I understood perfectly, your clamour for equality only extends so far. You're willing to judge people based on your subjective value of their individual characteristics. You claim a philosopy of equality for all, but in practice you personally ascribe to the Orwellian "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

OH drat. You found me out.

__________________
Sent from an agnostic abacus

2014 C250 21,XXX my new DD ** 2013 GLK 350 18,000 Wife's new DD**

- With out god, life is everything.
- God is an ever receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller as time moves on..." Neil DeGrasse Tyson
- You can pray for me, I'll think for you.
- When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

You've outed yourself!

Fair enough but when those items mentioned can legally give consent, I'm for it.

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

Not to disparage the author or this thread in any way, however after I determined he couldn't answer post #5, nor his 'equality' premise - I realized the thread was just a poorly worded rush-job - based on feelings/emotion, not fact nor higher law, which seemingly reflects most if not all of liberalism.

__________________
'06 E320 CDI
'17 Corvette Stingray Vert

How exactly do genetics come into play in gay marriage? There is a reason Mother Nature has seen to it that homosexuals can't procreate. No court can overturn that. As far as I'm concerned, let them get "married", but don't let them have children.

Maybe I'm blind but it seems that many have pointed out some of the unequalities enjoyed.

__________________
1982 300SD 180K, rebuilt engine
1973 450SLC Megasquirt
1990 Volvo 780 - 273k
1993 Volvo 240 Wagon - Scrap yard slumber

http://www.fuelly.com/sig-us/44619.png

Why do you keep saying that? MTI gave examples of clear, unambiguous legal advantages given only to married couples. The advantage of being able to hold property as tenants by the entireties is just so completely obvious. Unless gays are allowed to marry, they can't hold property in that manner. There are other examples where it is legally advantageous to be married. We can argue about the societal benefit of those legal advantages, but I find it so odd that you claim that they don't exist.

For best trolling results, be sure you have the proper spread and color of your line. Chartruse is recommended.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AoUHlTbJNc8&feature=related

Repeat after me, SSDD.

On the subject of deciding who should be allowed to have children and who shoild not, maybe there should be an evaluation on the ability to provide for and create an environment conducive to raising children. How many times have you passed a "family" with six screaming kids knowing that the parents can't and have no interest in providing for them and beat them on a regular basis? Maybe take a trip to your local wally mart and just watch for awhile. The point is just because these people can reproduce they arw automatically deemed fit. It goes both ways - not everyone is fit for a family, gay, straight, vegetable, mineral.

__________________
1982 300SD 180K, rebuilt engine
1973 450SLC Megasquirt
1990 Volvo 780 - 273k
1993 Volvo 240 Wagon - Scrap yard slumber

http://www.fuelly.com/sig-us/44619.png

I would tend to agree with you on the above. However, because homosexuals cannot reproduce they would be automatically deemed "unfit", so it's a moot point.

Mother nature has seen to it people get sick and die early. We are screwing around with that too. So, WGAS about mother nature or whatever he/she is wanting?

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

In nature, you can have sex and procreated with your sister. So, by that criteria, you would be considered fit then?

__________________
01 Ford Excursion Powerstroke
99 E300 Turbodiesel
91 Vette with 383 motor
05 Polaris Sportsman 800 EFI
06 Polaris Sportsman 500 EFI
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Red
03 SeaDoo GTX SC Yellow
04 Tailgator 21 ft Toy Hauler
11 Harley Davidson 883 SuperLow

The prohibition of the situations you note are Constitutional because they do not single out a specific race, gender, ethnic group, etc. If you were to outlaw polygamy for Asians only, for example, allowing other races plural marriage, that would be un-Constitutional because it violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.

Also, the states can justify outlawing the above noted items because they can demonstrate a compelling reason(s) to do so, which is absent in this case.

At issue is the consistent and constitutional application of marriage laws.

Two people do not need to be "married" to jointly own property of any kind. That's a red-herring, throw away cause....

"Shall not be discriminated upon based on sex, age, race, creed, or national origin."

Exactly where or how in that statement are homosexuals excluded or unequal?

They're beating a dead horse.....

__________________
'06 E320 CDI
'17 Corvette Stingray Vert