close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

First gay marriage, now polygamy; what next?

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by Sam Spade, Sep 25, 2012.

  1. HarlDane

    HarlDane

    6,568
    1,391
    Jul 26, 2005
    San Joaquin Valley
    A simple contract between a couple (or group) covers most of the normal legal issues that arise in creating or dissolving a marriage. As for suits against churches, it's a non-issue; churches currently discriminate with regards to who can be married in their buildings with no problem, legalizing polygamy or gay marriage would do nothing to change that.
     
  2. HarlDane

    HarlDane

    6,568
    1,391
    Jul 26, 2005
    San Joaquin Valley
    Animals can't consent. Of course, I'm fairly sure you know that. :upeyes:
     


  3. countrygun

    countrygun

    17,069
    17
    Mar 9, 2012
    "Polygamy": A Crime that is also it's own punishment.
     
  4. IvanVic

    IvanVic

    5,960
    1,301
    Apr 19, 2012
    Because it is not a man and a woman. Pretending that the word marriage has not retained a historical meaning in Western civilization is dishonest.
     
  5. douggmc

    douggmc

    1,851
    9
    Feb 23, 2007
    Orlando, FL
    Do you own the term or its definition?
     
  6. IvanVic

    IvanVic

    5,960
    1,301
    Apr 19, 2012
    No. I also don't own the definition of the word "shoe". Does that mean it's correct to start calling the 500 pound stainless steel box that keeps our food cold a "sneaker"?
     
  7. Gunnut 45/454

    Gunnut 45/454

    12,129
    9
    Jun 20, 2002
    Thats right why have Marriage at all! You can go screw anyone you want, live with them and when you get tried of there **** just leave. If you have kids with twenty different women who cares, just get a new one, let them take care of them, you don't have to pay nothing or raise them. Who cares right it's not your responsibility! That means no divorce , no allimony, no cares what so ever. Hey your kids can screw each other as well I mean we shouldn't care what they do right! Why should you, you don't care who your sleeping with nor the kids you have! Right! Now of course this doen't apply to gay couples as they can't have children- oh wait they can now since anything goes right! So Lesbian can get knockup for free by some dude- save the trip to a doctor to get enseminated!:faint:
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
  8. NMG26

    NMG26

    7,205
    210
    Jul 24, 2010
    NM

    Honestly there are a lot of different ways to see a thing. The word marriage is used in cooking, art, culture, for things coming together.

    You can have a small view of things or a large view of things.

    Pretending that there is only one way to see a thing is dishonest.

    No double entendres intended.


    .
     
  9. douggmc

    douggmc

    1,851
    9
    Feb 23, 2007
    Orlando, FL
    OK ... We are clear then. You don't own the term or its definition. So ... Mind your own business and quit trying to define it for someone else.

    PS - You can call your shoe OR your refrigerator whatever you want. Doesn't impact me. See how that works? Neat .. Huh?
     
  10. janice6

    janice6 Silver Member

    31,739
    13,129
    Apr 4, 2006
    minnesota

    What about implied consent.
    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/implied+consent


    "Consent that is inferred from signs, actions, or facts, or by inaction or silence."

    Not that there is anything wrong with that.....
     
  11. NMG26

    NMG26

    7,205
    210
    Jul 24, 2010
    NM

    Well they can't hire their own lawyers so there is little chance............



    .
     
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2012
  12. IvanVic

    IvanVic

    5,960
    1,301
    Apr 19, 2012
    So you're going to tell me that you don't understand the difference between how the word marriage applies in the context of a married couple and the context of cooking?

    Nobody owns definitions. By their very nature they are not things that can be owned. Your argument seems to be: since nobody can own a definition, then words have no real meaning. When I say "tree", you could honestly have no idea what I'm referring to and think that I might be referencing the rocking chair you're sitting on rather than the spruce in your front yard.

    I think it's fair to say that you've lost the argument at that point.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2012
  13. NMG26

    NMG26

    7,205
    210
    Jul 24, 2010
    NM
    So you're going to tell me that don't undestand how the word marriage is things coming together? A couple is not just man and woman. A couple of anything coming together can be called a marriage. You may not like it, but that is the way the word is used.

    Understand?


    .
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2012
  14. Chronos

    Chronos

    3,541
    11
    Nov 26, 2007
    Ditto.

    Btw, there *is* a slippery slope to be afraid of, but it's the one that looks more like George Orwell at the bottom than Joseph Smith.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2012
  15. IvanVic

    IvanVic

    5,960
    1,301
    Apr 19, 2012
    Yes, marriage in a general sense means the coming together of things - although in usage, it distinguishes. Words have context and their definition applies accordingly.

    Example: If you were describing an car accident, you wouldn't say "the two cars married," even though they technically 'came together' when they impacted.

    If I'm going to have to run a remedial reading class every time I quote one of your posts, this is going to wear thin rather quickly.
     
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2012
  16. NMG26

    NMG26

    7,205
    210
    Jul 24, 2010
    NM
    Just messing with you man. You can be right today.


    :cool:
     
  17. Foxtrotx1

    Foxtrotx1

    4,036
    0
    Jan 29, 2010
    Scottsdale AZ
    polygamy was fine in the old testament/new testament.
     
  18. Gunnut 45/454

    Gunnut 45/454

    12,129
    9
    Jun 20, 2002
    Foxtrotx1
    Yet being gay was not! So now your going to use the Bilble to justify this crap? Really?:rofl: The Hypocracy of the Homosexual agenda pushers is over the top!:faint: As I said in my first post - why don't we just get rid of Marriage all together! Take all responsibility out of relationships! Go sleep with whom ever or what ever you want- absolutely no obligations! :steamed: While we are at it lets just do away with all responisiblity for anyone- no laws, no governement at all just do as you please!:rofl:
     
  19. Guss

    Guss

    4,151
    273
    Jul 1, 2010
    Tampa
    And don't forget the Muslims.
     
  20. Foxtrotx1

    Foxtrotx1

    4,036
    0
    Jan 29, 2010
    Scottsdale AZ
    :dunno: