- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Gay Marriage Spinoff: Where should the new line be drawn on marriage?
Posted on 9/3/15 at 5:04 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 9/3/15 at 5:04 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Good points. I am personally opposed to incestuous marriage
Why? Marriage and a sexual relationship are not the same thing. If a person wants to enter a tax dodge relationship with each other and/or many others, why not let them. It goes back to you OP/ETA. The state should not be marrying people, nor give tax credits for it, nor give credits for being a single parent.
If people want to get married, that should be something they arrange with their church.
1
Posted on 9/3/15 at 5:17 pm to el Gaucho
quote:
When do normal people get new rights?
You should think of this as expanding normal people rights. That way if you get divorced, or stay married, you are now able to get gay married or polygamously married and not just traditional married. That sounds like a whole lot of win.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 5:32 pm to madmaxvol
I think the need for state regulation of marriage has passed. I am probably more opposed to how same sex marriage became a right and business owners being fined in some states or forced to go against religious beliefs. I actually don't think 1st Amendment should be applied to the States, but Since it is I think forced recognition of marriage should apply to the state govts only and not individuals or private businesses or churches specifically when is forces them to go against religious beliefs.
I would love to see a state quit regulating marriage completely and see if others follow. That or have a state start letting anyone and any number of people marry including straight same sex marriages including between more than 2 people just to gain some benefit or tax break or limiting inheritance tax in some way or even just because. Just completely loosen it up so state recognition will basically mean nothing after awhile and maybe force Supremes to continue to decide what definition of Marriage is or is not.
I would love to see a state quit regulating marriage completely and see if others follow. That or have a state start letting anyone and any number of people marry including straight same sex marriages including between more than 2 people just to gain some benefit or tax break or limiting inheritance tax in some way or even just because. Just completely loosen it up so state recognition will basically mean nothing after awhile and maybe force Supremes to continue to decide what definition of Marriage is or is not.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 5:35 pm to Darth_Vader
I think the line on all marriages should be that you get ONE. Death, infidelity...whatever...one time...choose wisely.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 6:35 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
ETA: And for the record, I don't think the state should be in the marriage business to begin with.
it's a legal contract with significant legal consequences that range from taxation, to property ownership, and child custody. How in the hell can the state not be "in the business"?
Posted on 9/3/15 at 6:39 pm to gingerkittie
quote:
She would work and I would be a stay at home wife taking care of her. Just stuff like that.
You wouldn't feel weird calling your best friend your wife?
Posted on 9/3/15 at 6:43 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
Should they be allowed to marry? If not, on what legal grounds?
Because tree poisoners deserve to be second class citizens.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 7:14 pm to gingerkittie
Did the Supreme Court write the amendment for same sex marriage to only be a right for homosexuals or did they include what you posted?
Posted on 9/3/15 at 7:16 pm to Darth_Vader
marriage should be between how many people want to get married, as long as they are of legal age. if three dudes want to marry and Eiffel Tower each other every night, so be it.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 7:23 pm to Darth_Vader
2 consenting adults is my line.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 8:01 pm to Darth_Vader
My Godfathers (now deceased) were together monogamously all their lives, about 40 years or more. Lets just call then Joe and Ron.
They were actually childhood sweethearts, having met as children. They lived a successful and happy life together. They owned a business that was very prosperous.
But when Ron died, Ron's family swooped in (as next of kin) and took everything that Joe and Ron owned ( and they had a lot of property and assets). It was a nightmare.
Please read the story at the link and see what happens when longtime couple age and how the state treats them. Seriously PLEASE read the link. I would summarize it bt am trying to post shorter posts here. LINK
Although I am not deeply into the gay marriage issues, I do believe that they should have the right to be respected as spouses in cases like my Godfathers and the people in the link I provided.
They were actually childhood sweethearts, having met as children. They lived a successful and happy life together. They owned a business that was very prosperous.
But when Ron died, Ron's family swooped in (as next of kin) and took everything that Joe and Ron owned ( and they had a lot of property and assets). It was a nightmare.
Please read the story at the link and see what happens when longtime couple age and how the state treats them. Seriously PLEASE read the link. I would summarize it bt am trying to post shorter posts here. LINK
Although I am not deeply into the gay marriage issues, I do believe that they should have the right to be respected as spouses in cases like my Godfathers and the people in the link I provided.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 8:05 pm to CoachChappy
This post was edited on 5/17/16 at 10:12 am
Posted on 9/3/15 at 8:05 pm to The Hurricane
quote:
Def drawing a line on that. I think brother, sister, mother, father and 1st/2nd cousins should be off limits.
Why? It is no more a crime against nature than gay and lesbian marriage.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 8:26 pm to SG_Geaux
quote:
Why? It is no more a crime against nature than gay and lesbian marriage.
Especially 1st or 2nd cousins. Most societies in history have allowed first cousins to marry, and the offspring are at no increased risk for deformities. There's no reasonable argument against it except some people think it's immoral and some people think it's icky. If you accept those reasons as sufficient to ban first cousin marriages, you also have to ban same sex marriages.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 8:33 pm to HoustonChick86
quote:
2 consenting adults is my line.
Then you support incestous marriages too. I mean, two adults can consent to that. Why only two? Seven consenting adults should have the same rights as two.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 8:33 pm to rantfan
quote:
It should stop at a opussom. You shouldn't be able to marry opssums
Really? So you can frick a marsupial but you can't make it an honest mammal?
fricking fundamentalist logic right here.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 11:27 pm to The First Cut
quote:
Then you support incestous marriages too. I mean, two adults can consent to that. Why only two?
I don't think it's a good idea, but if you want to marry your sister go for it.
I draw my line, as I said at 2 consenting adults. If you want to be polyamorous go for it, but you can't marry the world.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 11:30 pm to Bestbank Tiger
quote:
There's no reasonable argument against it except some people think it's immoral and some people think it's icky. If you accept those reasons as sufficient to ban first cousin marriages, you also have to ban same sex marriages.
Exactly. There is no difference IMO.
Posted on 9/3/15 at 11:32 pm to Darth_Vader
Let people do what they want because this is America.
Posted on 9/4/15 at 1:48 am to JumpingTheShark
Polygamy can remain illegal on logistical grounds. It'd be too easy for people to commit tax fraud and child custody would be a nightmare. The government can get away with saying it's too much to regulate IMO.
On the other hand there's absolutely no reason there should be a law against cousins getting married. That was super common in the first world up until 60 or 70 years ago, and it's still not unheard of in a lot of places. Just like gay marriage, if we have moral or "ewww gross" feelings about it then just don't do it and don't go to any weddings between relatives
On the other hand there's absolutely no reason there should be a law against cousins getting married. That was super common in the first world up until 60 or 70 years ago, and it's still not unheard of in a lot of places. Just like gay marriage, if we have moral or "ewww gross" feelings about it then just don't do it and don't go to any weddings between relatives
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News