Texas voting on amendment to ban gay marriage today

This is the one so badly written it might ban all marriage, right? Ah, the beauties of my native land.

Yes, but it’s damnably hard to enforce!

I think an animated .gif of Babylon 5’s Londo Mollari screaming at the League of Non-Aligned Worlds works well with the original post.

It’s interesting to see that the Gideonbot program has been upgraded to include an ability to randomly insert smilies along with the bolding and capitalization.

Slaves were always the property of their owner, until we banned slavery.

I agree with Gideongamer that this is a “rediculous” issue, though I might be inclined to use the more commong spelling of “ridiculous.”

dude, we already know texas is evil, ok?

I actually hated driving through it when I moved cross country.

OMFGDRIVEFASTWEHAVEWEEDANDTHEYWILLHANGUSINTHESTREET
FORHAVINGLONGHAIRANDSMOKINTHEREEFERSOLOLOLOHALP!!1111

Texas chainsaw massacre is cool though, and Austin.

Slaves were always the property of their owner, until we banned slavery.[/quote]

Ridiculous was always spelled Rediculous in this forum, and the homo mafia has no right to change that, and especially not by bullying us normies with their blowdryers and handcreams and glory-seeking tactics!

As a straight person, I guess I truly can’t appreciate the socially-progressive corporate health care plans that don’t require employees to be married to their same-sex partners in order to give them benefit coverage.

And, I probably don’t fully appreciate the frustration that same-sex partners who don’t have the luxury of working at such corporations must feel.

But I bet it’s frustrating.

Gideon, as far as I’m concerned, a marriage is a civil union contract. If you want to qualify your particular mariage it and call it a Christian marriage, that’s fine. But do you really believe that the IRS lets you file income taxes jointly because the IRS believes in God?

So are you saying marriage should be banned, or simply that it is equivalent to slavery?

So are you saying marriage should be banned, or simply that it is equivalent to slavery?[/quote]

Wicked burn!

So are you saying marriage should be banned, or simply that it is equivalent to slavery?[/quote]

Wicked burn![/quote]

Technically, that is a zing.

He’s saying the same thing I am: the argument that something “always has been” is ridiculous. You shouldn’t be basing your decision on whether something has always been a certain way. You should be basing it on whether it’s something you believe is right or wrong.

Slavery was always legal, until we made it illegal. This was a good thing, right? Just because slavery was always legal doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be illegal. Just because marriage has always been defined as only between a man and a woman doesn’t mean it should be. And yet, one of the most common arguments against gay marriage is that history has never accepted gay marriage so why should we now?

And the GOP marches on.

Haha, let’s screw heterosexual couples who don’t want to get married, too, because not only do we hate homosexuals, we’re also stupid.

My questions;
What time?
Where?
Should I bring anything besides myself?

Slaves were always the property of their owner, until we banned slavery.[/quote]
Ownership of other humans is a completely separate issue. Though as others have mentioned, marriage has in the past been pretty much de facto ownership of the woman by the man.

My marriage seems to be evidence that the situation has completely changed. :wink:

Slaves were always the property of their owner, until we banned slavery.[/quote]
Ownership of other humans is a completely separate issue. Though as others have mentioned, marriage has in the past been pretty much de facto ownership of the woman by the man.[/quote]

You’re missing the point, which is, as you’d know if you hadn’t skipped some posts in between: the fact that something has always been a certain way is no kind of argument that it should remain that way. There are countless examples. There were no female landowners until there were. There were no elections until there were. You need to posit something other than “this is how it’s always been.”

[size=1]…and frankly, you need to stop being such a Confucious fanboy.[/size]

I’ve learned that in actuality, Confucius was very much for changing traditions to help conform to a changing world, much like how we would change our laws to conform to a changing world and manage our society. No one knows how Confucius would react to homosexuality of course. It existed but he never wrote about it. I for one believe that homosexual couples should receive all civil rights in accordance to a union of 2 households, but that they should create their own cultural traditions to match with the union recognized under law.

I’d like to get a couple of Carolina Panthers ex-cheerleaders to give an opinion on this…