Wow, i agree with you on something...

So does the Taliban.

So does the Taliban.

Oh good grief.

 

I agree with the decision, but I also understand why people are upset by it.

 

 

So does the Taliban.

 

They also supported Obama

 

Or was that Al-Qaeda?

They also supported Obama

 

Or was that Al-Qaeda?

Depends on which messenger you believe.

They also supported Obama

 

Or was that Al-Qaeda?

You're probably talking about Hamas, which isn't anywhere near the same thing.

 

Al-Qaeda called him a "house negro."

Oh good grief.

 

I agree with the decision, but I also understand why people are upset by it.

I also understand why people were upset by interracial marriage 40 years ago. Doesn't make me sympathize.

little to none, but I disagree with it.

And this right here is the single biggest reason why the social conservative movement in this country is, thankfully, dying off. If the GOP makes a comeback, it will be as small government, low tax, pro-business, personal freedoms crusaders.

 

And this right here is the single biggest reason why the social conservative movement in this country is, thankfully, dying off. If the GOP makes a comeback, it will be as small government, low tax, pro-business, personal freedoms crusaders.

Considering that they've decided that the best way to respond to one of the biggest presidential blowouts in 40 years appears to be to double down on their base, I'd like to say I'll believe it when I see it.

you're right, not all americans deserve the same equality. some americans are just more special than others.

 

 

i'm so proud to be from Iowa right now.

 

Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain.....motherf***er.

Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain.....motherf***er.

Considering that they've decided that the best way to respond to one of the biggest presidential blowouts in 40 years appears to be to double down on their base, I'd like to say I'll believe it when I see it.

I didn't say the GOP was going to walk away from it entirely, or at least I didn't mean to. Nor did I mean that the party is smart enough now to make a massive shift. But, you are seeing the beginnings of a slow shift away from that base. Also, the base itself is changing to take a more economically drive mindset.

 

Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain.....motherf***er.

 

 

So there's nothing wrong with polygamy or first-cousin marriages then right?

So there's nothing wrong with polygamy or first-cousin marriages then right?

Or marrying corn. Delicious corn.

ROFL. I could write a script for you guys to tell you how this thread is going to go to save you all time, if you like.

ROFL. I could write a script for you guys to tell you how this thread is going to go to save you all time, if you like.

I know I for one intend to continue using jokes related to corn. Or as the Native Americans call it, maize.

So there's nothing wrong with polygamy or first-cousin marriages then right?

Polygamy results in abuse at a high frequency, and first-cousin marriage results in children at an astronomically high rate for all sorts of problems. In both cases, the societal damage is documented and huge. Gay marriage does no such thing - it doesn't promote abuse any more than any other marriage, and it doesn't result in retarded or handicapped children.

 

ROFL. I could write a script for you guys to tell you how this thread is going to go to save you all time, if you like.

I think you should start a new thread on some political topic, lock it, and then add all the posts by each poster with what you think they'd say. That might be pretty amusing.

 

I know I for one intend to continue using jokes related to corn. Or as the Native Americans call it, maize.

Your corn jokes actually f*** up my plan. Virtually none of these merry-go-round arguments have jokes about people f***ing corn. I'm going to need to factor this in somewhere.

I know I for one intend to continue using jokes related to corn. Or as the Native Americans call it, maize.

What about jokes involving HFCS? Fair play?

What about jokes involving HFCS? Fair play?

That just starts us on the slippery, but also somewhat sticky slope to jokes involving all sorts of products. Clearly we need to ban those jokes to keep a limit on where my corn-sex jokes can be taken.

So there's nothing wrong with polygamy or first-cousin marriages then right?

 

If only we could get gay married to all of our gay cousins.

 

I'm pretty sure this ruling won't lead to that.

Polygamy results in abuse at a high frequency, and first-cousin marriage results in children at an astronomically high rate for all sorts of problems. In both cases, the societal damage is documented and huge. Gay marriage does no such thing - it doesn't promote abuse any more than any other marriage, and it doesn't result in retarded or handicapped children.

 

 

If it is all about rights and such I don't see any difference at all. If I wanted to marry my cousin why can't I? (I know I could in some states but in general i'm fairly confident you can't). As for polygamy leading to a high frequency of abuse, well, what's to say I wouldn't be in a loving relationship with 3 or 4 wives who all loved each other? Nothing. Should medically retarded people be allowed to marry each other? I'd think they'd have a pretty high chance of having children with problems. I mean how can you (not you directly) claim it's all about the "right to marry" and yet still deny it to others.

 

I believe gay people should be able to engage in a civil union with all the legal rights and privileges that a marriage allows. I also believe in civil unions b/w two consenting individuals with no sexual relationship. For example, my grandmother has two friends, sisters, who never married or had kids and lived 100% of their adult lives in the same house. I believe they, or any other pairing that makes sense, should be allowed to have the legal privileges a civil union could provide. But to me, the term marriage is a union between a man and a woman. You will never change my opinion on that.

 

 

I mean how can you (not you directly) claim it's all about the "right to marry" and yet still deny it to others.

 

It is all about the right to marry. Now every person in Iowa can get married. Every single one. Gay or straight.

So there's nothing wrong with polygamy

The entire system is set up as a legal contract between two people, so it poses problems there, but morally, who am I to tell someone else they can't be a polygamist?

or first-cousin marriages then right?

 

First-cousin marriage is still common in many places and was common in the Western world until recently. Hell, Einstein married his first cousin. Again, who am I to tell you who to marry?

 

It is all about the right to marry. Now every person in Iowa can get married. Every single one. Gay or straight.

 

They were already allowed to. It was about the right to marry whom (trying to recall The Office debate about when to use who/whom)