Gay Couples Apply for Marriage Licenses in Nationwide Protest

eddieblick »

Sat Feb 14, 2009 10:51 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

Gay marriage? How can there be such a thing? Marriage is by definition a union between a man an a woman that is consumated by sexual[vaginal] intercourse. Gay marriage is a categorical impossibility -- a lot like asking for a square circle. You cannot have a square circle, it is a definitional and categorical impossibility.

We can have civil unions between people of the same sex, but it is not marriage.

And, once we shred the definition of marriage and make it other than what it is, we open Pandora's box and have to then allow all sorts of other types of marriage. Why not three men and a dog? Why not a man an five wives [there are 40,000 Mormon men in Utah who would certainly favor that]? Why not a man and his daughter? Why not a man and his son? Why not the rancher and his favorite sheep?

Once you redefine marriage, what then limits the new definition to a man and man, a man and a woman, or a woman and a woman?

And, by the way, how do gay people consumate their marriage?

Mendelssohn, Lincoln, and Darwin

eddieblick »

Thu Feb 12, 2009 11:19 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

. . . while listening to Mendelssohn, of course.

NAE President Reassures Critics of Pro-Life Stance

eddieblick »

Mon Dec 08, 2008 5:07 pm Agree: 1   Disagree: 6

You mean that you AGREE: I wrote: "The knee jerk reaction of the right wing is that it will not allow discussion of any position other than its own and regards that discussion as treason or capitulation."

You just ratified that to be true.

NAE President Reassures Critics of Pro-Life Stance

eddieblick »

Mon Dec 08, 2008 1:03 pm Agree: 5   Disagree: 20

Sorry to disagree, but Richard Cizik has served us well for thirty years. He did make some poorly advised statements on the program -- like admitting whom he voted for in this or any election -- but it is no reason to throw him under the bus. Hundreds of interviews over the years will inevitably yield an occasional gaff, but it does not invalidate his role or disqualify him.

The problem here may well be the knee jerk right wing that won't even allow discussion of any position other than its own and regards that discussion as treason or capitulation.