Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 157
  1. #41
    IncGamers Member Leopold Stotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Trees
    Posts
    13,460

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnmaster View Post
    And marrying in Law has no meaning, since we signed a paper that says we live together, giving us the exact same rights as married couples, but with less paperwork, no charge, supereasy divorce (not planning this ) and no fuss about anything.
    That is my problem. You and your gf can have the same rights as a married couple by signing a piece of paper saying y'all live together but 6ays cannot get that benefit because it's two men or two women? How is that fair?

    Quote Originally Posted by krischan View Post
    Granting each others the same rights as in a marriage will obviously lead to the same problems like those during a regular divorce. You will still have to split up things and if the one has a different idea of what belongs whom and insists on it or what would be worse, if the divorce is of the dirty kind and hate, greed, envy etc. is involved, you will find yourself in a courtroom, facing an opponent who isn't interested in a compromise, but who might want to destroy your life.

    .....

    I can agree to that in a way, in addition to who gets what after a divorce, to protect people from being abused or to force them to care for those who depend on them. I see no reason why the state shouldn't grant certain rights to homosexual or lesbian couples. At the end, it's just making a contract in the registry office. If religion demands ownership of the term "marriage", a different term in the text of the law can be used.
    And that can happen to 6ay people, ESPECIALLY if the family was against it or doesn't like the partner. They need the same protection too against that kind of thing.

    I'm not sure if I want non-straight couples to adopt children, however. The top concern is the welfare of the children while the rights of people regarding discriminazation have to stay behind and I'm not sure about the consequences for them. I'm not saying that homosexuals are potential child molestors, but apart from developing somewhat disturbing views about what's "normal", the children will probably be subject to a lot of teasing if the other children find it out.

    That's the thing, though. What exactly IS normal nowadays?

    Quote Originally Posted by kestegs View Post
    I really don't see any reason to not allow adoption. It does kinda weirds me out a bit putting kids in a non traditional home like that, but it's just something I need to get used to.
    Again, what is normal and traditional these days? Mother and father? That wholesome attitude of the 1950s no longer applies. Single parents, 6ay parents, biracial parents, NO mother or father but an aunt, uncle, grandmother, grandfather, sister, brother RAISING the kids. I think it is worse to have a parent(s) who is/are neglectful, abusive, a downright degenerate pile(s) of genetic ****(s) in flesh raising kids than to have a loving single or a loving 6ay couple raising kids.

    Yea, I think that's the general stigma that most people have. Thinking about lesbians marrying and adopting is far easier to accept than *** men.
    That's something I don't get. Lesibians being more accepted than homosexual men. My mind can't wrap around it.


    Yea, what I said above. I still think that you are best off with 1 of each, but how many kids of a heterosexual family actually have a strong male and female parent that is involved and are not divorced or never married to begin with. I just don't think it's going to be a big problem.
    Is it more of the fact that there should be a MAN and a FEMALE or is it one person being more masculine/feminine than the other?

    Quote Originally Posted by tougeznut View Post
    I want people to see how committed we are to each other, and I want to be able to call her my wife. After a while the term "girlfriend" doesn't hold enough meaning to even remotely describe the relationship.
    Damn. I wish I could find a guy like you, but that is a whole 'nother topic.


    I imagine it's the same way for non-religious homosexual couples. They want a more serious title, or they want to be closer to God. I don't know which, but the reasons for denying it are mostly ignorance
    Yes.

    Also, I'm 26 and a virgin. Something that is usually followed by a gasp.
    Nice! And not with me. I know a few people your age who are virgins, one of them I was talking about the other day with Merv. My "puritanical" friend. She is Religious with a capital R.

    To say that a "household" needs a father and mother figure is left up to interpretation. My Catholic father divorced my Jewish mother when I was 9. My father is a very sought after engineer in his field so he was hardly home to begin with. This story isn't unique to me. There are millions of single parent households that we're broken up by a divorce, as well as people that have children who aren't fit to raise them. There is no nationwide scolding of these "sins" and the world has seemed to have accepted it.
    The world has accepted it NOW. It started accepting it.... Older peeps, help me please. 80s? Definitely in the 90s it was becoming more known and more accepted. 60s? 70s? As far as I know, no. Girl got pregnant? Her parents sent her off or made her marry the dude she had sex with so the child would be born sin-free! Single parents? What was that back then? I'm not saying that it did not happen period, but it was not as common then as it is now. And with how tight-lipped and traditional people were back then I'm sure it wasn't discussed much either. Again, I could be completely wrong about that because I did not grow up then (hell, I wasn't even alive and my parents were still kids!!) but with what little I do know and have seen and read about, it was a completely different time then and it took a long time for people to accept that "sin" of single parenthood or divorce.

    Homosexuality is another issue that is slowly being accepted. 6ay in the 80s? OMG YOU HAD AIDS! You were contagious. GTFO. That slowly changed. In the 90s, more people were starting to come out. People realized that AIDS was not a "6ay man's disease" and that ANYONE could contract it. Now, 20 years later, being 6ay is generally more accepted. The slow change now is granting the same equality rights to the 6ays as heteros get when they get married.

    It's not me that's saying that it's a sin, it's God. I can't speak for other people, but I struggle with sin also. I'm not trying to say that *** people are sinners and I'm not, we're all sinners. But you're absolutely right that people need to look at their own lives before criticizing others. The fact us that God doesn't hate *** people. He doesn't hate anyone. He loves *** people just as much as he loves me.
    Would it be appropriate to say that God disagrees with the lifestyle? Hehehe! ^^

  2. #42
    IncGamers Member BobCox2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UnderYourDoorMat
    BattleTag What Me Worry?
    Posts
    10,824

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Can we play this at the reception?





  3. #43
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Quote Originally Posted by kestegs View Post
    I'm going to side with steve here and not understand what the point really is. The point to me seemed to be that she doesn't like marriage at all.

    And that her brother did her partner. Yea, that's not weird or anything.

    There are of course some inaccuracies in the bible, but I'm not agreeing that this is one of them.

    Well, cloning doesn't copy your personality and what is being talked about further down further confirms that I don't really see an issue with it in my limited understanding.

    And for the record, that weirds me out.

    And a win is a win in my book!

    Kinda hurts my head a bit as I'm not esspecially scientifically inclined. But I think you make a very good point and I can mostly agree.



    I can also agree with this. Life experiences play a huge factor in determining many things like orientation, weight, mental conditions, etc etc.
    You're so agreeable.

  4. #44
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,936

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnmaster View Post
    supereasy divorce (not planning this ) and no fuss about anything
    Yeah, not to bring you down vis-a-vis the Kevster, but how the feck is your un-missus to know this? See, that's the problem - and it's an obviously chauvinistic one - if marriage means no more than a get well card, and Leo had a baby with Mr. X, then what sort of position is she in now? What happens when you get tired of waking up in the middle of the night and not getting any consideration?

    Marriage has been steadily cheapened by equating it with the false Western construct of "true love". But hey, WTF do I know, I'm only on year 22 of it.

  5. #45
    IncGamers Member BobCox2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UnderYourDoorMat
    BattleTag What Me Worry?
    Posts
    10,824

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    See I Object to what *** Marriage leads to
    Future wOrD Abuse.

    Like Saying "Yeah, that guys his Wife."

    Sorry Ladies
    Elton John's husband cops a feel of Neil Patrick Harris' ***.
    I saw this tonight on the INTERNET.

    So Elton was the Bride?

  6. #46
    IncGamers Member Dawnmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    5,816

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    That is my problem. You and your gf can have the same rights as a married couple by signing a piece of paper saying y'all live together but 6ays cannot get that benefit because it's two men or two women? How is that fair?
    In one way it isn't, in another it is, it all comes down to what is considered normal in your country/city/family/friends.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    That's the thing, though. What exactly IS normal nowadays?
    The world considers everybody unique, yet want them to be as close to a standard as possible.

    It's like school, you get prepped for as much as possible, while corporation look for specialized people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    That's something I don't get. Lesibians being more accepted than homosexual men. My mind can't wrap around it.
    I don't know if it's a public opinion, but what I hear most is that men doing it are considered more icky than women doing it (because of the butt thing I presume?)

    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    Homosexuality is another issue that is slowly being accepted. 6ay in the 80s? OMG YOU HAD AIDS! You were contagious. GTFO. That slowly changed. In the 90s, more people were starting to come out. People realized that AIDS was not a "6ay man's disease" and that ANYONE could contract it. Now, 20 years later, being 6ay is generally more accepted. The slow change now is granting the same equality rights to the 6ays as heteros get when they get married.
    Funny thing is, when men just rose to set itself apart from the apes, we were still just animals, and most animals do anything they can get their hands on.
    Heck, in the Roman Empire days, it was common practise for the soldiers to do the nasty.
    Also, for some reason, almost all pedofiles I read about in the news don't discriminate between boys or girls.

    I think everybody is born bi-sexual, and you grow into whatever you are now.

    Quote Originally Posted by jmervyn View Post
    Yeah, not to bring you down vis-a-vis the Kevster, but how the feck is your un-missus to know this? See, that's the problem - and it's an obviously chauvinistic one - if marriage means no more than a get well card, and Leo had a baby with Mr. X, then what sort of position is she in now? What happens when you get tired of waking up in the middle of the night and not getting any consideration?

    Marriage has been steadily cheapened by equating it with the false Western construct of "true love". But hey, WTF do I know, I'm only on year 22 of it.
    Actually I signed another piece of paper that I'm his father, so if we ever choose to split up, I'll be in big trouble.
    Regardless of my wife's employment, I'll have to pay both child support and alimony for her, which is deducted directly from ones paycheque.

    Quote Originally Posted by BobCox2 View Post
    See I Object to what *** Marriage leads to
    Future wOrD Abuse.

    Like Saying "Yeah, that guys his Wife."

    Sorry Ladies
    Elton John's husband cops a feel of Neil Patrick Harris' ***.
    I saw this tonight on the INTERNET.

    So Elton was the Bride?
    Some *** couples consider one of the two to be the guy, while the other is the girl, and some consider both to be guy or both to be the girl.
    (although I think the latter is more mental healthier for any children growing up in such situation, it might confuse the child to see someone act as another gender)



    As a last note, I would like to ask a question to everybody willing to answer:
    - Apart from religious people I don't know anybody who has a problem with *** people or their rights.
    - However, almost everybody seems to be terribly upset when somebody likes both genders (threesomes excluded)

    Where do you stand on people who have relationships with opposite and same genders?
    And why do you suppose a lot of people have more problems with bi than with *** people?

  7. #47
    IncGamers Member jmervyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    12,936

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    That is my problem. You and your gf can have the same rights as a married couple by signing a piece of paper saying y'all live together but 6ays cannot get that benefit because it's two men or two women? How is that fair?
    It isn't, but that's because the two systems are very dissimilar. Plus, it's no secret that Europe is dying out because they aren't replacing the population at anywhere nearly close to the sustainment rate.

    However, I'd still argue that the claims about a lack of visitation rights & what-not are substantially overblown for the sake of dishonest hyperbole. Someone doesn't have to stay in a hospital staffed with petty-fascist douchebags that make up such rules, either.
    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    Again, what is normal and traditional these days? Mother and father? That wholesome attitude of the 1950s no longer applies.
    Sure it does. Just because we're massively fecked as a society hardly means that thousands of years of what works is out on it's ear.
    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    That's something I don't get. Lesibians being more accepted than homosexual men. My mind can't wrap around it.
    Silly girl. Lesbians are hot, where ghey men are not. The Media says so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    The world has accepted it NOW. It started accepting it.... Older peeps, help me please. 80s?
    !970's, I'd say, because I was victimized by the mentality in the 1960's. Villagers making fun at my expense (I didn't realize it because my parents hid the details) saying how much I resembled the previous father. The reason for the societal condemnation wasn't just because people are A-holes, though. The modern Progressive mentality pretends having children out of wedlock is kool, and suppresses the recognition of just how damaging single-parent and "alternative" families are.* I know; I was "latchkey" before it was fashionable.

    *Not referring to Dawnmaster's arrangement, which would equate common-law marriage in the U.S. and preceded religious marriage in historical terms.
    Quote Originally Posted by Leopold Stotch View Post
    People realized that AIDS was not a "6ay man's disease" and that ANYONE could contract it.
    Sad thing is, AIDS/HIV is STILL a 'sin' disease, but the backlash against discussing it as such has probably increased the spread. The reason it's widespread in Africa is that anal is used for contraception, BUT YOU CAN'T TALK ABOUT THAT@!!@ONE!!

    ************************************
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnmaster View Post
    Actually I signed another piece of paper that I'm his father, so if we ever choose to split up, I'll be in big trouble.
    Regardless of my wife's employment, I'll have to pay both child support and alimony for her, which is deducted directly from ones paycheque.
    One of the few benefits of a less free society is that deadbeat dads can't be deadbeats. Paternity suits are apparently difficult and expensive, so they only really work well when the male has some money. I was just talking to a co-worker; his children's real father has contributed a grand total of $1600 in child support over 10 years because he doesn't hold a steady job. There's no way he's meeting his obligations.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnmaster View Post
    As a last note, I would like to ask a question to everybody willing to answer:
    - Apart from religious people I don't know anybody who has a problem with *** people or their rights.
    - However, almost everybody seems to be terribly upset when somebody likes both genders (threesomes excluded)

    Where do you stand on people who have relationships with opposite and same genders?
    And why do you suppose a lot of people have more problems with bi than with *** people?
    I don't have any of the problems you mention because of religious reasons; I have a problem because it's already used to attack religious belief. The reason I cited that woman in the YouTube clip is because she's a "leader" in the alphabet soup community (and there's other, similar admissions by the queer community that what they really want is to attack the supposed "establishment").

    People have swallowed the lie that this is over 10% of the population; it's less than 2% and how many of those are actually interested in marriage? The way they fabricate the 10% claim is by counting things like Madonna kissing what'serface on stage, or anyone who ever did same-sex experimentation (like an orgy) when at University.

    It's all about the ability for the ACLU to create another protected class and go to town fabricating discrimination cases. It will keep them rolling in dough for decades to come.

    I'll also throw a complementary question to yours - why would bigamy and polygamy remain illegal, and why are they considered so horrific and filthy when they're far more socially correct and traditionally accepted than queer marriage? I'll tell you - because they have a religious tradition even if it's no longer endorsed. The only ones who get away with it are Muslims.

  8. #48
    IncGamers Member BaronScarpia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    RL: BR | D3: NA | D2: SPF
    Posts
    900

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    If they are 2 guys, I think they consider themselves guys... They don't consider the partner a girl. Sexual orientation and gender orientation are different things, btw.

    Some law background and religious matters (no research now, no sources, pulling things out from law school and religious classes and trying to mix them together):

    - Civil Marriage started as copy of religious marriage. Something like "let's add some roman law to it".
    - After that, the two "things" started to grow apart. Around here the "right name" of civil marriage is conjugal society. Due to my religious background, I'm against making reference to civil marriage as "marriage" (only me, afaik), because that is misleading.

    A conjugal society can be dissolved by divorce, a catholic marriage can't. There's no divorce on church, because there's no such thing as divorce on the dogmas. State can have his law, but the catholic marriage follows the canons. That's why you can't celebrate *** marriage on a church - it isn't predicted on the canons. One can't create catholic sacraments in a whim (after a few decades, a concilium, ex cathedra papal declaration with infallibility, etc.).

    Imo (and for other people too) legal marriage and religious marriage are very different things, *** or not. By the law, you can divorce, marry again, etc.

    (I know that catholic religion is different from other religions, but I'm talking about it because I'm more familiar with it).

    When we talk about legal *** marriage, I don't think about sins, dogmas, etc. It's about two people forming a conjugal society. If there's a mutual feeling of respect between two people, I thing the law should allow them to create a conjugal society. Not allowing them just because they have the same gender seems weird to me. It goes all way down to human rights, eliminate gender distinctions in the eyes of law, etc. Also, it's a right that, by itself, doesn't reduces the right of other people.

    I can have my opinions about *** (I'm against any form of discrimination, by the way, and I don't understand why I have to use "*"), but I don't think personal opinions/beliefs should be used to deny rights like inheritance, ailments, use of name, tax benefits, etc. Imo, it's a matter of rightfully recognize human rights and make their situation legal.

    At least here (Brazil), they're not trying to change the religious marriage.

    A *** man asked me for legal advice on marriage on a public place and I gave him. Then, the people surrounding us started to discuss sins, nature, hate crimes, etc. The guy said "I just wanna marriage". While some groups go too far defending their beliefs (pro or against), some people just want the same protection from state that other married people have. Denying that is saying "you won't have this right because you love a man and was born a man. If you wasn't a man, you would have the rights". I really don't like how it sounds...

  9. #49
    IncGamers Member Stevinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    chicagoland
    Posts
    5,003

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Well as to why two guys is considered ickier, is probably just a difference between the sexes thing. As a straight guy, I think two guys is gross, but two girls is kinky or intriguing. I'm not sure that women think the same way in the same numbers.


    Again though, it doesn't matter what we think is icky. The reality of the situation is anyone can just live together, but there are certain government protections that I think should extend to people in spousal relationships. People who have pledged their life together are ostensibly family, whether or not anyone else approves. So things like health insurance, hospital visits, survivor benefits, and joint tax returns, I think there are real and concrete benefits to having the legal distinction of being married, so why not treat all of them the same? We are talking about consenting adults here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnmaster
    Actually I signed another piece of paper that I'm his father, so if we ever choose to split up, I'll be in big trouble.
    Regardless of my wife's employment, I'll have to pay both child support and alimony for her, which is deducted directly from ones paycheque.
    That's something that annoys me. Would it be the same if she took off? I have a friend (an old boss) whose wife cheated on him, then somehow got the kids and the house, he was required to pay child support, then he was laid off. Now he looks like a deadbeat dad (he's making half as much at his new job he found almost a year later), and he's damned lucky he has a roof over his head. It was a bit touchy there for a while he asked that if he got tossed from his girlfriend's place if he could crash on my couch, but it didn't come to that--luckily. I think if we spent too much time together he'd drive me crazy.


    Anyway, I think the way they favor the women in cases of break ups like that isn't fair. She was okay, but I don't know that she was so great with the kids. She seemed really awkward about it.


    Quote Originally Posted by dawnmaster
    As a last note, I would like to ask a question to everybody willing to answer:
    - Apart from religious people I don't know anybody who has a problem with *** people or their rights.
    - However, almost everybody seems to be terribly upset when somebody likes both genders (threesomes excluded)

    Where do you stand on people who have relationships with opposite and same genders?
    And why do you suppose a lot of people have more problems with bi than with *** people?
    I did not notice that. I always thought people had the biggest problem with the person who took on the opposite role in the relationship. The "butch chicks" or the "girly man". If you're a switch hitter, aren't you half right in the eyes of the lord? (sarcasm)

    Quote Originally Posted by Merv
    It isn't, but that's because the two systems are very dissimilar. Plus, it's no secret that Europe is dying out because they aren't replacing the population at anywhere nearly close to the sustainment rate.
    Quote Originally Posted by merv, later in the same post
    People have swallowed the lie that this is over 10% of the population; it's less than 2% and how many of those are actually interested in marriage? The way they fabricate the 10% claim is by counting things like Madonna kissing what'serface on stage, or anyone who ever did same-sex experimentation (like an orgy) when at University.
    While I'd love to know what size a minority group needs to be to achieve legal standing with you--but I'm also interested in why if there are so few are you blaming gays for europe losing population? it would seem that if there are so few of them, that they might not have such a big impact on population. Also, is it really that big a deal if we don't constantly grow our population? i know there are economic benefits to constant growth, but that can't go on forever. a little ebb and flow is okay I think.

    However, I'd still argue that the claims about a lack of visitation rights & what-not are substantially overblownfor the sake of dishonest hyperbole. Someone doesn't have to stay in a hospital staffed with petty-fascist douchebags that make up such rules, either.
    Neither of those address the concern of a family that wants to not allow the person's spouse access to them while they're in a hospital. Also, I don't think you get to pick a hospital in an emergency. Maybe after you're stable, but not at first. Plus, just a short time ago, that wasn't the law everywhere. I bet it isn't everywhere now. They used to NOT be able to share insurance, and they still don't get social security benefits, and a whole host of other stuff. Yes, a lot of it is money related. But it's also simple respect and fairness. You can argue well, now we've let them visit each other in the hospital, now go away, but there's still a giant list of a bunch of other things that marriage would grant them.


    Quote Originally Posted by merv
    It's all about the ability for the ACLU to create another protected class and go to town fabricating discrimination cases. It will keep them rolling in dough for decades to come.
    you keep saying that, but you've only produced one instance where this happened, and it was kinda iffy. Where are the lawsuits to force catholics to marry gays in their church? Recently when they were putting this up for some kind of vote here in Illinois, it was specifically stated in the law that churches would NOT be forced to marry them. So that argument is a bunch of hooey.

    I'll also throw a complementary question to yours - why would bigamy and polygamy remain illegal, and why are they considered so horrific and filthy when they're far more socially correct and traditionally accepted than queer marriage? I'll tell you - because they have a religious tradition even if it's no longer endorsed. The only ones who get away with it are Muslims.
    If we're talking consenting and aware adults (not some jerk setting up franchises, but everyone is aware of what's going on), i don't think it's filthy or whatever. I'm a bit concerned about letting them double dip on benefits (which is why I'd change the tax law so there were no joint returns). Also, two spouses shouldn't be able to collect Social security benefits, but hell, I don't care if you marry two people. It shouldn't be allowed under current law, but if we fixed the laws to not allow people to game it--all the power to them.

    Which benefits a multiple partner arrangement would get might take some looking into. I have lost the list of bennies that pertained to *** marriage (I think it's a muddled list now since their status is different in different places). but if you found one under 25 or so, I'd go through it and say yes or no to which ones I think group marriages should get.


    Sure it does. Just because we're massively fecked as a society hardly means that thousands of years of what works is out on it's ear.
    Oh please. Nothing has changed, even if they do allow for *** marriage. You can't truly think that throughout all of history there was never non-traditional families. That people didn't band together to survive with whomever was around? THat gays were just invented in the 1960's? They've always been there and they've sometimes been able to be open about it sometimes not, but it's not like one day Poof! gays came and the traditional family was destroyed.

    If you want to get on about the traditional family being destroyed, your culprit for today's mess is the war on drugs and the mass incarceration of people from the inner city. Remember, gays are only a TINY sliver of the population. Some guy named Merv told me that.

    The modern Progressive mentality pretends having children out of wedlock is kool
    Where do you get this stuff? Are you referring to letting ***'s adopt? Because there's a good chance they're not married because it's against the law. Otherwise, I don't know what you're talking about. My ex was big on this "16 and pregnant" show--and let me tell you, they do not glorify it. They portray the women on the show as idiots, and the whole premise is about How much they were unable to handle it.

    Besides, that position isn't fair coming from a guy who wants to ban any contraceptive that works after conception (morning after pills, plan B, any and all abortions, etc.) You seem to want it both ways. Hate to break it to you, people are going to have sex. Some of them will do it with others of the same sex, some with multiple partners, and some of them will do it too young, or when they're broke, or in whatever F'ed up situation they're in. It seems like instead of using the force of government to tell them how to live you should probably just let them be and live your life how your god tells you to.

    One of the few benefits of a less free society is that deadbeat dads can't be deadbeats. Paternity suits are apparently difficult and expensive, so they only really work well when the male has some money. I was just talking to a co-worker; his children's real father has contributed a grand total of $1600 in child support over 10 years because he doesn't hold a steady job. There's no way he's meeting his obligations.
    It sounds like we're incenting him not to work. Why bother working when you only get to keep a couple bucks an hour? I wish i had a solution, but they gotta take it or the kids may never see it. At some point can't they block him from seeing his kids?

  10. #50
    IncGamers Member BobCox2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    UnderYourDoorMat
    BattleTag What Me Worry?
    Posts
    10,824

    Re: Let's talk *** marriage!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dawnmaster View Post
    As a last note, I would like to ask a question to everybody willing to answer:
    - Apart from religious people I don't know anybody who has a problem with *** people or their rights.
    - However, almost everybody seems to be terribly upset when somebody likes both genders (threesomes excluded)

    Where do you stand on people who have relationships with opposite and same genders?
    And why do you suppose a lot of people have more problems with bi than with *** people?
    Make up your mind you selfish bastards!

    Just kidding, I'm Fine with group marriage rights for consenting adults but the real reason is.

    More Competition.
    I used to say I'm Better on *** Guys than girls because the *** guys are not competing with me ( Straight single male at the time ) but the girls remove two of the ones I want from the game.

    Bi-Sexuals compete with everyone.


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
  •