|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 3:57 pm
Lilith Delost I believe it should be legal, and I'll explain why. I'll start with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. But marriage is about children, say some: to which the answer is, it often is, but not always, and permitting gay marriage would not alter that. Or it is a religious act, say others: to which the answer is, yes, you may believe that, but if so it is no business of the state to impose a religious choice. Indeed, in America the constitution expressly bans the involvement of the state in religious matters, so it would be especially outrageous if the constitution were now to be used for religious ends.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:12 pm
Se Ga Takai Lilith Delost I believe it should be legal, and I'll explain why. I'll start with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. But marriage is about children, say some: to which the answer is, it often is, but not always, and permitting gay marriage would not alter that. Or it is a religious act, say others: to which the answer is, yes, you may believe that, but if so it is no business of the state to impose a religious choice. Indeed, in America the constitution expressly bans the involvement of the state in religious matters, so it would be especially outrageous if the constitution were now to be used for religious ends. Thanks for agreeing! <3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:07 pm
Eh, eh? When did Lilly join the guild?
*Waves.* n/(^_^)n/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 10:41 pm
PirateEire Eh, eh? When did Lilly join the guild? *Waves.* n/(^_^)n/Yesterday! <3 The other christian guild I was in was boring..no one ever wanted to debate or open-their minds even a crack.. D:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:58 pm
Well there goes my "signature Satanist" title, aye? Good to see a familiar face indeed. Very well-versed people here, fun as hell to both speak with, and debate with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 8:22 am
Lilith Delost I believe it should be legal, and I'll explain why. I'll start with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. so then incest should be allowed?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 3:49 pm
i like burnination Lilith Delost I believe it should be legal, and I'll explain why. I'll start with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. so then incest should be allowed? Don't see why not. Sweden's all for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 9:22 pm
PirateEire i like burnination Lilith Delost I believe it should be legal, and I'll explain why. I'll start with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. so then incest should be allowed? Don't see why not. Sweden's all for it. lol. not your best argument ever. I mean...sweden. come on. get cool already. *shakes fist at uncool sweden* lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:28 am
i like burnination Lilith Delost I believe it should be legal, and I'll explain why. I'll start with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. so then incest should be allowed? To be blunt, it would result in retarded children, creating inbreds. However, if two people are related and in love and wish to have kids, go for it, retarded kids are born already anyhow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:30 am
PirateEire Well there goes my "signature Satanist" title, aye? Good to see a familiar face indeed. Very well-versed people here, fun as hell to both speak with, and debate with. Sorry, but at least theres so far just us. sweatdrop
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:11 am
Lilith Delost i like burnination Lilith Delost I believe it should be legal, and I'll explain why. I'll start with equality, pure and simple. Why should one set of loving, consenting adults be denied a right that other such adults have and which, if exercised, will do no damage to anyone else? Not just because they have always lacked that right in the past, for sure: until the late 1960s, in some American states it was illegal for black adults to marry white ones, but precious few would defend that ban now on grounds that it was “traditional”. so then incest should be allowed? To be blunt, it would result in retarded children, creating inbreds. However, if two people are related and in love and wish to have kids, go for it, retarded kids are born already anyhow. well, it's not neccessarily true that all kids from incest result in deformaties. but i'm surprised that you are okay with incest. most people shudder at the thought. also, what about polygamy? a man can honestly love three women. or why can't a human marry an animal? evolution asserts that we're animals anyway, so why should species stand in the way of true love? so define "consent" and "adult".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:18 am
i like burnination also, what about polygamy? a man can honestly love three women. I know of polyamorists who would be best off being married. There was a Greek Recon I knew... Married to one woman, dating the other, and both girls were dating one another. Certainly not for me. I was offered, but I turned it down. I would never share my woman. Quote: or why can't a human marry an animal? evolution asserts that we're animals anyway, so why should species stand in the way of true love? Remember that consent thing? You would need that. Animals cannot give verbal consent. Quote: so define "consent" and "adult". Consent would be, as defined on that dreaded dictionary site, "Acceptance or approval of what is planned or done by another; acquiescence." Legally, verbal or written consent is needed. Adult would need to be defined by your location. In this state it is 18. I have heard that in others, it is 16, and in some, it is 20 or 21. Refer to your local age of consent laws for details in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:54 am
PirateEire i like burnination also, what about polygamy? a man can honestly love three women. I know of polyamorists who would be best off being married. There was a Greek Recon I knew... Married to one woman, dating the other, and both girls were dating one another. Certainly not for me. I was offered, but I turned it down. I would never share my woman. Quote: or why can't a human marry an animal? evolution asserts that we're animals anyway, so why should species stand in the way of true love? Remember that consent thing? You would need that. Animals cannot give verbal consent. Quote: so define "consent" and "adult". Consent would be, as defined on that dreaded dictionary site, "Acceptance or approval of what is planned or done by another; acquiescence." Legally, verbal or written consent is needed. Adult would need to be defined by your location. In this state it is 18. I have heard that in others, it is 16, and in some, it is 20 or 21. Refer to your local age of consent laws for details in your area. Honestly, while I may be morally opposed to it, politically, I think this sounds like the best policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 12:08 pm
Quote: Remember that consent thing? You would need that. Animals cannot give verbal consent. so? verbage means nothing. what about arranged marriages? the bride is forced into marrying someone she does not know and somehow just because she says "i do" makes it okay?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 1:07 pm
i like burnination Quote: Remember that consent thing? You would need that. Animals cannot give verbal consent. so? verbage means nothing. what about arranged marriages? the bride is forced into marrying someone she does not know and somehow just because she says "i do" makes it okay? Verbage? You mean verbality? Verbal consent means everything. Even in the United States of America, arranged marriages do require verbal or written (in person) consent to marry. Whether or not it's their will is not something that we can determine, because they may be unwilling to marry a person, yet willing to please their parents. All they need to say is that they are willing to marry this person, whether that's a lie or not. Arranged marriages are cultural--they are legal in the US. I have a friend from highschool who got into an arranged marriage at the age of 15. She liked the guy, fortunately, but she told me she could say no if she didn't agree with the marriage. No one was forcing her at gunpoint to walk the aisle. Because an animal cannot consent, it is not okay to marry them. Note: I do not agree with incest nor polyamory, but I am damn willing to fight for their rights to marry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
