It Begins: Pedophiles call for same rights as Homosexuals

I wouldn't lump the three together, but whatever.

 

This was the premise of my argument. The system has been broke. This would have been a good time to bring in the civil union and phase out the typical marriage.

I am not too sure how you think adding more people to the marriage pool with strengthen it. This isn't insurance. Its not about quantity, its about quality. If you fully intend on staying marriage no matter what, then the current format will work. If you're like the vast majority of people who will use divorce if need to be, then you should stay away from it.

 

backwards ass logic in this thread.

 

There are certain rights that are covered under marriage that should be given to anyone, not just married people, or straight people or gay people.

There are aspects of marriage that the government have no business involved in.

 

Excellent source DingoJesus.

 

It's an abusive non-consensual relationship. Your thoughts?

 

I'm not gonna lie, I kinda thought my teachers were hot when I was a kid (and thinking of them now as an adult, I had good taste). If they came on to me, would that be considered pedophilia? Cause little sexybutignorant was a perv when he was a kid, he woulda liked it.

I've matured now...

 

****ing stupid.

 

I completely agree with this, unfortunately everyone thinks you're crazy when you mention it in public.

IMO, it's offensive to ask religious people to recognize homosexual marriages. We don't have to stomp on their religious rights to give rights to gays, everyone should have equal rights regardless of marital status.

 

#1 They are two completely seperate arguments.

#2 No one is forcing any church to marry homosexuals. They can refuse to marry anyone they want.

#3 "Forcing religious people to recognize marriages". Do you mean that the STATE shouldn't? Because that is what this is REALLY about.

I don't think anyone should be forced to marry homosexuals in their church. If Baptists don't want to marry interracial couples, they shouldn't have to... If the Catholic church does not want to marry homosexuals, they should not have to.....

Anything else is a red herring.

 

RE: #1 Possibly, but giving everyone equal rights and getting rid of (or significantly altering) state recognized marriage would render the gay marriage argument irrelevant. Everyone goes home happy and no one's belief system is challenged.

RE: #2 I never mentioned churches.

RE: #3 refer to #1

 

As some others have pointed out, the key difference is that children and animals cannot give consent. Two adults, regardless of whether they are of the same sex or of different sexes, can.

 

.... or 3 or 4 adults can give consent.

I don't really understand the fear of poly families..

 

If you never mentioned "churches" and do not mean "churches", then how the hell are religious people being forced to recognize anything? If you mean LEGALLY forced to recognize and provide benefits, then this is nothing new. Religions are forced to legally recognize many things they do not like in a legal sense.

Second, having the state do away with tax breaks, benefits, etc for married people would be EXTREMELY unpopular, and that includes with the church crowd as they are used to and rely on the benefits and breaks.

 

My thoughts? The OP couldn't even manage an original title for this farce. My other thought? That he is a disgusting fool deserving of my ignore list. Congratulations idiot. You made it.

 

Based on the the rampant Caligula-ization of human life in all of the states and countries with legalized gay marriage it seems that the OP may be on to something...or on something.

I mean, we are witnessing the complete collapse of civilized functioning in Argentina, Denmark, the Netherlands, South Africa, Belgium, England/Wales, New Zealand, Spain, Brazil, France, Norway, Sweden, Canada, Iceland, Portugal, and Uruguay, not to mention the moral destruction occurring in our own backyards in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington state. Right?

 

Yes, being forced to legally recognize gay marriage is obviously what I meant. And, yes, there are many legal sins, as they should be. The problem with gay marriage for religious people is not that they consider it wrong but that it does not fit their definition of marriage in the first place.

I agree that doing away with marriage benefits is currently unpopular (I believe I hinted towards that in my original post). That doesn't mean it is not the right thing to do. In fact, in personal discussions, that's the most common response I get. It sounds like the right thing to do but a lot of people won't like it.

 

The issue with polygamous marriages comes more from the image of the compound, cultish nature of those groups where young women are basically being raped and forced into these marriages.

The other issue with polygamy is the tax break situation. Should a man get a tax deduction for every wife? In today's "civil union" view of marriage anyway, that makes it enticing for people to do it just for the business aspect.

 

This.

It's not that hard, Izak. Do you see pedophiles gaining rights in any other country where gay marriage has been legal for so long?

Just an intellectually pathetic thread.

 

What the hell are you talking about???