DOMA and Prop 8 - Page 19
+ Reply to Thread
Page 19 of 48 FirstFirst ... 915161718192021222329 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 479
Like Tree248Likes

Thread: DOMA and Prop 8

  1. #181
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    If we're going to talk fantasy worlds and marriage, my fantasy world is one in which people wait until they are a bit older to get married, have sown their wild oats, and then have lived and slept with each other for a while to make sure that they are compatible. Financial security would help too, although waiting until you're older may bring that naturally. Of course, I wouldn't make getting married to someone you've never lived/slept with right out of high school illegal, because that's not my place. But if we wanted to reduce the divorce rate, we'd all do it up like the liberal heathens do (y'all know we have the lowest divorce rate in the country, right? ) This "making people wait until AFTER they get married to find out that they can't live with each other's quirks while also making divorce illegal" business is toe up!
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  2. #182
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    14,461

    Default

    Right on! I like this game! My fantasy world would be a lot like Alissas. No marriage before at least 27. Home ownership mandatory. International travel required, at least once. Proven ability to hold a job and/ or live on your own . No more of this kids marrying straight from mommy and daddies house!
    Spacers likes this.

  3. #183
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,606

    Default

    If the government wasn't involved in marriage the government wouldn't be involved in divorce either. If a legal partnership contract was signed that would be dissolved in whatever legal manner appropriate. Custody issues would be handled by a judge just the same as they are now.
    Rivergallery likes this.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  4. #184
    Posting Addict ClairesMommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    If the government wasn't involved in marriage the government wouldn't be involved in divorce either. If a legal partnership contract was signed that would be dissolved in whatever legal manner appropriate. Custody issues would be handled by a judge just the same as they are now.
    Right, because the judicial system isn't an arm of the government.
    Spacers and Potter75 like this.

  5. #185
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    23,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    If the government wasn't involved in marriage the government wouldn't be involved in divorce either. If a legal partnership contract was signed that would be dissolved in whatever legal manner appropriate. Custody issues would be handled by a judge just the same as they are now.
    And this is what you want?

    I presume in your scenario there's still a way for you to get married through your church, though, right?
    Laurie, mom to:
    Nathaniel ( 10 ) and Juliet ( 7 )




    Baking Adventures In A Messy Kitchen (blog)

  6. #186
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,606

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freddieflounder101 View Post
    And this is what you want?

    I presume in your scenario there's still a way for you to get married through your church, though, right?
    Sure then everyone keeps whatever definition of marriage they want without the government endorsing one or the other. As it stands right now no matter which way it goes the government will be endorsing one definition over the other by letting it stand as it is between a man and a woman or changing the definition, which it should not be involved in. If you want to get married in whatever social setting you want whether it be a church or in a park or by an Elvis impersonator in Vegas that is up to you.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

  7. #187
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    Sure then everyone keeps whatever definition of marriage they want without the government endorsing one or the other. As it stands right now no matter which way it goes the government will be endorsing one definition over the other by letting it stand as it is between a man and a woman or changing the definition, which it should not be involved in. If you want to get married in whatever social setting you want whether it be a church or in a park or by an Elvis impersonator in Vegas that is up to you.
    But this is already in place. So....you want people to be able to get married wherever and by whomever they want, and then to file a legal contract with the government to get their rights....but it will different from what we already have? How?
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  8. #188
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    23,503

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    Sure then everyone keeps whatever definition of marriage they want without the government endorsing one or the other. As it stands right now no matter which way it goes the government will be endorsing one definition over the other by letting it stand as it is between a man and a woman or changing the definition, which it should not be involved in. If you want to get married in whatever social setting you want whether it be a church or in a park or by an Elvis impersonator in Vegas that is up to you.

    But you can already do that. That's a wedding, not a marriage.

    So what IS marriage, then, in this scenario? Is it a meaningless thing we get by waving our magic marriage wands and has zero effect on anything else in our lives?

    Anybody can marry anybody? Multiple people? Anything? And it affects nothing at all in any other area?

    Explain again how this is good for society and an improvement over what we have now, and better than letting the gays marry, please. Because none of this makes ANY sense to me. Have we not determined that marriage is good for families and society? Isn't it fundamental to almost every culture?
    Laurie, mom to:
    Nathaniel ( 10 ) and Juliet ( 7 )




    Baking Adventures In A Messy Kitchen (blog)

  9. #189
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    7,272

    Default

    In my fairy tale land consenting adults could marry other consenting adults regardless of their sexual orientation. We would all recognize the fact that they have found their Prince Charming and will live happily ever after. And that THEIR God and their government view their marriage as equal to all other marriages.

    If, for whatever reason, the marriage doesn't stand the test of time, the consenting adults could dissolve the union as they see fit.
    Spacers and Potter75 like this.

  10. #190
    Posting Addict GloriaInTX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,606

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freddieflounder101 View Post
    But you can already do that. That's a wedding, not a marriage.

    So what IS marriage, then, in this scenario? Is it a meaningless thing we get by waving our magic marriage wands and has zero effect on anything else in our lives?

    Anybody can marry anybody? Multiple people? Anything? And it affects nothing at all in any other area?

    Explain again how this is good for society and an improvement over what we have now, and better than letting the gays marry, please. Because none of this makes ANY sense to me. Have we not determined that marriage is good for families and society? Isn't it fundamental to almost every culture?
    So you just want to change the definition of marriage for your preferred group but then still discriminate against those who want to practice polygamy or whatever else they believe?
    Rivergallery likes this.
    Mom to Lee, Jake, Brandon, Rocco
    Stepmom to Ryan, Regan, Braden, Baley
    Granddaughters Kylie 10/18/2010 & Aleya 4/22/2013


    I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosopy, as a cause for withdrawing from a friend. --Thomas Jefferson

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions