D.A.: I'll arrest same-sex wedders - Says homosexuals committing frauds

WorldNetDaily ^

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

This thread is a veritable mine of links ~~if they all work...;-) ~~

Read as many as you can, and let others who are not smart enough to read Free Republic know the truth.

Let me know if you want on/off this busy ping list.

[EdReform]

Bump

What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

The Stamp of Normality

[azhenfud]

"The director of legal affairs for the American Civil Liberties Union says he's disturbed the issue of same-sex marriages is moving into the criminal arena....

"Let's have a civil debate about whether we should have gay marriages, rather than involving the heavy hand of the criminal-justice system."."

And of course this JERK wants a "civil debate" when Phaggots and sympathizers display blatant disregard for civil law. What a two-faced jacka$$.

[Protagoras]

Except marriage is not a right, it's a privilige.

That is the goofiest thing I have heard here this week.

[olde north church]

It might be goofy, it may not be my opinion on the subject BUT if you look into the history of marriage, it's considered a privilege which is why you need a license to do it AND the following groups have or have not been allowed to marry in the USA:
1st cousins may marry in 38 states There was a time when the following groups were not allowed to marry in the USA:
Jews and Gentiles
Blacks and Whites
Epilepticss

[Protagoras]

History? You mean like the last 10,000 years? That kind of history?

You are confused, common law marriage is legal because it's a fact, not because they want it that way. The state may point a gun at you and tell you it's a privilege, but that doesn't make it so.

I don't need any government clerk or lawmaker to tell me if I'm married or not. I'm married because of promises I made before God, not some legal nonsense the government does.

This whole thing is about money.

[L.N. Smithee]

The director of legal affairs for the American Civil Liberties Union says he's disturbed the issue of same-sex marriages is moving into the criminal arena.

Maybe it's moving that way because authorizing them IS CRIMINAL?

"The real question is why he needs to throw out a threat of criminal prosecution," Larry Frankel told the Inquirer. "Let's have a civil debate about whether we should have gay marriages, rather than involving the heavy hand of the criminal-justice system."

Excuse me? Did you not hear me the first time, or are you just stupid?

[olde north church]

1. Some states don't recognize common law marriage.
2. The states that do recognize "common-law" marriage have varied times for couples to be considered as married.
3. I personally couldn't care less what laws you choose or choose not to recognize or whatever jurisdiction you answer to really has no impact on me. Have a blast.
4. The information I provided is accurate:
History? You mean like the last 10,000 years? That kind of history?
Is hyperbole.
Have a pleasant day.

[Happy2BMe]

"I'll await this hypocrite's impassioned pleas to return Judge Moore to the bench. After all, lets not have a heavy hand on this matter that we all can disagree on."

* * * *

[Happy2BMe]

>> "At least five of these autocrats . ."

There are only 9 of them - 5 is a majority, hence the OLIGARCHY.

[Barnacle]

How long before the people with fake marriages are getting fake divorces?

[MeekOneGOP]

Right on the $$$$ ...

[bk1000]

"Except marriage is not a right, it's a privilige.

That is the goofiest thing I have heard here this week."

What do you mean, goofy? It is the absolute truth. Do you make no distinction between a right and a priviledge?

[Protagoras]

What do you mean, goofy? It is the absolute truth. Do you make no distinction between a right and a priviledge?

I make a precise distinction, and getting married is a right as far as government is concerned.

That government (and others) violate rights and in some cases claim that things are privileges granted by them is beside the point. They are incorrect.

If government says tomorrow that people can marry dogs, it will not be true no matter what law they pass.

If they say murder is acceptable, it still won't be. They say it's OK to murder babies right now, but that don't make it so.

Rights do not flow from governments, I hope that explains it.

[bk1000]

The state provides a licence to drive a car. You do not have the 'right' to drive if you don't pass the test, buy insurance, etc. likewise with sanctioned marriage. You must first obtain a licence, which you cannot get if you don't meet certain criteria. These things are priviledges, not rights. You have the right to apply for the licence, which will grant you the priviledge.
You are correct that rights do not flow from government. If one must obtain a licence to engage in an activity, that activity is a priviledge. Priviledges are earned, rights are inherent.

[Protagoras]

The state provides a licence to drive a car. You do not have the 'right' to drive if you don't pass the test, buy insurance, etc

Correct, with exception for private property.

likewise with GOVERNMENT sanctioned marriage.

The word "sanctioned" makes this somewhat correct.

However the main point is that it is a false comparison. Driving on government property is a priviledge granted by the property owner, in this case the government. The government has no ownership of the relationship of marriage.

The government sets up rules under which THEY will recognize relationships. They don't matter outside of that arena.

Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman for which God's blessings have been asked. Government thugs have no place in that. They are irrelevant to real marriage.

Anyone who gets married in the above manner is truly married no matter what government thinks.

In as much as it relates to government, Marriage is a right, not a privilege.

In as much as it relates to God, it is a privilege, not a right.