BrainKing - Fóruns de discussão (Politics)

Moderador: Vikings

Politics

Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.

All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..

As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.

Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!

*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."

Lista de Fóruns

Modo de acesso: Qualquer um pode escrever

Mostrar as mensagens mais antigas primeiro

20. Janeiro 2009, 00:01:59

Czuch

mostrar as mensagens deste utilizador | mostrar conversa | link

Assunto: Re:

anastasia: Marriage to me is a religious institution, anyone can have a religious based marriage ceremony, swap rings, do whatever they want to, the government doesnt really care.

But if the government is giving a legal document,IE a license to get married in the eyes of the government, of course they have the right to give rules and such.

There are some people who marry multiple partners, but the government will not sanction it. The government has always defined marriage as a whatever between 1 man and 1 woman, thats what marriage is, if its between 2 men or 2 women then it is not really marriage!

Then, you start to make changes to the actual definition of marriage, and you probably get into something more than you bargained for? If the courts rule that the definition can be changed to make same sex okay, then what would be your argument that the definition cannot be changed to make more than 2 people involved?????? What would stop the definition from including a woman and a dog? You think that is silly, but is silly a reason to not allow something???? You see where this is going, right?