Give me one *good* reason why gay marriage should be illegal by Amadeus - Page 12 - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Give me one *good* reason why gay marriage should be illegal
Page 12 of 21
Thread Tools
samUwell
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
221 - 11-07-2018, 18:04
Reply With Quote
I really don't care what homos want to do with their life, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others. What I do care about is creating a 'right' where one does not exist. No one has a 'right' to marriage. Marriage is something that heterosexual couples have been doing for thousands of years. It is considered a normal cultural custom that we did in our churches and the State recognized as a legal binding contract between the man and woman.

Seeing as how we come from European cultures and traditions, we follow the customs of marriage that Europeans created. Many of these customs come from ancient times and have changed as time goes on but modern day marriages stem from the Catholic Church and their legally binding contracts between royal families in an attempt to stop European countries from murdering their neighbors over lands. Naturally, the peasants followed suit and these laws were granted to us too.

Because we come from a European culture, marriage is a religious ceremony but it is also a word used for a civil union/contract between 2 adults. If homos want to get married, they can go and get a civil union and if they want to say they are married, no one is stopping them. If they can find a church that will marry them, more power to them but if the State says, "Homosexuals have a right to marriage", the very next day, 2 Jewish lezbo's are going to march down to the local Christian church (never an Islamic temple church thing), demand they marry them and then feign shock and horror over being denied. They will put on a show for the media and sue the church into oblivion, infringing on the rights of the people in the church to worship in their church of choice.

No one has a right to marriage and yes, the State should be involved in marriage/civil unions as it is nothing more than a contract. Legally binding contracts are one of the main functions of the State, otherwise, contracts wouldn't mean ****.
 
samUwell is offline
 
Sponsored Links
Dweasel
Banned
Old
222 - 11-07-2018, 18:15
Reply With Quote
[QUOTE=Amadeus;19012818]


- marriage and homosexuality are not ...... behaviors (wtf?)
- WRONG ! Any human activity is a behavior. >

- i seem to recall something about the pursuit of happiness being an "unalienable human right",
- not sure where i heard it. ......
 
Dweasel is offline
 
Dweasel
Banned
Old
223 - 11-07-2018, 18:26
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by uno View Post
They both apply and are accurate.
Devious. Deviant.

WRONG !

Examples: At a dinner setting.

A. Momma is devious
when she tell those at the dinner table that a surprise dessert will be served IF .... EVERYONE eats their veggies.

B. Momma is deviant when serving chocolate cake sprinkled with boogers.
 
Dweasel is offline
 
Amadeus
VeteranXX
Old
224 - 11-07-2018, 18:26
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by samUwell View Post
I really don't care what homos want to do with their life, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others. What I do care about is creating a 'right' where one does not exist. No one has a 'right' to marriage. Marriage is something that heterosexual couples have been doing for thousands of years. It is considered a normal cultural custom that we did in our churches and the State recognized as a legal binding contract between the man and woman.

Seeing as how we come from European cultures and traditions, we follow the customs of marriage that Europeans created. Many of these customs come from ancient times and have changed as time goes on but modern day marriages stem from the Catholic Church and their legally binding contracts between royal families in an attempt to stop European countries from murdering their neighbors over lands. Naturally, the peasants followed suit and these laws were granted to us too.

Because we come from a European culture, marriage is a religious ceremony but it is also a word used for a civil union/contract between 2 adults. If homos want to get married, they can go and get a civil union and if they want to say they are married, no one is stopping them. If they can find a church that will marry them, more power to them but if the State says, "Homosexuals have a right to marriage", the very next day, 2 Jewish lezbo's are going to march down to the local Christian church (never an Islamic temple church thing), demand they marry them and then feign shock and horror over being denied. They will put on a show for the media and sue the church into oblivion, infringing on the rights of the people in the church to worship in their church of choice.

No one has a right to marriage and yes, the State should be involved in marriage/civil unions as it is nothing more than a contract. Legally binding contracts are one of the main functions of the State, otherwise, contracts wouldn't mean ****.
All of this only works if you define marriage as "that thing the church does". I think you'll find that's not the legal definition. A church ceremony is not legally binding per se, nor is it a requirement for a legally binding marriage contract.

I will happily agree with you that people don't have a right to a specific wedding ceremony at a specific church. But legally, that has absolutely zero to do with the right to get married.
 
Amadeus is offline
 
samUwell
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
225 - 11-07-2018, 18:38
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
All of this only works if you define marriage as "that thing the church does". I think you'll find that's not the legal definition. A church ceremony is not legally binding per se, nor is it a requirement for a legally binding marriage contract.

I will happily agree with you that people don't have a right to a specific wedding ceremony at a specific church. But legally, that has absolutely zero to do with the right to get married.
European marriages stem from the Catholic Church. What 2 people do when they get married is they form a contract in their church in front of their God. The State doesn't recognize this until the couple goes down to the county courthouse and registers as being married. They then get this paperwork and then get it processed at another State based agency and this paperwork makes it to the IRS. The State now recognizes this as a legally binding contract between 2 adults and the IRS used to grant tax incentives because they were expecting the couple to pump out new w-2 forms in 20 years.

What the couple did first was got married in front of their God. This is between them and God. That is a 'marriage' under European culture after the Catholics took control and destroyed all our individual marriage customs. The State doesn't care about this at all, until the couple registers in the courthouses. Homos have to do this same thing and no one is stopping them from doing this.

Why would homos want to get 'married' under a cultural norm that they personally despise? Isn't a gay couple getting married in the local Catholic Church a perfect example of cultural appropriation?
 
samUwell is offline
 
Last edited by samUwell; 11-07-2018 at 18:43..
coombz
VeteranXX
Old
226 - 11-07-2018, 18:40
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by uno View Post
They both apply and are accurate.
um noooo

**** who you want to ****, as long as it's not the English language
 
coombz is offline
 
Amadeus
VeteranXX
Old
227 - 11-07-2018, 18:50
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by samUwell View Post
European marriages stem from the Catholic Church. What 2 people do when they get married is they form a contract in their church in front of their God. The State doesn't recognize this until the couple goes down to the county courthouse and registers as being married. They then get this paperwork and then get it processed at another State based agency and this paperwork makes it to the IRS. The State now recognizes this as a legally binding contract between 2 adults and the IRS used to grant tax incentives because they were expecting the couple to pump out new w-2 forms in 20 years.

What the couple did first was got married in front of their God. This is between them and God. That is a 'marriage' under European culture after the Catholics took control and destroyed all our individual marriage customs.

Why would homos want to get 'married' under a cultural norm that they personally despise? Isn't a gay couple getting married in the local Catholic Church a perfect example of cultural appropriation?
You totally missed my point.

If "marriage" is to mean what it legally means, then that's the paperwork, nothing else. You can have that with or without the church ceremony, and the state has no reason to care if it's between a heterosexual or homosexual couple.

If you want "marriage" to mean the western christian tradition, then that is not a legally recognized institution, so nobody has a legal right to it.

There's no frame of reference in which it makes sense for the right to "marriage", however you want to define it, to be legally restricted to heterosexual couples only. It's either everyone or no-one.
 
Amadeus is offline
 
Amadeus
VeteranXX
Old
228 - 11-07-2018, 18:52
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dweasel View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by uno View Post
They both apply and are accurate.
Devious. Deviant.

WRONG !

Examples: At a dinner setting.

A. Momma is devious
when she tell those at the dinner table that a surprise dessert will be served IF .... EVERYONE eats their veggies.

B. Momma is deviant when serving chocolate cake sprinkled with boogers.
When Dweasel has greater mastery of the language than you...
 
Amadeus is offline
 
Plasmatic
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
229 - 11-07-2018, 18:55
Reply With Quote
Zlex in his 'jeep'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTrxEQnPtAg
 
Plasmatic is online now
 
havax
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
230 - 11-07-2018, 18:56
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
When Dweasel has greater mastery of the language than you...


now stfu pedos

thx
 
havax is offline
 
Esteban_Villa
VeteranXV
Old
231 - 11-07-2018, 19:09
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
There's no frame of reference in which it makes sense for the right to "marriage", .
Welcome to 1783 where our initial founders struggled with firmly delineated rights vs open to interpretation writings which could be turned to imply things the founders didnt want or could conceive of at the time and then multiplying it by the current legal lens of good faith implementation of 'would the founders have wanted this based on that line.'

there is no right to marriage. marriage has been codified similar to our 2 party system since we as a people naturally drift to it. laws and legal opinions on marriage have generally come from a freedom of religion argument, but then mormons started trying to horde all the white women using it so we made rules and regs that codified traditional christian views on marriage.

given denominations of protestant (and even catholics with a lot of **** now) have gone further and further liberal in their interpretation of the bible and allowing gays to get married we now find ourselves in the **** show we are today as something that isn't really supposed to change (religion) has in fact changed. thanks watered down protestants ya'll need to find luther again
 
Esteban_Villa is offline
 
Dweasel
Banned
Old
232 - 11-07-2018, 19:47
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by havax View Post


now stfu pedos .......... sigh, time for a lesson havax

thx

The above denote SYNONYMS of said word.
A synonym is "kinda like" or "substitute" but absolutely not the same.
A synonym may be inclusive but not de facto.

Let us begin with your lesson.
The root > 'di' ..... to divide, detract.

Ex: A plan may be "DEVIOUS", it may contain nothing deviant in execution
or to the end result. A means to 'di'.

Your twisting semantics need not apply. .....
 
Dweasel is offline
 
blackpeople
REEEEEEEEEEEXV
Old
233 - 11-07-2018, 20:53
Reply With Quote
lol schooled by a degenerate beaner

havax
 
blackpeople is offline
 
KingSobieski
VeteranXX
Old
234 - 11-07-2018, 20:58
Reply With Quote
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pxxBQm114k
 
KingSobieski is offline
 
Dweasel
Banned
Old
235 - 11-07-2018, 21:44
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackpeople View Post
lol schooled by a degenerate beaner

havax
Degenerate?
Yes, being an old folk, biological stuff is starting to degrade.

Beaner?
Yes. Although imma White I am not a Gringo.

Irl, I'm conservative and have good rep in the neighborhood.
 
Dweasel is offline
 
SkittleBrew
VeteranXV
Old
236 - 11-07-2018, 23:15
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amadeus View Post
What if they want to marry another human being who also wants to marry them?
Sure. It's not like a couple cleptomaniacs getting hitched is sending some mixed message that stealing is normal behavior.
 
SkittleBrew is offline
 
bowl of blood
Veteran++
Contributor
Old
237 - 11-08-2018, 00:47
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dweasel View Post
The above denote SYNONYMS of said word.
A synonym is "kinda like" or "substitute" but absolutely not the same.
A synonym may be inclusive but not de facto.

Let us begin with your lesson.
The root > 'di' ..... to divide, detract.

Ex: A plan may be "DEVIOUS", it may contain nothing deviant in execution
or to the end result. A means to 'di'.

Your twisting semantics need not apply. .....
 
bowl of blood is offline
 
LGBR
VeteranXX
Contributor
Old
238 - 11-08-2018, 01:00
Reply With Quote
pls don't quote dweasel and also he's wrong
 
LGBR is offline
 
Dweasel
Banned
Old
239 - 11-08-2018, 01:09
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by LGBR View Post
pls don't quote Dweasel and also he's wrong

You want some too
? > Step up.

Provide proof as to how I am in error.

Leave your Emo
feelings at the door.
 
Dweasel is offline
 
Fool
Whiny BitchX
Contributor
Old
240 - 11-08-2018, 01:16
Reply With Quote
 
Fool is online now
 
Page 12 of 21
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Give me one *good* reason why gay marriage should be illegal

Social Website Bullshit

Tags
hfs was this made by ants


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: claudebot / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:33.