Heterosexual couple want to ‘marry’ in civil partnership to protest against ‘anti-gay’ marriage

 

1. Well now I gotta come to their defense. One of the best ways to get stupid laws culled is to, as Rush Limbaugh is fond of saying, “demonstrate absurdity by being absurd.”
   Personally, I don’t think government should be involved in the marriage business. That’s between you, your partner and your beliefs.
   To be sure, marriage is also a legal contract, with legal ramifications. So what? Personally I think that consenting adults should be able to draw up pretty much whatever kind of contract they please. Really, that’s the whole point of my “get the government out of the marriage business” attitude. If the signatories of the contract are all adults, there is no evidence of force or fraud being involved, and the contract does not define a mechanism for using force or fraud against others, then the government can damn well butt out, and I don’t care what the contract says, or who, how many, what gender, etc. people it involves.

   Posted by GrumpyOldFart       11/14/2009  at  09:23 AM  



2. Hey Grumps ... glad to see you back here.  All ok I hope.

   Well, as for the couple here.  I saw the article and immediately thought (and think I’m correct) here’s another loony tune left wing bleeding heart hand wringing take offense on the behalf of others ... libtard couple in search of a politically correct cause.

   Posted by peiper       11/14/2009  at  09:38 AM  



3. Dear Queers, we will make a trade.  You stop using the word “gay” and burn all rainbow flags and images used to promote homosexuality, and you can have gay marriage.  Then start acting like human beings, you know, shut the fuck up, mind your own business and quit trying to force everyone to kiss your asses.  You’d be surprised how much better your lives would be.  Think about it.

   Posted by grayjohn       11/14/2009  at  12:47 PM  



4. right on Grayjohn.  they are their own worst enemies seeing insults even when there are none. accusing everyone who finds guys kissing in public as repulsive as homophobic and race and god knows what else. and those damn outlandish parades celebrating perversion.
   jeesh.

   Posted by peiper       11/15/2009  at  03:06 AM  



5. Welcome back Grumpy!

   And, I agree with you—to a point.

   In the old days, marriage just meant a public acknowledgement of a couple’s decision to join. Other than having to do with issues of family property, etc, now, because of the intrusion of the Federal Government, it means much more in terms of taxpayer goodies.

   This is the entire reason for the so-called ‘gay’-rights movement. It’s an explicit money grab.

   If marriage were indeed still a ‘church’ or community matter, I really wouldn’t care if ‘gays’ married. The problem is that the only reason ‘gays’ want such recognition is for the taxpayer credits or benefits.

   Go back to the tax system circa 1890, the ‘gays’ wouldn’t be so intent on ‘gay marriage’.

   BTW, what’s so ‘gay’ about being queer? If being queer was so grand, wouldn’t they all be happy and gay anyway?

   Posted by Christopher       11/15/2009  at  01:01 PM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.