I personally do not care if they do or dont. Its just fun to argue.

Good question:

CALIFORNIA CODES
FAMILY.CODE
SECTION 300-310




300. Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil
contract between a man and a woman, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary. Consent alone does not constitute marriage. Consent must be followed by the issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by this division, except as provided by Section 425 and Part 4 (commencing with Section 500).

from here

But the poor kid will be teased to death!

I can see the grade school kids now "You got two daddies, Haha"

Kids can be cruel!

Poor fucker would probably commit suicide by 16

edit (it left out my remark)

Doesnt mention baby production, just man and woman so in theory it would be discrimination which in itself is illegal.

So all of the SF 'marriages' are not legal.

Good I hate kids and I hate paying more taxes because the majority keep having them, and getting special tax treatment because they do.

the funniest thing about this is mirriam webster online...


It used to say:

1 a: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage

now it says:

1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage


amazing! they changed the fucking dictionary.

<img src="http://orr.justblow.us/images/You're_a_homo.jpg">

exactly, you are catching on :thumbsup

what the hell are you talking about? baby production?

What the hell does it mather is someone is gay or straight?

The most important thing is that are happy right??

I say let the homos marry each other if they want to

I mean if they're not gonna get married to the opposite sex, and still want to get married

who gives a shit


it's wacky but the ones who truely feel wrong about marrying the opposite sex should be able to marry each other, just because they're americans

50-different views on fruits marrying other fruits


edit-52

Read higher in the thread baddog. Jesus was mentioning people need to be able to have babies without medical intervention.

ummmm, when citing a dictionary, you might want to at least spell their name right :1orglaugh

cock and pussy. cock and pussy. If it was meant to be, we would all have cocks and pussies

pfft. . . . insane, what if you were not fertile, had a vasectomy, tubal ligation . . . . . yada yada.

Just follow the law, not a GFY persona :winkwink:

I said same thing about infertile ect. He left the argument.

So are we allowed to have laws that remain legal if they are discrimitory?

Its all about the health coverage.

Gay's and and there partners looking for better medical coverage.
And well I guess if there no political or moral stance on the entire issue why do straight couples get the benefit of insurance and first time buyers programs when they marry?

Double standards do apply here and no way around it Marriage is an institution and gay's are knocking on the door.

May as well let em or its is discrimation plane and simple?

Not really when looking at the investment government puts in future generations. A gay couple can not contribute to the growth of the population at large nor contribute to the gene pool.

So...
Why provide incentive to couples unable to breed and raise family?

Survival and logic is what it boils down to without getting choked up on love and emotion and morals...

Basically the instition of marriage stands to loose what it stands for in the concept of encouragement of "Family values" and over all growth of the population.

Oh shit! Look somone has a real grasp on reality ^^^^

Do we really need more people?

Yes America needs more people.

America has to have 3 children per family to even sustain ratio's of what the human production is in China or India.

More people mean more money, more team work, more innovation, more minds, more blood for war and more grave yard space etc...

Mens are supposed to be with womens

Womens are supposed to be with man AND women at the same time . That's my view of life :)

We need more Americans to work at Mc Donalds or carry a Machine gun.
Its really that simple.

Exactly.

Did I mention I hate kids?

I like japan better, negative population growth and the fast food dispensors do not require idiots that mess up your order. They also seem pretty damn innovative.

I did not plan on having children, I got a daughter...

Long story.
My life style and path is not univerally applicable either but there are those that if they should choose to settle down and make babies they oughtah be given somthing to help em out.

Gays are not really qualified breeders whom may have the determination to settle down and ultimatly have children.
Why should they get anything when they are not contributing to a system designed to help those whom will take on the responsibility of having children?

They should get none of the benefits that go with it or...
No benefits whats so ever accross the board for both sexual orientations which I think would be detrimental to the growth in population.

It is not legal in the USA for same sex marriages. I dont believe that is how it should be. But to each his/her own. I do not judge people by that. But we must not have any political uprise in a time like this.

Or not...

It's more about survivor benefits than health, but let's not focus on the facts.

Would they not either:

1. adopt and potentially assist a child out of the foster care establishment which often is a 1 way path to prison for most, where the child could go onto being a more productive member of society?

2. Just slowly vanish due to not breeding.

Face it Gays would want nothing to with Marriage if benefits were not tied to it.

But fact is provisions are tied to it and it becomes a queswwtion of whether or not the resources are worth investing to a gay couple...

In the words of Richard Jeni: "Gay people should have the right to loose half of their shit, just like the rest of us." :winkwink:

Legislator's bill urges
two-child limit
Democrat wants state to promote population sustainability

It's not China's draconian one-child policy, but a lawmaker in Washington state is proposing legislation to urge parents to have no more than two children.

State Rep. Maralyn Chase is the sponsor of what she calls the Two-or-Fewer Bill, which aims to promote population sustainability.

The bill does not mandate the number of children, but calls for a pamphlet to be distributed by Washington's health department spelling out the presumed benefits of having no more than two children.

Mother and preschool owner Lori Saymon told radio station KXLY in Spokane, Wash., she thinks the idea is ridiculous.

Not all Democrats are intelligent.
Nor Republicans...

Its not a breed.

But I am sure even the fags here can see the point and stand down about why they should not get the benefits involved with an institution specically designed to promote the growth of the population.

Ya people should be ashamed of yourselves thinking everything in society is a hand out.

In the end the health insurance and drug companies will benefit from this outcome. :2 cents:

Not true ultimatly it comes down to your tax dollars.
Subsidies are made by the government for health coverage and pharmacuticals costs.

There is no such thing as gay marriage, just like there is no such thing as a round triangle.

until they are overturned by the Supreme Court, yes