Jun 20, 2008
Yankee Yahoo Profile
Mm, if you want to get married, you get a license. If you want to start a corporation, you get a license. If you start a government, well, you got to get permission from the people, and people to join you. In all cases, the people give permission. It's so simple it hurts! (3 hrs ago | post #1023)
http://en.wikipedi a.org/wiki/License Uh huh. Yeah, you got permission. Just like I did, by the State of Nevada, which enforces the will of the Nevadan people, who gave us permission to marry in their state. Stupid. Just pure stupid. (3 hrs ago | post #1022)
Actually, you did need our permission. You got a license. (Face palm.) You know, the people are against incest, so we impose restrictions, stupid. (4 hrs ago | post #1017)
OMG, Justices don't run the country. The people run the country. How is marriage a privilege? Because you don't own any other human beings, and can make anyone marry you. Because the says of slavery are over. Holy crap, dude. Are you REALLY that stupid? Yes, yes you are. You are what is so wrong with this country. Profound ignorance! No, the States have been enforcing what people wanted about marriage. Of course, it was Martin Luther that thought that the State should have any say over marriage at all. So, are you defending Luther now? He also was an idiot that thought the State should tell us what to do. Of course they can't control each other. There is no one supreme institution, silly. Thus, the separation of church and state. And you wonder why I call you a fascist ... only they believed one institution was superior to all others! (4 hrs ago | post #1016)
Freedom of association is a right. The right not to compelled to associate with people whom we decide are criminals, immoral, or untrustworthy. Oh, and yes, the individual decides that, not the State ... since you keep making fascist arguments. Oh, but they are a business, you argue, and must go by DIFFERENT laws? You mean like marriage laws??? Don't even try and pull that. (5 hrs ago | post #63599)
Oh look, it's the same idiots with the same failed arguments!!! LOL! (5 hrs ago | post #63598)
Good grief. Government is an institution that serves the public interests, the political body that exercises traditional functions like military and police (which themselves are their own institutions, and can be managed separately.) OF COURSE marriage is an institution that some qualify for! Just like ANY OTHER institution, like labor unions. Are CEO's allowed to join a labor union? No! They are called privileges, not rights. Institutions do no give rights, only privileges. Like the privilege to work for Microsoft, or marry a someone to create a new household. The State, itself an institution, cannot define other institutions it does not create. Marriage was never created by the state, which would violate the separation of church and state in MOST cases. All easily refuted ... again. If you don't like what marriage means to the whole world ... don't marry! LOL! (5 hrs ago | post #1013)
LOL! Trying to control the argument? Classic!!!!!!! Rights do not arise from the law. They existed long before laws did. If ANYTHING, laws arouse because people claimed to have a right to something, and therefore created laws to support that belief. Your ignorance is astounding. No historical foundation whatsoever. Semantics is ALWAYS relevant. What words means is the very core of communication and understanding. The law is irrelevant and may be changed. As I stated, in the end, marriage is will be strengthen as a de facto household government institution, and defined much better than it has been. It has been taken for granted, because ignorant people such as yourself cannot differentiate between rights and social obligations. (8 hrs ago | post #1009)
Mister Absolute Sovereignty Man who denies he's a Randian. Uh huh. (9 hrs ago | post #1006)
First, there is nothing to rebut. No valid argument for you idea of marriage has ever been made. Secondly, all points you and everyone else here has made have been easily refuted. Here are the main claims.... Marriage is a right ... never has been. Institutions are not rights. Misinterpreting the Courts will not suffice. Using American laws when this is a human issue, and a sociological issue. Marriage is an evolved social construct like government and corporations, no less, no more. Claiming marriage is equal to concubinage. Different concept, no one said you could not have a gay concubine. Use the English language! Claiming equal entitlement to a benefit. Easily refuted, you have to meet qualifications to receive a benefit. As long as it is EQUALLY applied, there is no violation. There is no "gender restriction." It's just the nature of marriage, whether you like it or not. Claiming a "compelling government interest." There is no such thing. And, even if there were, the European Court already made a precedent that the state has compelling interest in traditional marriage, and made a valid argument for it. Any logical argument ANYWHERE is universally valid. Logic and reason are not bound by nations or culture. See? Easily refuted. The courts have no say in the matter either way ... I don't use them in arguments. Depending on the law is a logical fallacy, you fail every time. Stupid? If you can't figure out that it is you that is stupid, I can't help you. This whole issue is stupid beyond belief, and speaks ill of the future of all humankind when they cannot separate in their minds rights and social obligations. (9 hrs ago | post #1004)
Um, everyone has rights. They are called human rights. Not just Americans. Documents of any kind do not establish rights. Are you kidding me? (9 hrs ago | post #1003)
The Constitution never established rights. Being human is a biological virtue, and has nothing to do with rights. But if you want to get into theology, philosophy, and ethics, I'm game. But this issue, ONCE AGAIN, has nothing to do with any nation on the planet. The USA is irrelevant to the issue of HUMAN rights. And rights are irrelevant to the issue of INSTITUTIONS and ASSEMBLIES. Marriage existed long before ANY government, and is absolutely not established by government. The law is relative, and there are no absolutes with the law. You have no rational reason ... period. There has never been any logical or rational cause for redefining any institution, ever. Why don't you try redefining government to be a church. Let me know how that works out. You don't get to redefine any institution, it's purpose defines it. (12 hrs ago | post #998)
Um, since long before Confucius or Aristotle, marriage has taken only one universal form, from Native Americans to Mongols. It cannot ever be established as a right, because it's an institution, not a right. As already stated, court rulings are subject to change, and are not permitted in argument. Try again. (13 hrs ago | post #996)
No, it's refuted. LOL! Both are contractual social constructs, both are legal instruments, both require a license. Both entail special rights and privileges based on their purpose. Nice try, but you're obviously wrong. No fundamental civil right requires a license, by the way. Here is a clue my child, we seek to change the law just like you are doing. If there are stupid laws, we will seek to change them. I am not the one trying to rationalize something that cannot exist. But again, nice try. ;) (13 hrs ago | post #995)
An institution is not a civil right. The constitution does not defend your beliefs, because you cannot convert a corporate body to a right. Who said anything about benefits to the government? ALL institutions must benefit society, not the State. Thus, corporations benefit business interests if they wish to be supported by protected, and marriage must benefit social interests if they wish to be supported and protected. Churches must benefit society if society continues to exempt them from taxation. That is how it works. No matter what you opinion is. Marriage is just another kind of union, whether you like it or not. And no one has a right to any union of any kind. (14 hrs ago | post #991)
Q & A with Yankee Yahoo
Fear is the Mind-Killer
Cibola National Park
Red chili, and Satellite Coffee.
I Belong To:
God, Jesus, then my wife.
When I'm Not on Topix:
I'm doing something productive.
Read My Forum Posts Because:
I've probably read yours.
I'm Listening To:
Song of Ice and Fire
Read This Book:
Tradegy and Hope by Carroll Quigley.
Being with family, talking politics and history with my wife, teaching my kids, reading, writing, making love to my wife, though not in that order.
On My Mind:
My wife, still obsessed with her after 12 years!
Blog / Website / Homepage:
I don't do blogs.
I Believe In:
A Creator, free will, universal morality, liberal democracy, and social evolution away from the dependency on archaic forms of government.
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC