Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

malthaussen

(17,065 posts)
25. It's not that hard to parse
Sun May 13, 2012, 05:57 PM
May 2012

Gays may marry -- persons of the opposite sex. Not of their own. Given this restriction, many choose not to marry.

-- Mal

No, Sir: And If they Meant It About 'Preserving Marriage' They Would Be Crusading Against Divorce... The Magistrate May 2012 #1
And adultery. nt laundry_queen May 2012 #29
And many a battle against those -- divorce and adultery -- has been fought and lost. JDPriestly May 2012 #36
Hell, I have a pretty good imagination and I can't even THINK of one. I've certainly ... 11 Bravo May 2012 #2
Of Course. Any person that owns a co. that will have to pony up health care, retirement, etc. WingDinger May 2012 #3
Actually, retirement benefits can go to whomever one designates. GoCubsGo May 2012 #10
Not so with Social Security, which is all the retirement $ most folks will ever see. kestrel91316 May 2012 #16
that's not a "cogent" argument (as the OP asked)...it's an argument that denying civil rights saves CreekDog May 2012 #28
So that lesbian woman at the next desk should pay for Social Security that JDPriestly May 2012 #37
They can't say it, but they try to dance around it... targetpractice May 2012 #4
Nope sakabatou May 2012 #5
No Solly Mack May 2012 #6
Yes thelordofhell May 2012 #7
Well, "Because I don't like it" is a perfectly coherent reason malthaussen May 2012 #8
I've never heard a single rational argument about why marriage equality may be detrimental to ANYONE kestrel91316 May 2012 #17
There is one just upthread. malthaussen May 2012 #20
Most/many employers do not cover family Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #22
No. Starry Messenger May 2012 #9
I never have. Jazzgirl May 2012 #11
Nope Kalidurga May 2012 #12
no d_r May 2012 #13
sure arely staircase May 2012 #14
Well, Since You Asked, On the Road May 2012 #15
Not bad. But you ignore the Common Law. malthaussen May 2012 #19
marriage does not require a wedding in texas arely staircase May 2012 #21
I don't know if it's still the case, but at one time in Texas HillWilliam May 2012 #31
dont know about the two witnesses0 arely staircase May 2012 #47
No marriage requires a wedding obamanut2012 May 2012 #53
First, what state requires a ceremony Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #23
It's not that hard to parse malthaussen May 2012 #25
Then that isn't an argument for equal marriage, IMO. Ruby the Liberal May 2012 #33
Poster defines "marriage" as being among members of both sexes malthaussen May 2012 #35
In fact, as I have posted in the past, the word "marriage" has two meanings. JDPriestly May 2012 #38
The religious definition is prior to the civil definition, however. malthaussen May 2012 #39
Yes, the religious one came first, which is why people are confused. JDPriestly May 2012 #56
I was using "prior" in the logical sense... malthaussen May 2012 #57
Never in my lifetime. Rex May 2012 #18
No. All the arguments start from the false premise that homosexuality is an abomination. aikoaiko May 2012 #24
Just to play Devil's advocate for a moment malthaussen May 2012 #26
the need for small tribes arely staircase May 2012 #27
Ha, I hadn't thought of that at all malthaussen May 2012 #30
That is because in primitive societies and earlier ages, society feared underpopulation. JDPriestly May 2012 #40
but all societies everywhere have not so conspired RainDog May 2012 #45
As to your first point malthaussen May 2012 #46
actually, that's not the case RainDog May 2012 #49
Ah, interesting. Dr Boswell would appear to have lucked into a good lode malthaussen May 2012 #51
Oh, and what I also find really interesting RainDog May 2012 #50
Most people haven't read The Source malthaussen May 2012 #52
thanks for the conversation RainDog May 2012 #54
The pleasure was mine, assuredly. malthaussen May 2012 #58
I heard Rush Limbaugh talking about it interfering with his ability to get married every couple of madinmaryland May 2012 #32
yes " I don't want to do ritual you straight people do" said one of my childhood friends, He said it mulsh May 2012 #34
I don't belive the polls, I don't think anyone for the most part, cares if gays get married. crazyjoe May 2012 #41
Then with respect, you live up to your user name malthaussen May 2012 #42
Never have, never will. Initech May 2012 #43
religious belief does not require coherent thought RainDog May 2012 #44
Because it would create more married couples, requiring more married benefits? haele May 2012 #48
You ask the best questions, Don. n/t EFerrari May 2012 #55
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Have you ever heard anyon...»Reply #25