By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Joelcool7 said:
Viper1 said:
Marriage, a legally binding union between 2 people, is a right of everyone that shouldn't require legislation to regulate.

I don't see laws or national founding documentation making it a right to be able to walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Some things should just be common sense.


If marriage was simply a Government institution or civil matter then I would agree its common sense. However it is a religious institution who's meaning actually had to be changed to accomodate gays, beastiality and object fetishers. It's pretty insaine to change the definition of a word, force that change on the religious groups who made the word and the institution. Its insaine that its even considered a right.

What about going naked down the street, shouldn't that be my right I mean I'm not hurting anyone and its my free will to wear what I want. That should be a right should it not. Thats common sense isn't it?

In this case changing the definition of a word and then imposing that change on everyone is not a right in my eyes or the Constitution's or rights bills.

A religious marriage should have the right of refusal from the presiding religious insitution or pastor/preacher/rabbi, etc...   No religious instution should be forced to marry that which they do not see fit as a marriage. 

But note that I gave the legal usage in my post, not the religious.  And I don't know any marriage laws that allow bestiality.  Do plese show me the law that I may point and laugh. That should be illegal on the grounds the animal is not cognizant of the procedings.  No more so can you marry someone in a comma because they are not cognizant enough to so say I do.  Same with pedophelia.  A child does not comprehend the ramifications of a marriage nor has the physical, mental or psychological capacity for marriage.



The rEVOLution is not being televised