Proposition 8 declared unconstitutional

**miotas** · 08-07-2010, 08:02

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

This why the government recognition of marriage must be universal and spread to homosexuals, bisexuals, asexuals and heterosexuals and anything else I'm missing.

I think that's the wrong way of looking at it, it should just be any two people, homosexual, asexual, heterosexual or any other -sexual shouldn't even be considered.

Originally Posted by Fragony

Cool, so can I marry my cat now, and please don't say that's something different, for me he's really a person.

1) An animal is not considered equal to a human, whereas any two humans are considered equal and 2) how will the cat say "I do"?

**Fragony** · 08-07-2010, 08:13

Originally Posted by miotas

I1) An animal is not considered equal to a human, whereas any two humans are considered equal and 2) how will the cat say "I do"?

me ow.

What's it to you anyway. I really want this.

**a completely inoffensive name** · 08-07-2010, 08:13

Originally Posted by miotas

I think that's the wrong way of looking at it, it should just be any two people, homosexual, asexual, heterosexual or any other -sexual shouldn't even be considered

Well, yeah that was kind of my point. I tried to list off all the different categories you could think of so that it listed that anybody could marry anyone they want. Like one of the quotes from the 138 page court document I posted said, the "-sexual" based terms didn't come about until the 18th-19th century, but we all use them for whatever reason. I meant what you said when I said "universal".

**Fragony** · 08-07-2010, 10:20

Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name

Well, yeah that was kind of my point. I tried to list off all the different categories you could think of so that it listed that anybody could marry anyone they want. Like one of the quotes from the 138 page court document I posted said, the "-sexual" based terms didn't come about until the 18th-19th century, but we all use them for whatever reason. I meant what you said when I said "universal".

Scrap sexual and replace with reproduction, that is what marriage traditionally is about, bloodline. Times change of course, kindly let it.

**Philippus Flavius Homovallumus** · 08-07-2010, 10:45

I'm going to vulgarise at this point:

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

The burden of proof lies with those whishing to change the law, otherwise the status quo can stand.

ATPG's basic argument is that traditional marriage is broken and no longer matters, so we should extend the institution.

Heaven forfend we try to fix out systemic social problems; rather than waste to time on this pointless exercise.

**miotas** · 08-07-2010, 11:36

It is the most simple of actions to allow same sex marriages and remove discrimination. In Australia for example all it would require is to change the passage in the marriage act from '...the union of a man and a woman...' to something like '...the union of two people...'

**Fragony** · 08-07-2010, 11:46

Originally Posted by miotas

It is the most simple of actions to allow same sex marriages and remove discrimination. In Australia for example all it would require is to change the passage in the marriage act from '...the union of a man and a woman...' to something like '...the union of two people...'

What discrimination, a civil union grants the same rights. No matter how hard they pump butt or rub fleshwounds nature simply thinks otherwise. Can't help it, it's not possible. Gays are a flaw of nature, they are human beings and should be treated likewise, but they can't have eveything and shouldn't want it.