Yellerjacket said:

---

biles90 said:

---

A better question is why do consenting adults have to get government approval to enter into a contractural relationship (marriage)? I don't have to get government approval to enter into a personal services contract or other (real estate, employment, etc...) contracts.

---

Exactly. My wife and I don't even have any kind of contract. We just said we are married and that was that. If we ever decide we don't want to be married anymore, we just won't be. No need to get the government involved.

---

The government does need to be involved, but only minimally, because they get to tax assets, and need to know what to do with your property when you're dead. Plus, if what you're doing is a common law marriage, and doing this in Texas, you can't just leave each other and say you're not married anymore; you have to file for divorce. I am not an attorney, and I am definitely not your attorney, and take this advice for what it's worth, but this is a very, very bad idea.

Back to the OP, if gay/lesbian couples want to be married, they should be able to be as miserable as everyone else.

The old thread backfire!

icrymyselftosleep said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

Shagga said:

---

Quote:

---

Adultery and Homosexual behavior shouldn't be legal, Homosexual behavior being legal is not yet 20 years old with Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas dissenting in the decision; some of the greatest most conservative voices to ever grace our highest court.

I have zero clue how modern Republicans can look at the Obergfell case and think that Scalia, Thomas and Co were the liberals, and Kagan, Sotomayor and Ginsberg were the conservatives.

---

Are you suggesting that I think Scalia is liberal? Nobody who reads the dissents thinks that. Where did you get this? And as for adultery and homosexuality, not everybody practices my religion, and there is no basis to criminalize it amongst consenting adults.

---

No, I'm not suggesting that, I'm saying that to all the posters that equate "big government" definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman are agreeing with the left and disagreeing with Titans of the right.

There is a basis to criminalize it, which is why it was done for so many years. It pollutes and attacks the family; which is the building block of society. As the family has weakened society has weakened; again this is by design not by happenstance. Women's suffrage, the sexual revolution, the porn industry, abortion, all fomented and abetted by the left for the purpose of harming society.

---

So you want women to be subservient again, right? Like back in the "good ol' days"?

---

You mean back in the good old days when the dems and the republicans were feet apart instead of miles, they weren't killing babies and they weren't teaching kids about anal sex in public schools?

Way too many self-professed conservatives have no clue what the difference is between classical liberalism and a theocracy.

C@LAg said:

---

*******.
Someone really wants to go Full Handmaids Tale.

Guess he is going to advocate for criminalizing divorce next.




MuH SancTiTy of mARRiAge

Donald Trump
Spouse(s)

Ivana Zelnkov
(m. 1977; div. 1992)

Marla Maples
(m. 1993; div. 1999)

Melania Knauss
(m. 2005)


Mitch McConnell
Spouse(s)

Sherrill Redmon
(m. 1968; div. 1980)

Elaine Chao
(m. 1993)

---

This is amazing, I had no clue there were Republicans who were divorced. Next you'll tell me Kid Rock isn't a choir boy.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Yellerjacket said:

---

biles90 said:

---

A better question is why do consenting adults have to get government approval to enter into a contractural relationship (marriage)? I don't have to get government approval to enter into a personal services contract or other (real estate, employment, etc...) contracts.

---

Exactly. My wife and I don't even have any kind of contract. We just said we are married and that was that. If we ever decide we don't want to be married anymore, we just won't be. No need to get the government involved.

---

The government does need to be involved, but only minimally, because they get to tax assets, and need to know what to do with your property when you're dead. Plus, if what you're doing is a common law marriage, and doing this in Texas, you can't just leave each other and say you're not married anymore; you have to file for divorce. I am not an attorney, and I am definitely not your attorney, and take this advice for what it's worth, but this is a very, very bad idea.

Back to the OP, if gay/lesbian couples want to be married, they should be able to be as miserable as everyone else.

---

Oh wow you really got him with that original decade old zinger.

Man, I feel sorry for your spouse if that's your view on marriage.

CDUB98 said:

---

Way too many self-professed conservatives have no clue what the difference is between classical liberalism and a theocracy.

---

Unfortunately there are even more conservatives who don't understand that classical liberalism is liberalism, which is the antithesis to conservatism; regardless of whether it's classical or progressive. The idea that the society is built on freedom rather than virtue can only exist while the populace freely chooses virtue.

The OP wants the USA to become Giliad.

Way to Margret Atwood the future of the GOP

Silian Rail said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Way too many self-professed conservatives have no clue what the difference is between classical liberalism and a theocracy.

---

Unfortunately there are even more conservatives who don't understand that classical liberalism is liberalism, which is the antithesis to conservatism; regardless of whether it's classical or progressive. The idea that the society is built on freedom rather than virtue can only exist while the populace freely chooses virtue.

---

Then it will probably come as a giant shock to you that the founders of this country were classical liberals.

Charpie said:

---

The OP wants the USA to become Giliad.

Way to Margret Atwood the future of the GOP

---

I swear the only two things liberals in this country know are a Handsmaid Tale and that all conservatives are Nazis.

Any reference to this country that is older than 10 years literally never happened.

Silian Rail said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Way too many self-professed conservatives have no clue what the difference is between classical liberalism and a theocracy.

---

Unfortunately there are even more conservatives who don't understand that classical liberalism is liberalism, which is the antithesis to conservatism; regardless of whether it's classical or progressive. The idea that the society is built on freedom rather than virtue can only exist while the populace freely chooses virtue.

---

You don't understand Classical Liberalism all, do you?

Classical Liberalism is very much tied to Capitalism and Free Markets. Conservatism is kind of tied to them and Progressives have generally abandoned Capitalism and Free Markets.

CDUB98 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Way too many self-professed conservatives have no clue what the difference is between classical liberalism and a theocracy.

---

Unfortunately there are even more conservatives who don't understand that classical liberalism is liberalism, which is the antithesis to conservatism; regardless of whether it's classical or progressive. The idea that the society is built on freedom rather than virtue can only exist while the populace freely chooses virtue.

---

Then it will probably come as a giant shock to you that the founders of this country were classical liberals.

---

That's the point of my last sentence. They were classic liberals who knew their great experiment of liberalism would only last as long as society was virtuous. Society decided to keep the liberalism and ditch the virtue and here we are.

Did someone say tossed salad?

eric76 said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

Way too many self-professed conservatives have no clue what the difference is between classical liberalism and a theocracy.

---

Unfortunately there are even more conservatives who don't understand that classical liberalism is liberalism, which is the antithesis to conservatism; regardless of whether it's classical or progressive. The idea that the society is built on freedom rather than virtue can only exist while the populace freely chooses virtue.

---

You don't understand Classical Liberalism all, do you?

Classical Liberalism is very much tied to Capitalism and Free Markets. Conservatism is kind of tied to them and Progressives have generally abandoned Capitalism and Free Markets.

---

Liberalism is tied to freedom; it's the root of the word. Capitalism is nothing but economic freedom. Freedom is a good thing but it's a benefit not a cause of conservative society. If we legalized child porn there would be companies making a buck off of it tomorrow. All the free market ensures is that any and all demands will be met at an efficient price; it says nothing about the depravity or worthiness of the demand itself.

I'm not the one who is using cannon law as justification for public law.

There were no cars in biblical times. Maybe we should outlaw them.

C@LAg said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

Charpie said:

---

The OP wants the USA to become Giliad.

Way to Margret Atwood the future of the GOP

---

I swear the only two things liberals in this country know are a Handsmaid Tale and that all conservatives are Nazis.

Any reference to this country that is older than 10 years literally never happened.

---

says the one wanting to legislate from a book from 4000-1600 years ago.

---

You mean the one that's the backbone of Western Civilization? Sure, I'll take that one. What do you have?

Charpie said:

---

I'm not the one who is using cannon law as justification for public law.

There were no cars in biblical times. Maybe we should outlaw them.

---

Which canons did he cite? I missed that?

Charpie said:

---

I'm not the one who is using cannon law as justification for public law.

There were no cars in biblical times. Maybe we should outlaw them.

---

It's Canon law, and again the idea that the USA was a theocracy in 2014 is ludicrous.

OK. So which Western country has adultery as a crime?

Charpie said:

---

OK. So which Western country has adultery as a crime?

---

Had, and virtually all of them; the USA within your lifetime most likely. Were we a theocracy at those points in our history?

So something that WAS a backbone is no more.

So were things better then? I mean, why did they all change?

C@LAg said:

---

Silian Rail said:

---

ah yes, we're the ones playing word salad, not the ones who decided to change the meaning of the word because "love wins"

---

Republicans own neither the word "marriage" nor the concept thereof.

---

Neither does govt, but here we are.

Should come as no surprise to anyone, RINO Elise Stefanik voted for gay marriage. Can someone remind us why the hell she was given a leadership position in the party?

OP deciding to go full mask off and admitting to supporting authoritarianism, so much for the party of personal freedom.

Keep going, y'all! This is a great fight and definitely needs to continue. I'll make sure to post screenshots from this thread everywhere to help the cause, we can't let these heathens keep getting away with it!

Charpie said:

---

So something that WAS a backbone is no more.

So were things better then? I mean, why did they all change?

---

Yes things were better then; the divorce rate was lower, the suicide rate was lower, the crime rates were lower, we weren't in crushing debt as a country, etc etc.

read my post above, society was liberalized, McCarthy was absolutely correct and communists invaded our government, educational system, news media and entertainment industry.

Im Gipper said:

---

Should come as no surprise to anyone, RINO Elise Stefanik voted for gay marriage. Can someone remind us why the hell she was given a leadership position in the party?

---

because Trump has a messiah complex and she bent the knee.

Silian Rail said:

---

Charpie said:

---

So something that WAS a backbone is no more.

So were things better then? I mean, why did they all change?

---

Yes things were better then; the divorce rate was lower, the suicide rate was lower, the crime rates were lower, we weren't in crushing debt as a country, etc etc.

read my post above, society was liberalized, McCarthy was absolutely correct and communists invaded our government, educational system, news media and entertainment industry.

---

Free speech is when I silence political opponents cause they make my blood pressure rise.

I agree with OP. I am also unironically a theocratic fascist.

WaltonAg18 said:

---

OP deciding to go full mask off and admitting to supporting authoritarianism, so much for the party of personal freedom.

Keep going, y'all! This is a great fight and definitely needs to continue. I'll make sure to post screenshots from this thread everywhere to help the cause, we can't let these heathens keep getting away with it!

---

Weird how the far left and the classical liberals both hold the same views on so much stuff. It's almost like they didn't like personal freedom when it was being used for good stuff, but they do like personal freedom now that it's being used as a weapon against conservative society.

Kunkle for Congress TX-34 said:

---

TheHulkster said:

---

If you're gonna continue to bark up this particular tree, there's no need to worry about when strong, moral Republicans assume power and what they'll be able to do because there won't be a Republican president elected any time soon running on this.

A platform that includes overturning gay marriage protections will alienate every single Democrat, most swing voters, and even a decent percentage of Republican voters. Don't know how you'll cobble together a winning path starting there.

---

Maybe not now, but in 15-20 years when Hispanics make up the majority of the Republican voting block, it can be a winning platform issue. Lord knows what craziness will be going on then.

As has been stated above, this is the slippery slope that has lead us to where we are now... only one way to fix it.

---

Yeah, us conservative browns don't give a single, group **** about gays marrying.

We could be the straightest, most anti-gay country in existence and be broke as **** because we stupidly didn't worry about the real problems, all fiscal.