is a basic human right, and restricting it to a man and woman is discriminatory, inequitable, and unfair. We have out grown such puritanical notions ... or have we?

What if you were to re-read the website quote above and substitute the phrase “intergenerational couples” or “trans-species couples” for “polygamous couples.” Would it make sense?

In today’s world, it sure could. We already know countless stories of sex between students and teachers or adults with children. Why should we be surprised by bestiality?

Intimacy with other species is growing in our country just as bigamy and polygamy is. It is already in some universities. Professor Alice Kuzniar researches and writes on relationships with animals, particularly dogs.

She was at the University of North Carolina when she wrote a leading work on the subject called “Melancholy Dog.” Later, for a San Francisco State University journal she wrote “On Intimacy with Dogs,” where she “insist[s] on the appropriateness of one’s passion for a pet, sprightly challeng[ing] assumptions about what constitutes a marital-sexual relationship.”

This isn’t farfetched, but becoming normal in our country. A July 15, 2005 story in the Seattle Times chronicled the death of a man who was crushed while having sex with a horse at a popular farm near Seattle. In the end no one was arrested as “deputies don’t believe a crime occurred because bestiality is not illegal in Washington state and the horse was uninjured.”

You may be cringing right now. You may be laughing and thinking this is ridiculous. This could never happen in our country, because this is a small minority, and people would never allow it. Really ...?

I have lived long enough to witness a tectonic shift in public opinion on sexuality and marriage. Today, these issues are framed as human rights and matters of inequality and discrimination.

They are nothing of the sort. We are witnessing what happens when a country jettisons God. Dostoyevsky said if there is no God “everything is lawful.”

This is what happens when God in his person and character is no longer the definition of good. Everyone knows we are not like him, and that is how we all knew what was right and wrong.

Now, we are all our own standards, which means there is no good or evil. There is just what is good for oneself. One can’t say what is good for another because he or she is their own standard.

Likewise, if someone wants to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings or exterminate whole races of people, no one can say that is wrong. All one can say is that he, she or they would not do that. They are their own standard.

This is what happens when we decide for ourselves what good is rather than God. So if our neighbor wants to marry two men, how can anyone say that is wrong?

Oh, remember that website quote above where I suggested substituting other phrases for “polygamous couples?” I have to confess, I already did that with the quote, which actually comes verbatim from the Human Rights Campaign, a leading homosexual rights group.

From the gay marriage page, I substituted “polygamous couples” for “same-sex couples.” The argument for gay marriage is EXACTLY the same as the argument for polygamous, bigamous, intergenerational, or trans-species marriage.

This has never been a rights or discrimination issue. It is a moral issue. When we assume that we are the deciders of good instead of God, then “everything is lawful” and amazingly we scratch our heads and wonder how we lost our country and our culture.

Fifty years ago people laughed at the idea of homosexuals marrying, thinking it was ridiculous and would never happen. Who’s laughing now?

[David Richardson of Peachtree City coordinates the Assumptions Project. He has a Master of Theology degree from Oxford University and is a recognized expert on the religious attitudes and beliefs of university professors. He, his wife, and his children have lived in Fayette County for over 22 years.]

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - I restated

my question so you could better understand my meaning....so;

I will try and keep my questions simple for your benefit. You can do the same.

Do you believe that people today should receive money as payment for past injustices against their ancestors by ancestors of those that administered those injustices?

I hope this question is not too complicated.

A simple, yes or no will be fine.

I look for your clear answer, or no answer at all, which is an answer in of itself.

Thanks

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Not my question

DM, you’re correct, both slavery and Jim Crow laws were legal, but not illegitimate to natural law, so they were mute from an unalienable right standpoint. Dr. King recognized this when he urged the repeal of the segregation laws, in his “I have a dream” speech by repeating the legal promises of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, referring to these promises as a “sacred obligation”.

However, that was not my question. I will rephrase my question, then. Do you believe that the progeny of those that propagated and enforced these illegitimate laws hold some obligation to the progeny of those that were enslaved? In other words, do you believe that current American Indians, Blacks, Irish, etc. should receive some monetary compensation for the past deeds of evil men by their descendents?

A short concise response would be appreciated.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Please clarify this statement

Inquiring minds want to know:

Quote:

but not illegitimate to natural law,

Slavery and Jim Crow

LOL!!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Sorry

typo, should have read "legitimate".

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

Using your logic, so you believe that slavery and Jim Crow are legitimate to natural law. Keep posting! Let the world know what non-socialists, libertarians, strict Constitutionalists think about slavery and Jim Crow. Very, very enlightening. I'll check again sometime next week - have to go out with my conservative, Republican, non-racist friends.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Run DM

Run DM, wouldn't want you to miss your appointments.

I think you need a reading comprehension course, or perhaps that's that public education showing through?

Now, when you get back next week we will all be waiting patiently for your answer to the BIG question. Naturally, we don't expect you have the courage to answer it.

When you come back, I will ask it again, just in case you forget.

Drive safe.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
What? (PTCO)

Couldn't find where I said I wanted money (reparations)? Whoever paid for your PRIVATE (WHAT A WASTE OF MONEY THAT WAS!)education should have taught you how to use the dictionary - and think logically. [the operative word here is THINK!] I told my friends that according to your posts - you are not a Republican. They sighed with relief. ALERT!! I will not answer any of your repeat questions. They have been answered. ROTFL!!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Wow - DM

Did I go through a time warp?

I thought you said you wouldn't be back until next week? You couldn't stay away could you? ;-)

Now, I know you aren't going to answer the question on reparations, you have already answered because you refuse to deny it. Therefore, one can safely say that you are for it.

I hope those Republican "friends" of yours know your position on this. You know, I sigh with relief that I am not a Republican too.

Here's what I think, if Mr. Obama is elected again, people who believe in reparations will put this front and center on his agenda.

However, these people have two problems to overcome, one is the entire incumbent Congress will be turned out of office. Secondly as we all know Mr. Obama is white and will resist any calls for reparations.

Please get off the floor you must look pretty silly down there.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
PTC Observer

Davids Mom is living proof that wisdom does not always accompany age.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PtCO

You asked about absolution. My answer to that is NO! Absolution does not involve 'money'. Look up the difference between absolution and reparation. READ! THINK! Your questions make little or no sense.

This is your original question:

Quote:

Are you suggesting that the practice of slavery in the past should require absolution?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Absolution - DM

Yes, your definition is correct and my question was about absolution, aka forgiveness.....and your answer is NO! You don't believe that there is anything to forgive by people that live today. I think this is your answer?

Yes
No

My attempt in asking another question based on your response has confused this string I suppose. Sorry for the confusion on this.

I now await your answer to the above and my follow on question concerning payment. Also a yes or no answer please.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

Many blacks and whites worked together to get this country where it is today. The constant referral to slavery is not what is going to help heal the 'race' problem. The Jim Crow practices and attitudes of white supremists needs to be dealt with by those who feel that because of the color of their skin, by some reason they are superior to those who have more melanin. I don't know if you are green, purple or pink - but anyone can see through your 'questions' that you are still trying to validate your bigoted libertarian ideology. Keep asking your questions - you will find my answers in what I have already stated. Again, I celebrate the progress in race relations that I see in Georgia today compared to what it was 30 years ago. Enough said. I guess you agree with Romney - that only the black citizens in America today need to stop freeloading. I bet he won't make that statement outside of the south!!! The Romney son will not be the only Romney booed off the stage!! YES I think you are an idior! No - I don't think there is anyone in 2012 who is proud of 'slavery' anywhere - but especially in the US - and NO I don't feel anyone needs to be 'forgiven'. It was/is a hateful practice regardless of where it occurrs Jim Crow is another topic - because there are vestiges of that right here in our country today! Do you want to be forgiven for slavery or Jim Crow? A yes or no answer will suffice. LOL!!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
To all: Race Relations
Quote:

I celebrate the progress in race relations that I see in Georgia today compared to what it was 30 years ago

To discuss 'forgiveness' and 'reparations', in my opinion, is a hinderance to the continuance of the needed healing that remains to occur in order for the citizens of this country to unite as Americans. Therefore, in the discussion of race-relations, I celebrate the progress that I perceive based on my personal experience and will continue to celebrate that in the face of those who refuse to acknowledge this progress in Fayette County. Some believe that to forgive is to forget. I was in Fayette County 40 years ago. ( I was not a child, but a 30 year old woman, and an American citizen. I have not forgotten my experience - but today I celebrate the noted progress in how a woman of color is treated in Fayette county in 2012. Jim Crow was practiced 40 years ago. I cannot forget, nor do I honestly forgive bigoted practices of the past - but I celebrate the noted progress. I will continue to share my opinion in this discussion. I do not speak for all 'minorities' or all 'women', nor do I feel anyone in this discussion speaks for all 'whites'.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - We all

celebrate too!!!

However, why is it that you think we shouldn't discuss forgiveness or reparations?

You state here that you can't forgive "bigoted practices of the past", that's clear.

Can you say that you don't believe in reparations?

Remember it was Christ that instructed us to forgive, it will lift a heavy burden from your heart if you can do it. Luke 6:37

"Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven"

Healing also means to cast corrupted and dishonest men's ideas aside like thorns, this is what you can't seem to do to convince those that read your posts that you want to "heal" race relations. Your words seem to ring hollow or at least you don't seem to be helping in the process of "healing". See if you can cast it aside DM.

Samuel 23:6

I forgive you DM for calling me bad names, really I do. ;-)

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Compliments?

"YES I think you are an idior!"

Urban Dictionary:

Definition (really)

a new way of saying an intellegent wonderful hot person who rocks life or just crazy/amazing

Thanks so much for this nice compliment, who says your mom didn't teach you manners!

BTW, Do you actually play chess?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Definition of 'idiot'

An utterly foolish or senseless person (really)
Yes - I love to play chess! CHECKMATE! LOL

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Geee - DM

Maybe I am wrong about what your mom taught you.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
So, DM

you still have no answer to the question, which I assume means that you don't have the courage to put down a simple "yes".

The most difficult answer would be to say "Yes, I do believe in reparations." for past misdeeds. Why don't you have the courage to just say it?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
You asked for absolution in

You asked for absolution in your original question. Answer mine, I answered yours. Do you want to be forgiven for the practices of slavery and it's cousin, Jim Crow? Come on, be courageous!

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM for me the answer is NO

I have nothing to apologize for...

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Lindsey - DM

is not looking for an apology she is looking for money.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO/Lindsey

Funny, I don't remember asking for money. Please paste it here in a quote for all to see. Thanks. Lindsey, I don't care what you 'think'. Have a nice day - both of you throw backs to what used to be. LOL. (IMO)

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM you don't care????

But yet you responded any way... Deeds belie words madame and yet your words belie your beliefs.

A conundrum wrap inside an enigma.. Interesting.

Still waiting on you to present at least a shred of evidence of my racist nature or are you one to throw the racist charge out there like the rest of the race baiters?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey

Your need to point out the negative aspects of race relations is more than a 'shred of evidence' in my opinion.. I care about the possible reaction that your words may create in others. But please continue. Your words are important in helping us to identify the steps all citizens need to take towards healing this sore in our relationships in the United States. I could
match your negative examples word for word, but my observation of how the average citizens in Fayette County treat one another belies the words of such a discussion.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM but...but...but

Dm on just how many occasions have you stated that America is Racist..?

You see DM your continued defense and out right ignoring those very same issues that you state I bring up as evidence of me being racist does in fact prove one thing your views and bias are clearly prejudiced by what you claim was done in the past.

DM we have to discuss these issues not bury them. Burying them DM like you wish we white people would do is why the Black Community is in the shape it is in now.
Why there are more black on black murders then any other race... Why there are disproportionately more blacks in prison then any other race.

DM simply acknowledging this FACT, to you, may be racist but to me it represents a blinding ideology that Progressives like yourself have propagated and foisted on the black community for a Generation now.

DM you can continue to ignore the issues.. WE all know there is racism in America and in the UK, France, Italy, Greece and well everywhere in the World.. That's nothing new. But to continue to blame one race's issues on as you state "America is a racist Country" is to ignore the cancer that is growing in your community and your continued defense of it does not help.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey

Please share what you are doing to help solve the 'race' problem (the cancer in the black community ). Your experiences
will (can be) a guide to others. When there is a disease in the body, if there has been any improvement, that improvement is studied and replicated in order to help the healing process and possibly lead to a cure. To only discuss the issues that cause conflict and deny any healing activity is fruitless . To tell a person of color or a woman that their experiences are being 'claimed' as opposed to being a part of history . . well that is insulting. Lindsey, the world celebrated Obama's victory not because of his intelligence or his good looks or his politics, but because he represented a change in how the United States was viewed regarding the issue of race. The students from the Middle East who studied in the U.S. in the '50's experienced the same 'claimed' racism that I experienced. It is the young people of the Middle East that are moving towards 'freedom' that the US is practicing and demonstrating today . . not the 'freedom' for some that was demonstrated years ago. There are Americans in this country who have not had equal educational opportunities. Unless our educational offerings are improved and broadened, we will lose our standing in the world. I know how far this country has come in the last 30-40 years in the area of race relations. . . and I will continue to celebrate that. I know what exists in a black community where there is poor education, poverty, drugs, crime. I have learned that the same condition exists in a 'white' community where there is poor education, poverty, drugs, and crime. I and others have visited those communities. These communities should not exist in a country that claims to be the most powerful in the world .

Cancer, unless checked, spreads. Over spending, corruption, inaction on the part of national and local leadership needs to be delt with. Racism, here and throughout the world needs to be dealt with. Actually I feel we have made greater progress in race relations than we have in handling our business for the benefit of the American people.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
See Lindsey?

Everyone is doing it, so it is o.k. Moral equivelancy.

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
I don't think anyone said they had the cure for cancer

But I think everyone has pretty much diagnosed your thought process as symptomatic of the disease.

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
I don't think anyone said they had the cure for cancer

But I think everyone has pretty much diagnosed your thought process as symptomatic of the disease.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM suggarfoot is right

Why is it when someone disagrees with you or brings up a point that you disagree with your typical response is "What is your plan/solution/cure" add verb as needed?

DM you first have to recognize the problem before one can deal with it.

We showed you the video of the New Black Panthers outside a voting precinct- You said "what intimidation" there is nothing wrong with 2 black guys in BDUs with nightsticks threatening people.

We showed you the speeches and rants from Sharpton, Jackson and Farrakhan and you said what about the "secret cabal of racist in the Teaparty".

You said "America's a racist Country" and said the Teaparty is "White dominated organization made up of racist" we showed you racism in your own Community and we are branded racist.

DM you love to point out the inequities of the white community and how it unfairly treats the black community but when we point out issues like Eric Holder failing to do the job he was appointed to do we are racist.

When I went to School black children sat in the same classroom as I did. They were taught by the same teachers and had the same opportunities to learn as I did.. In fact they had MORE opportunities then I did with Colleges actively recruiting blacks to get the quotas in line with Federal Mandates and with the assistance of the Black College Fund where able to go to College with little or no GPA and/or loans that the rest of the us had to have.

The poor will always exist. It's a sad fact but in a free society there will always be those that make poor life choices and as a result will fail to take advantage of the opportunities America gives them. You speak of Foreign students coming over here and experiencing the same racism that you felt in the 50's????? REALLY

Where are the fire hoses, dogs and just how many are in jail DM..being a bit dramatic aren't we? Many people FEEL like they are supposed to be given something just by being here DM that's not new. In a Capitalist society, however, you have to earn it.

DM you can continue to lay the racist charge on those of us that refuse to be cowed into silence by it. It doesn't scare me. You don't know me nor do you know what is in my heart. So your opinion of that one issue concerns me not, however, until you can logically and dispassionately discuss issues that are right in front of you you will never be able to help solve them you will however help create them.

How can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,' when you don't see the beam in your own eye? Luke 6:42

DM a final thought. If by me raising issues of the black communities own plight is therefore racist isn't therefore also racist if you do so for the White community? You see DM that racist street runs both ways or isn't more likely you don't like it when others point out the failings in ones own community?

No one likes to be criticized DM. I understand that but before you point fingers at the mess in someone else's house you should make sure your own house is clean first don't you think?

Can we not discuss these issues openly and freely without calling someone names or ascribing beliefs not yet in evidence? Is it not what America is all about? To be able to speak ones mind without repercussion and recriminations?

Dm if you don't believe that then I truly feel sorry for you because you don't live in the America that I do.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey - yes really

Some here appear upset because I view the history and much of the present actions in the United States as 'racist:
What I have experienced the past 8 years has changed SOME of my opinions - but let's see:

Lindsey wrote:

Quote:

DM a final thought. If by me raising issues of the black communities own plight is therefore racist isn't therefore also racist if you do so for the White community? You see DM that racist street runs both ways or isn't more likely you don't like it when others point out the failings in ones own community?

I wrote:

Quote:

I know how far this country has come in the last 30-40 years in the area of race relations. . . and I will continue to celebrate that. I know what exists in a black community where there is poor education, poverty, drugs, crime. I have learned that the same condition exists in a 'white' community where there is poor education, poverty, drugs, and crime. I and others have visited those communities.

I see some agreement in these two statements. Now about your knowledge of my experience with foreign students in the '50's. Really Lindsey - many of them joined us in our march for civil rights. Their skin color was the same as ours - so they didn't stand out in this non-racist society of the '50s that you claim you have such expertise.

Quote:

Where are the fire hoses, dogs and just how many are in jail DM..being a bit dramatic aren't we?

No!

:You have expressed a sentiment that I have heard a lot here in the south. That those who experienced the civil rights of citizenship for a lifetime - were/are resentful that the attempt to allow those who had been denied affected their lives in a negative fashion. The practice of racism in the United States had a negative affect on all of its citizens. The negativity is difficult to put aside. "Black children had more opportunities; had greater access to college; etc., etc., etc. " I hear you. Whites and blacks who worked hard, studied, etc., seemed to overcome these 'problems' of the affects of all having 'civil rights' and are contributing to society. Those who haven't made this transition, need to look and blame their own efforts or lack of effort. I think that you have also intimitated this in some of your statements. Thank you for sharing your point of view. It is based on your experience and bias. I will continue to share my point of view based on my point of view and my experience and bias. I don't deny my bias. But I continue to celebrate the progress that I have experienced - especially here in Fayetteville, GA.

Quote:

Can we not discuss these issues openly and freely without calling someone names or ascribing beliefs not yet in evidence

You have called me a 'racist', a person who denies inadequacies in the black community, and still I try to continue to have a free and open discussion with you. Regarding beliefs not yet in evidence - please share. To some, I sound like a disgruntled black woman and you sound like a disgruntled white man. Sad. Still, I rejoice in the friends of all colors that I have made here in Fayetteville and Peachtree City. We have more in common than 'racism' could affect. Kindred tastes seems to be very important to 'relationships'. The residents of Fayette County seem to have 'kindred tastes' and want the best for their community. (But I'm sure you will find more negatives to separate 'persons of a different race' in Fayette County.) I find it interesting that you and those who 'disagree' with some of my points - don't want to offer a plan for solving anything. That just may be a very productive discussion.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Dm fair enough we will disagree on this

I still don't see why I have to produce a plan for you to solve issues that you have.

But I guess on this we will simply disagree... I know, a shocker right but there it is.

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
Here's a great plan

Take firearm lessons and arm yourselves. The more housholds that keep firearms locked and loaded are more prepared to deal with the infestation of criminals attempting to invade our county.

The more criminals sent to the hospital or morgue, the more the word will get out that Fayette County citizens have had enough of the thuggery from the north and will not stand by and watch it turn into Clayton or Fulton.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
To all:

The media is not giving a 'racial' description of the person who took a shotgun and followed Clayton County school buses. Some statements here are considered inflammatory. Private groups and church groups are working hard to make citizens realize that these are acts of SICK individuals and not an act of an entire racial group. Please think about your words. Words are very powerful tools for war and peace. There is a community in Clayton County who is very fearful for their children. The cooperation of all law enforcement is appreciated.

Quote:

The more criminals sent to the hospital or morgue, the more the word will get out that Fayette County citizens have had enough of the thuggery from the north and will not stand by and watch it turn into Clayton or Fulton

An individual has the right to his 'free speech' - but if some sick person takes sick action based on such ideas, the words are harmful to us all.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Is

correct on this view. I can't imagine what the parents are going through there.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

These parents could care less about the 'race' of the suspect. It is important that NO vigilante action be taken in this case - and that law enforcement be allowed to do their job. A crime has been committed by a criminal - and this community is very familiar with black on black crime. If one is so inclined - this is a time for prayer.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Agreed

I don't think it matters what race this person is, he's just as guilty either way. He will be caught and will receive a fair and speedy trial.

I think the black community has shown its restraint in Florida, with a few notable exceptions, there hasn't been vigilantes roaming the streets down there. I haven't seen reports of mobs in the streets holding torches and looking for white people to lynch. The only thing I've seen is outrage....before the evidence is in. We'll see how this all works out.

Vigilantes can go to jail too.

My thoughts and prayers to go out to those families in Clayton, they don't deserve this, no one does.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Just don't 'approach' them, Grizz...

...you might get cited (or beat!) for 'profiling'!

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Don't ask for a jump-start either.....

You might get shot and killed like the poor guy at the Starlight Drive-In did by a poor excuse of human trash, some idiot with the name of "Quentric ShayMon."

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Yes, NUK...

...already posted/linked that one on another blog/column; doesn't help dispel the fear of violent young black men. I included - that same day/night - the 4 black teens beating & robbing a Soldier in Tampa, FL. As posted there, it's enough to make Jesse J. nervous...

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
You all are racist

bringing up acts like these only help to divide us...

See DM I can get with it...

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
I am sorry...

...that I encouraged these acts by being paranoid about these acts...like Jesse J. is...

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - But

you don't deny it either do you DM?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
So, DM I see

you don't want to answer the question. Therefore, this is my answer.

Thanks for being so upfront about it.

I don't need absolution from you for anything, thanks.

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
Robert

Did you really thinks whites caught blacks in Africa? That is funny, they didn't know the area, nor were they use to the elements there...in short ...they would have died trying.

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=5375628&...

SLAVERY AND ITS TRANSFORMATION IN THE
KINGDOM OF KONGO: 1491–1800*
BY LINDA M. HEYWOOD
Boston University
ABSTRACT: Studies of slavery in Africa during the period of the Atlantic slave
trade have largely ignored questions of how political processes affected enslavement
during the period and also the extent to which notions of who could be
enslaved were modified. Documentation for the kingdom of Kongo during the
1500s to 1800 allows us to explore how the trade was sustained and the social and
political dynamics behind it. In a state that consistently exported large numbers of
slaves throughout the period of the trade, kings of Kongo at first observed quite a
pronounced distinction between foreign-born captives subject to enslavement and
sale in the Atlantic trade and freeborn Kongos who were largely proctected from
enslavement and sale overseas. In time, however, the distinctions that separated
foreign-born and Kongos fell apart as later political authorities and others disregarded
such distinctions and all Kongos became subject to enslavement and sale
overseas. This was a product of internal Kongo conflicts, which witnessed the
collapse of institutions and the redefinition of polity, what it meant to be a citizen
or freeborn, and who could be enslaved.
//////////////

The reason the drop in Irish slaves you can find on virtual Jamestown. The white (Irish slaves) could run off to a nearby settlement and blend in. At first they brought them back and branded them on both sides of their face. After that, they ran off to the Indians. For the English the difference in the color of the skin was a no brainer. After the used up as many Irish as they could, they had life exiles who were on the wrong side of whatever religious war that was going on, then they had the people locked up for petty crimes. In the end, it was much easier to go to the Congo and pick up already caught slaves. That was the chief export by the blacks in power. They sold their own people as slaves.

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
more
suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
this is good too.
PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Simple Solutions - RWM

Let’s take your three points one by one,

1. Shifting the power to take away individual freedom to the states. Is this not the same thing as having the Federal government take individual freedom? Won’t we replace pandering federal politicians for pandering state politicians? Using the power of the state in all its forms to limit the action of the individual in leading their lives is the threat. Extending your solution here, what will then stop the state from passing laws that conform to the Muslim faith and concepts of morality? At what point do we draw the line between personal beliefs and mores when using the force of law? Is not liberty of conscience the most fundamental and important liberty of all?

2. This point is a separate but equally important issue. What gives the state the mandate to award tribute for human action? In other words, why should the state give anything to any individual or group for doing something that they would normally do using free will? For that matter why should we allow the state to use coerced funding in an attempt to achieve some social "vision" of the political elite. Using the state’s power to tax and then redistribute that tax is a corruption of the purpose of our government or for that matter any government. So, in this I agree with you. No one should be rewarded for marriage by the state. As to the rest of your points in this paragraph please see #1 above.

3. I agree, the government should leave everyone alone. All government.

What is the defense of liberty anyway? It is first and foremost the recognition that our rights are given by God and that these rights precede government. It is the recognition that it is a freedom to act as long as that action does not harm others through that action. It is the constant vigilance of citizens to be wary of the power of government to suppress individuals in allowing them the full use of their abilities. It is the eternal struggle to fight the darkness of despotism, including legal despotism.

This is why I think your position is wrong and plays into the hands of those that would use government to justify control our lives and our liberty.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
PTCO: Totally agree

The "states right" mantra is also what has wrecked the insurance industry in this country and prevented cost savings by all the state-level mandates that have obliterated free market insurance and driven costs through the roof. How insane is it that Blue Cross/Blue Shield has "franchises" in every state and all of these franchises have different policies and rates due to which state they are located in and you have to buy in whatever particular state you happen to live in? "Free market health insurance didn't work?" That's because it's NEVER BEEN TRIED. The "states" got in the way as usual with their hands stuck-out waiting for their payoffs.

Repubs are always hung up on the "states rights" issue even though their hero Ronald Reagan didn't give a damn whatsoever about it once elected. You don't extort states with "you raise the drinking age to 21 or you get no money" if you care about so-called "states rights." Another Repub in Nixon did the same bit with the 55mph speed limit. Repubs aren't stupid, but they are fast forgetters.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
NUK_1 - Republicans

are no different than Democrats, its all a matter of degree. They pay off their political supporters the same way the Democrats do, using other people's money.

At least the Democrats don't hide their corruption, it's right out there for everyone to see. They assume that universal participation in robbery will get them all re-elected. The Republican's cloak their payoffs using the banner of "defense of freedom" and we pour money down a bottomless pit called "defense", while we play policemen to half the earth. Defense or offense either way there is no end to the spending and the growth of government.

Our government is out of control and will remain so. Our citizens are afraid of the uncertainty of freedom and seek the comfort at the teat of the "nurturing" beast. Your example above is merely a symptom of the much great disease of government social engineering. YOU know this already, don't you NUK_1?

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Why do we care?

Do any of the involved parties care?

What about when a regular couple divorce? Do we care? Is that against some Biblical Law?

father time
father time's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/06/2010
Interpretation is the key

The Bible is the greatest book ever. However,reading the Bible and interpreting the message is sort of like reading the law. " If it don't fit, you must acquit", made famous by the murder case against OJ Simpson.
Interpretation of the law helped OJ walk and I believe we all know he was guilty.
The use of Biblical standards can be construed differently by everyone, some for convienence and some by the way they were taught as children. Everyone knows right from wrong, and all choose their paths of life, but the bible specifically states that homosexuallity is wrong. In Genesis, the bible never mentioned Adam and Steve, but as Adam and Eve. All throughout the book it explains the principalities of morality and how we should live, and some people take a passage and use it for there own good. Why do we have lawyers-"to argue the law". I have seen cases where the accused is guilty but his lawyer done his homework and argued successfully that he was found not guilty.
How you act and how you live is your business,but when your actions involved the community and you try to force feed people that the life style of Gay Marriage is acceptable, then it becomes everybodies business. When a couple that cannot reproduce children, with the exception of being medically challanged, and believe that if everyone were gay is o.k., our society would come to a crashing hault because the end of reproduction we be eminent.
The Bible also tells us that these sort of things would eventually come around during tha last days, and seeing all of the things that are going on, I believe they have arrived.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Let the deviants marry if they want

Who cares? 2 gay guys (or gals) want to sleep together, live together or marry - so what? They are not going to reproduce, so the deviant behavior is not going to be passed along genetically, is it?

And if the happy gay couple adopts kids - so what? It would be kids that no one else wants, so they are better off being raised by 2 moms or 2 dads instead of the orphanage. They may grow up confused, but at least they won't make headlines a a mass murderer or something.

If the gays move in next door to you and it gets to the point that it annoys you, just ask Peachtree City Council to pass a law that prevents them from holding hands (or anything else) outside your house. They can handle it, so to speak.

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
RWM-Generally I'd agree but.....

Generally I'd agree with you. But the one point of concern I'd have would be what affect this would have on the economy when companies have to start covering all of these new "spouses". You know the added cost of providing these additional benefits will be passed on to the consumers.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
That's probably why, G-Dude...

...the House just voted to NOT recognized homosexual marriage on military installations. At this time the HUGE imposition of providing housing, medical benefits, etc...is hardly financially feasible. And it'd be just the tip of the iceberg of demands that the homosexual lobby would WILL continue to try and force on our military and nation.

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Tons of companies offer benefits now to "partners"..

In fact, many companies would in fact save money if these "partners" had to be legally married. It's one thing to say you're a "partner", it's another to get married and actually prove it.

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
Spy-Would you have any numbers?

I may be wrong, and maybe you have some data, but I'd think that there are not many companies that are offering benefits for "partners".

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
G35: Numbers

I know that most of the fortune 500 companies already do, including Delta, Google, Microsoft, Bank of America, GE, Apple. etc. etc. Here's a list from 2 years ago and it's a sure bet it's grown since then:

http://www.salaryfor.com/blog/companies-offering-domestic-partner-benefi...

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Those are about what i have seen

My Wife works for a company with a worldwide presence that has offices inPTC. they have done it for a while, no problems that I can tell so far.

Frankly I do not understand all the hubub.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
The uproar over gay marriage

I just DO NOT CARE whether gays can marry or not. I also DO NOT CARE if they call it a "civil union" or a "marriage" or "shacking up" or the fundie fave of "living in sin." It isn't going to affect my life one way or the other. Both sides can knock themselves out over it...the reality is that it is coming sooner rather than later and the fundies will just have to deal with it and can screech as usual about how only they have a monopoly on morality.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Well, NUK...

...that's nice to know. It WILL affect mine, it will affect many in this nation in many ways; its not simply all about 'morality', albeit for some it is. Some see marriage as an institution for the pro-generation of our society, specifically shared between 1 man and 1 woman. Homosexuals can pat themselves on the back for their advances; they figured out how to buy politicians, but they will never - in the familial sense - be normal. They can buy, genetically build, or adopt all the kids they want, but 'they' - the 'couple' - will never have their 'own' children. This to me is an integral part of being a family. Hence, in your words, they can 'shack up', or 'civil union', but they need not inject themselves into MY institution of marriage.

ginga1414
ginga1414's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/01/2008
kcchiefandy

The only thing I feel a need to address here is "adoption."

Quite a few years back and two days before Mother's Day, my husband and I brought "our" beautiful blonde, blue-eyed, seven week old baby girl home from The Children's Center of Metropolitan Atlanta.

Three years before that time, we had brought home"our" beautiful auburn hair, brown-eyed, six week old baby boy from the same place.

When "our" little girl was in elementary school in Fayetteville, she came home one day and said that a boy at school had asked her who was her "real" Mama. "My" little girl said that she told the boy, "My Mama is my real Mama." The boy said, "No she isn't. You are adopted."

Well, kcchiefandy, "my" child had known from the time she was a baby that God had sent her to us by a different route. She knew that she was adopted and just exactly what all that entailed.

I called "my" child's teacher and explained the situation. I, also, called the boy's mother and explained what had happened.

With an extremely heavy and worried heart, I sent "my" little girl back to school the next day. I sent her out into the cruel world with a hug, a kiss, a note in her lunch box saying how much we loved her and how proud we were of her, and just for good measure a Twinkie.

"Our" little girl came home that afternoon and said that she had fixed Jeff. She said, "Mama, Jeff asked me again who is my real Mama, and I told him that you are my real Mama. I told him that my Mama is just as real as your Mama."

Enough said, kcchiefandy. "Our" family is just as real as anyone else's family.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Ginga...

...you missed the rest of the conversation; it addressed homosexual adoptions, and even that wasn't really much of the point...

I applaud married couples who take these children in as their own and raise them in a decent, loving home; it is truly a blessed thing to do.

ginga1414
ginga1414's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/01/2008
kcchiefandy and Nuk

I realize that kcchiefandy was mainly addressing the many and broad issues of homosexuality.

However, as you can imagine, through the years my family has answered a whole lot of questions about adoption. Some of those questions have been hurtful and insensitive to say the least. Therefore, I am always tuned in when the subject of adoption comes up.

Also, tomorrow is Mother's Day and our baby girl's arrival in our family is right there in the forefront of my thoughts each Mother's Day.

kcchiefandy, I truly appreciate your sentiments. No offense taken. I was just trying to ward off any hurtful comments about adoption from other folks.

Nuk, if you will remember, the subject of adoption came up here a couple of years ago. You and I came to a meeting of the minds over adoption, then. Please, tell your Mom "Happy Mother's Day" for me.

Happy Mother's Day to all.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Happy Mother's Day to you Ginga

and to all Mothers out there. We'd all still be living in caves without you.

ginga1414
ginga1414's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/01/2008
Nuk, Thanks So Much

Your Mother's Day wishes mean a lot to me, and I'm sure to all the other Moms out there! I hope everyone has a great day.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
ginga: I hope it was a poor choice of words

As an adopted child myself, I saw blood red at first and was pissed off, but I highly doubt kcchiefandy was really talking about all adopted children there. While I may disagree with him, I don't think he meant to lump all adopted children and their parents into the gay marriage discussion.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
How are they injecting themselves into your marriage?

Mine isn't affected whatsoever if two dudes or two women with wallets on chains in their back pocket of their Wrangler jeans get married. It doesn't cheapen my marriage. They aren't going to drag down an institution that has been around forever any more than what heterosexuals have accomplished.

Also, are you saying people that adopt children don't have their "own" children? That adopted children are some how lesser than others that weren't adopted? There's a lot of adopted people who would totally disagree with you about who their "parents" are/were. Tons of idiots can produce children.....that has nothing to do with marriage or parenting.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
By definition, NUK...

...as previously stated, marriage is the union of a man and a woman. It intrudes on this definition, and it does cheapen the institution. Hmmm, so now I believe I can marry my dog, because there's no definition. My dog's vet bills are going up as he gets older; I want to care for him and get my company to provide the benefits. It is truly that simple. You can laugh but 50 yrs. ago homosexuals were thought of as abnormal (some still hold that belief). There's also the financial aspect in certain quarters, that's exactly why (IMO) the House just voted down recognizing homosexual marriage at the Federal level; the cost to DoD alone - at this time of constrained budgets - would be huge.

As for adoption, the jury's still out on how adoption by homosexuals affect the child; I've heard good & bad. That is my point, and, that would be the ONLY acceptable choice, IMHO, for these people to 'have' children. It still take a boy part & a girl part to make a baby; homosexuals can't change that with lobbying.

Btw, your description of female homosexuals - above - would probably be very offensive to most of them, I imagine.

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
kcchiefandy

As far as offending lesbians, I also DO NOT CARE. If they all looked like the versions of Hollywood and porno-land, that would be awesome, but I lived and worked in Midtown ATL and other places to know better. I don't pretend to understand how another person's sexuality is and as long as it only involves another consenting adult, I DO NOT CARE. I presently work overseas is a Dutch country and about the last thing people care about is whether you're gay or not. Lesbians talk about which co-workers they think are "hot" and sound no different than guys sitting around talking about women they work with. Why in a lesbian relationship there is almost always the "manly butch" and the "lipstick lebso" I don't quite get either, but I DO NOT CARE. This doesn't affect me.

Your first post about adoption didn't seem to indicate you were just talking about only homosexuals adopting, but all adoptions in general.

As far as financially, it will be sad day when the USA says you can't do "something" like gay marriage because it will cause too many supposedly additional costs, no matter what the economy is like at the time. I'm sure it cost a TON of money when black males were first allowed to vote and then when all women were later allowed to vote. All the voter rolls suddenly have to be changed, more vote counters, etc. etc. Matter of fact, freeing slaves and then later giving them some rights also cost a fortune because it was bye-bye free labor. Cost considerations in this case are BS. It's just a smokescreen to impose government-sanctioned morality on some and not others.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Nuk

Many have made the comparison that you have shared. It's difficult for some to see that 'rights' for some and not for all is difficult to do under our Constitution.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
So you say, NUK...

...so you say. I DO NOT CARE about other countries on this topic; only mine. And yes, homosexual adoptions was my point. That 'sad day' has arrived, btw, if you haven't noticed; those entitlements, benefits, et al, are what got us in the hole were are currently in. I.E., LACK of cost considerations...so, thank you.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
MEDICARE

IS NOT FOR FREE!! THOSE OF US WHO ARE 65 AND OVER PAY FOR IT!

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Some folks just think

That it is their duty to monitor chit like this. Funny to me. It would seem you feel about like I do about it.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Gays marry at will. That is an excellent solution, spyguy

The companies would be able to deny all domestic partners coverage - married spouses only would get coverage and that would be easy to verify.
Even with that, most companies should require the spouse's (and any children) monthly premium be paid by the employee. The spouse is merely given access to the group insurance and a better rate. That way single employees are not discriminated against. Same deal for a gay married couple with adopted children - the company only pays for the employee.

The whole "partner" scam was unleashed to get double insurance coverage back in the day when companies covered spouses at the company's expense. It was a Jesse Jackson type shakedown. The unemployed restaurant worker or airline worker would move in with an actual working and employed person and set up a house and then play house. The companies were trying to avoid lawsuits - as they always do and they knuckled under to the extortion. After all, it was just insurance premiums.

So, let them get married and they can get their limited benefits and then when they want to move on - they can pay for a lawyer and get a divorce. Ok with you?

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
I flat out do not understand

Why some have such a problem with this.

Fair enough?

funny thing it is the republican males with the biggest axe to grind, or so it would seem to me.

spyguy,that is a different dude altogether, he is much more uptight than me.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
I used to view it as fraud, Spyglass

An unrelated person of the same or different sex posing as a spouse in order to receive insurance benefits intended for married couples. And fraud it was. Then (probably in the late 1980's) they contrived this whole domestic partner hoax and the employers caved and started offering benefits to domestic partners.

I resent it because I am paying for it because the number of insured in my group has been increased by a person paying no premium or getting a subsidized premium. That's bad enough but a large number of these domestic partners engage in high-risk sexual activities which cost the insurance group higher payments.

Not sure that Republican males have a larger dog in this issue than anyone else, but this (sometimes) Republican male is not interested in being shaken down to pay more and more until we get to some politician's definition of what my "fair share" actually is.

You want to be gay? Fine. Want to get married/ Fine. Pay for own insurance. Concerned you can't visit your significant-other in the hospital? Name your partner your health-care surrogate and document it. Worried you might have inheritance and estate problems? Get a real will and a living trust and put both your possessions there. If anyone thinks that is too complicated or expensive for the average gay person and you'd prefer the government to offer you all that protection instead at taxpayer expense - you are a hopeless fool. (not you spyglass, that was a generic you)

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
RWM: Your ignorance and bias is showing
Robert W. Morgan wrote:

I resent it because I am paying for it because the number of insured in my group has been increased by a person paying no premium or getting a subsidized premium. That's bad enough but a large number of these domestic partners engage in high-risk sexual activities which cost the insurance group higher payments.

The "large number of these domestic partners" actually don't engage in high-risk sex. I'm not going to run afoul of decency standards of The citizen, but the practice you are referring to isn't done that prevalently in the gay community, despite the widespread ignorance of mainstream America. It's also something that a man/woman can do. What exactly can two gay men do that straight males/women cannot do or also do?

The bit about "choosing to be gay" or "wanting to be gay" is neanderthal. You really think people are making a choice about whether they are attracted to males or females? I sure wasn't sitting around at 7 or 8 pondering whether it was men or women that I was attracted to. This crap comes from some people's interpretation of the Bible that God some how wouldn't allow gay people to be created. That's really damn ignorant/stupid but not surprising at all.

As far as "you paying for it," you shouldn't be paying for heterosexuals in the first place. Are u OK with paying for hetro's stuff but draw the line at gay? How about instead stating the obvious: None of the Above?

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
"What exactly can...

... two gay men do that straight males/women cannot do or also do?" Well, they also (the homosexuals) cannot have children, although they'll use medical science to impregnate a female and call the child 'theirs'.

As to "despite the widespread ignorance of mainstream America", you could substitute the word 'disgust' for 'ignorance', depending on your viewpoint and/or morals.

IMHO, they can 'partner-up' all they want and give each other benefits, etc...but I stop at calling it a 'marriage'; not part of the definition I was raised with and believe it to be. We can argue all the live-long day, but it won't change my views and beliefs on this. Guess I need to 'evolve', huh?

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
kcchiefandy: Not really

I always thought that gays should have gone directly towards the idea of civil unions instead of marriage which would have the same "benefits,", but obviously I was wrong about that as they seemingly are slowing achieving "marriage."

Marriage is a concept very deeply rooted in religion and not government, social or political. It's not surprising that a lot of people have a problem with gay marriage based solely on that and I think gays may achieved what they wanted a lot sooner just focusing on that instead of going for the homerun of marriage. Then again, I'm not gay and their strategies are working pretty well without my opinion so whatever.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Even Elton John, NUK...

...cares less about the 'M' word and is fine with mere co-habitation. Yes, as stated before, homosexuals have figured out if you buy enough politicians you can get whatever you want in this country.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Incrementalism

The problem is incramentalism. A slow creep attack on the morays and values we have had for 200 years.

Once we draw the line in the sand and they step over it and all we do is back-up and draw another line then it will never stop until we are pushed right over the cliff.

Look at Social Security as a great example Spy. It was just going to be a small program to help people when they have retired... From there we have Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare et al...

So why defend a tradition that has been with us since we were a Country?

Like Christmas?

Personally I think Government has no business in the business of Marriage.

It should be under the purview of the Church where it started. Just an opinion.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lindsey - marriage

I agree.

Quote:

It should be under the purview of the Church where it started. Just an opinion

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
So what you're saying, RWM...

...is if I marry my dog (he's male, so it will be a homosexual union), I can get medical insurance for him, correct? If two men, or women, can marry, I don't see how I can be denied to marry my best friend, right?

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
Is your dog human?

If so, have at it.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Spy...

...why does that matter? You're a SPECIEIST!!! I CAN MARRY WHOEVER/WHATEVER I WANT!!! There is NO definition to limit my RIGHTS!

mudcat
mudcat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
I have seen you walking your dog, KC

and getting married seems like your next logical step. You would have a good head start on that phenomenon where couples married for a long time eventually begin to look like one another.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
Doesn't work in this case, Mudcat...

...as he looks like his ex-wife; he realized he was homosexual 6 years into that marriage...we're kind of a new thing...

pandora
pandora's picture
Offline
Joined: 11/16/2005
Homophones, KCA

I think the correct word for your post is "specious." You can only marry a consenting individual - that means they are actually capable of agreement with and commitment to the marriage. That means no children, no dogs, no table lamps. Duh.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
We use non-verbal communication, pandora.

Those with great love don't need words. My sister is 'married' to her car.

Recent Comments