U.S. 'gay' activist touts Canadian 'marriage'

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Thursday, July 24, 2003

[patton]

Kevin, what does happen when a man with more than one wife moves to the US?

I honestly have no idea.

Are all of the kids labeled bastards?

Is only the first wife entitled to benefits?

Can the man, and his "other" wifes, be charged with adultury or polygamy?

What happened to the Mormons with nine wifes, when it became illegal to have more than one?

I would really like to know...

[patton]

You describe an ideal world. One that I would like, but that does not exist.

[scripter]

You mean you're not impressed with their "beautiful minds"?

Last week I wouldn't understand your post as much as I do today. After trying to get a simple straight answer out of somebody I can easily agree with many things you've said about some libertarians. Impressed? Not in the least. Disappointed? Definitely.

[scripter]

More evidence that the culture war is heating up.

Indeed. The best we can do is pray and expose the darkness of the homosexual lifestyle. Perhaps more folks will wake up and take a stand.

[cc2k]

You describe an ideal world. One that I would like, but that does not exist.

Actually, every church that I've researched and every state that I've researched will grant an annulment (or for some states a dissolution) if on the day of the wedding ceremony, one (or both) of the people being married has no intention of having children.

Also, it's generally accepted practice to stop a wedding if the priest or minister (or rabbi or imam or justice of the peace or whoever is performing the ceremony) can see that the marriage is a fraud and will be annulled later. For example, if one party obviously isn't capable of giving informed consent. If two men (or two women) wanted to be married, it should be completely obvious that they have no intention of creating children and that such a marriage will be a fraud.

[OWK]

I wish libertarians would just admit their real motives and thoughts.

Help me out.

What are my real motives?

[AxelPaulsenJr]

Gay marriage is such a pain in the rear.

[OWK]

Gay marriage is such a pain in the rear.

Then you should stop engaging in it.

[AxelPaulsenJr]

Fuck You

[OWK]

No thanks.

I'm heterosexual.

[Guillermo]

Thanks for posting the definition of marriage, because, under that definition, it is absolutely impossible for 2 men to marry each other.

Homosexuals have the exact same rights as heterosexuals do regarding marriage.

[Guillermo]

Good to see you OWK...I don't see you around as much as I once did.

[OWK]

Frankly, I see marriage as a contract between individuals, or between individuals and their God.

State is not party to the contract, and therefore has no business dictating the terms and conditions of the contract, or demanding that individuals seek its permission to enter into said contract.

[OWK]

I wander other halls these days...

But still drop in occasionally.

Thanks for the warm hello.

[Guillermo]

I could call a tree a rock, but that wouldn't make it so.

For thousands of years, marriage has been defined as being between husband (male) and wife (female).

It's not something that can simply be changed arbitrarily.

If 2 men want to commit to each other, fine. But don't call that tree a rock, because it simply isn't.

[AxelPaulsenJr]

If so, then why are you offended by my remark ridiculing the sexual practices of fudge packers?

[OWK]

If so, then why are you offended by my remark ridiculing the sexual practices of fudge packers?

What makes you think I was offended?

Don't confuse ridicule of your rather limited mind, with offense.

[AxelPaulsenJr]

Wow, personal attack. "Limited Mind" what have I said that justifies that comment?

You are either gay yourself, or a pot obsessed Libertarian.

[OWK]

For thousands of years, marriage has been defined as being between husband (male) and wife (female).

And for thousands of years, the state played no part in it.

Now, now only does the state set the terms and conditions, but demands that individuals seek it's permission.

My comment has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of those seeking to wed.

It has to do with government trying to supplant a covenant formerly recognized as between individuals, or individuals and their God.

Give it some thought.

[Puppage]

Homosexuals have the exact same rights as heterosexuals do regarding marriage

Thanks for your OPINION. That worked out well for Rome, huh?

What's to stop 3 people from getting married together, hmmm? How about marrying an animal?

Crazy? So was gay marriage not too long ago. Get a group together to make enough noise,and who knows?