ImTheVoiceOfGod

Join the military and you can buy alcohol on post on Sundays.

__________________

mO 64 StAnG 06

I don't have a problem offending people. I try not to, but I'm not going to go out of my way to please people. This country has turned into a weak-hearted nation with PC up the ass. But that's outside this forums. 20Strong is simply arguing his point which is more than cool. No problem with that.

Nevermind... I just erased four paragraphs in sake of keeping this a non-religious debate... Back to topic.

Oh and another law. I believe Same-sex marriage should be legal. Who am I or anyone else to judge what others can('t) do. No one is given the authority to forbid other human beings the right to marry. Although a Christian tradition, it has become more of cultural and common tradition. Who cares if two guys or two girls marry. Who gives a ****! It's their lives, let them be. Just because others, although I do at times to, see it gross or wrong, who am I or anyone else to restrict those different than I am simply for that reason.

Let the ***'s marry as it will have no impact on anything. After all, It's a stupid symbol of giving up or settling with what you have ATM.

civsnake

Even better idea: live in a state that doesn't have those liquor laws! Then you don't have to join the military and you can still get completely obliterated on the Sabbath!

Special Ringpop

The prerequisite to that would be abolishing the Don't Ask, Don't Tell law and apologizing to the very many *** and lesbian soldiers who have bravely served the country.

__________________

ImTheVoiceOfGod

Im with you on that. I think its bullsh*t that people who want to join get turned down for that or are forced to keep it quiet.

They say its because people might be uncomfortable about it. Hell, Im more uncomfortable having women in the military that gays.

__________________

ryker

many areas have such laws. Called "blue" laws????

In my area I can't buy alchol in the county. But could smoke at a restuarant. But I can't buy alchol in the city limits but can't smoke! Also no beer on sunday.

ryker

Impact on anything can be argued greatly. Many parts marriage could come into question with the "Who am I or anyone else to judge what others can('t) do. " multiple wives? age of marriage?

ryker

I see that point. I'd much rather have a ****-Marine in combat next to me than a weaker female.

My guess is that the DoD is all about $$$. They know that the *** lifestyle by a statitics would cost them a lot of $$$$ due to STD's and mental issues. (not stating my opinion just the facts). Which is also why they want fit people over fat people. Fat people cost more in health care.

ryker

So true. Look at Iraq/Vietnam. If Bush had awake during that chapter we might not have wasted 1 trillion dollars or sheed so much blood.

Special Ringpop

Is that so...?

Mental issues? The only people who have the mental issues was the idiot who ever thought DADT was a good idea.

"You are allowed to fight, protect, and die for your country. Oh...you sleep with men/women. Better not tell anyone, we could upset the morale!"

That's the entire reason. These big chief army douches seem to think that *** men and women would cause "discord" and "damaged morale".

Funny that it's the straights who would have the damaged morale. I love how pervasive stereotypes truly are. Higher rates of mental defect and STDs? Where'd this come from, the Jerry Falwell memoirs? There are far more straight people than *** people in the world, there is no way in hell they are lower than the *** population, unless you're scaling them and normalizing the data to be representative of each other, in which case the data is arguable, at best.

Man oh man this country scares me sometimes. Nevermind that they'll take ex-cons over gays and lesbians. Heaven forbid we hurt the morale of the troops and the prestige of the army with *** filth...ex-cons are SO much better. Please...

__________________

Special Ringpop

Polygamy cannot be compared to *** marriage. It's a completely different argument and lifestyle. The fact of the matter is that *** couples (of two consenting adults, read two and consenting) should have these rights.

I think it is unconstitutional to deny it, the way the law is set up now. It was unconstitutional when Clinton superceded the Full Faith and Credit clause and signed DOMA, and it was even more unconstitutioanl when Bush presented af ederal marriage amendment to BAN *** people from getting married.

Aside from the already profoundly problematic concept of limiting rights in the amendments (last one was prohibition. That worked so well), but the fact that marriage is the state's right not delegated to the federal government.

__________________

civsnake

So I'm curious which you would prefer: Fed keeps its hands off the issue of *** marriage altogether and lets each state decide, or Fed steps in and declares that no state can refuse to recognize a *** marriage.

And WTF with "mental problems"?

Special Ringpop

ryker's statistics tell him that *** men have STDs more and that *** people have higher levels of mental disorders.

And while, as a psych major, I think that's a crock of shit, is it really that hard to see why *** people WOULD have higher levels of depression and suicide? It sure isn't because they are "defective" people. Try living in a society that thinks you're on the same level as child molesters, cat/dog humpers, and felons. All this just because you like a member of the same sex.

As for marriage, I want the federal government's hands off it. It's not their jurisdiction. Period. Whether or not a state allows *** marriage is their choice, however, I still think the Full Faith and Credit clause effectively provides that if *** marriage is recognized in one state, it is recognized in all 49 other states. Marriage licenses from one state, likewise with birth/death certificates, and driver's licenses, are to be valid in all 49 other states if it is valid in one.

Which is why no lawyer, politician, or scientist can tell me how it was that when Hawaii legalized same-sex marriage in 1996, Clinton was able to create the DOMA laws, and tell individual states it was upt o them whether *** marriage was "okay". That's irrelevent. The fact that Hawaii had endorsed same-sex marriage effectively (or was supposed to) allow *** marriages to be recognizedi n all 49 other states.

Politics suck. When morals get involved with politics, it sucks even worse. If I could make just one law, it'd be to ban lobbying and to mandate religion (not faith) be kept out of politics. It is nothing but divisive when it is in the realm of government.

__________________

mO 64 StAnG 06

lmao, there is people that actually hump cats?

menotakoala

I'd like to see, "all Trucks (as in 18 wheelers) and Buses must drive in a separate Lane to be created on the right side of all freeways."

20strong

I like these threads.

Hey Mo stang, I dont see any reason to have deleted your statement. I was only arguing really for the sake of arguing. All but one of the morons I work with are incapable of arguing without getting angry. You by no means what so ever offended me, I mostly agree wit hyou actually. I keep my religious feelings to myself were they belong and do not practice *thier* iunterpratation of Christianity.

So I based my argument off of the majority of Christians.

20strong

I think that the reason everyone is so on top off the same sex marriage thing is for these reasons.
1) Being homosexual is considered by near every (to my knowledge) religion to be a sin (or like)
2) The instatution of marriage is supposed (or originaly however you chose to precieve it) a religous act.
3) Allowing a sinful act to be deamed ok by the istatution of marriage would deface the sacntatiy of marriage.

Solutions and Reasoning for same sex couples to have every right to be *married*
1) Marriage is a legal contract anymore. You can get married without legal papers, but this affords you no legal rights. Therefore the government considers marriage a buisness deal of sorts requiring a contract.
2) Allow a same sex couple to enter into a legally binding contract together. Bam married without offending religous types. And viola you get the same tax breaks as straight couples that are legally bound to eachother.

Special Ringpop

Thats exactly right, Marcus.

Im not pro-*** marriage because I'm ***. I'm pro-*** marriage because I think that the way the laws stand and are defined now, you CAN'T deny it. If marriage were solely a religious institution, no problem: I'd be anti-*** marriage (and yes, some of my *** friends are, actually). However, because the federal government SANCTIONS these marriages (a religious pact) by giving federal benefits...

__________________