For gay marriage/against polygamy- Page 3

[iHeartMyGeek]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 1:51pm

all right, you two! Make love, not war.

[iHeartMyGeek]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 1:51pm

all right, you two! Make love, not war.

[Calvin]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 1:51pm

Without asking you to reveal any personal details, may I ask why a customer is pressing you on this in the first place? Is it somehow relevant to whatever your job is?

[iHeartMyGeek]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 1:52pm

Wow. i have never double-posted before. How do I get rid of it?

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 1:58pm

penicillin

Updated On: 8/25/06 at 01:58 PM

[DBillyP]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:03pm

Magdalene, again it is a question of one group receiving a right that another does not. Currently, heterosexuals are allowed to marry. Therefore, lesbians and gays should be allowed to marry.

Currently, no one is allowed to marry more than one person. If this is ever made legal for one group, it should be made legal for all groups.

You are correct, however, that polygamy is a religious issue for many people. A church should be free to perform such a ceremony if it is congruent with the church's beliefs. The government, however, chooses not to grant legal status to polygamous relationships.

[DG]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:04pm

I think everyone should be allowed to marry - and Jerby and papa should be forced to.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:10pm

since i am already married, dg, i can only take this as another example of the tall gay men in favor of polygamy bloc that is trying to demean our national spirit with your wild talk of multiple partner orgies.

[iHeartMyGeek]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:17pm

Wow, Papa, you're married? Who would ever be able to put up with your grumpy ways for longer than thirty seconds?

[Jilani]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:25pm

But what is to prevent polygamists from arguing that it violates their right to practice their religion?

The Supreme Court resolved this particular issue (as it relates to constitutional rights) as far back as 1878, in a case involving a Mormon in Utah who was trying to overturn a criminal bigamy conviction. The court concluded that the free exercise clause of the First Amendment did not translate into carte blanche in terms of an individual's actions; otherwise, as the court pointed out, "[s]uppose one believed that human sacrifices were a necessary part of religious worship, would it be seriously contended that the civil government...could not interfere to prevent a sacrifice?"

So the bottom line is that the freedom to practice religion is not unbounded, because "to permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself."

http://www.drbilllong.com/FreeExercise/Reynolds.html
Updated On: 8/25/06 at 02:25 PM

[DBillyP]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:33pm

That is excellent information, Jilani, but there is more to it than that. The legal ban on polygamy was, as I understand it, a deal that the leadership of the Mormon church struck with the federal government in order to be left alone otherwise.

Also, I find the Supreme Court's argument disingenuous. Equating human sacrifice with a consensual polygamous relationship is specious at best.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:33pm

my darling wife's sainthood is well established, geek, as is your witless ham handed posting style.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:34pm

Someone said ham. The fatties are going to be in this thread in no time.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:37pm

'who threw that ham at me????'

[iHeartMyGeek]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:37pm

oh, Papa...your pure blindness to sarcasm is beyond comprehension.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:40pm

Apparently your reading comprehension is sub par Geek as papa addressed your humorless attempt at saracasm with the "witless ham handed posting style" remark.

Yea. I heard ham.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:40pm

no dear, that's why i used the word witless.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:42pm

See, Papa? now Colleen is here. And I'm SURE you did that on purpose.
God.

mmm. now I want some ham. Damned vegetarian boyfriend. Yeah, that's right. Not only did I pick a SAME SEX partner, but he's a non-meat eater. That's REALLY pissing off those "man shall not live by bread alone" literalists.

[iHeartMyGeek]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:43pm

Wow, Colleen, you must be my handler because every time I speak it seems like you're deeming something I say incorrect, doesn't it?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:46pm

she's a sharp cookie, geek.

bway, i find your reference to colleen coming on the heels of your fatties comment beyond the pale, sir! evidently the lack of good piggly wiggly in your diet is having an awful effect on your judgement.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:48pm

Who says I'm not eating it? My real inference was that you weren't trying to get the fatties but rather the usual source of your straight boy come ons.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:50pm

Hey now people, I don't know what you're all inferring, but I just came for the ham!

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:50pm

i love it when she calls it ham.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:52pm

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 8/25/06 at 2:53pm

......

I walked right into that one.

Well, like bway's evidently wonderful boyfriend, I am also a vegetarian, so I was kinda hoping for soy ham.

This is all related to polygamy. Somehow. I swear.