#2 2010-11-29 20:03:10
Child brides and polygamy are alike as cars and drunk driving; we shouldn't ban cars because some people drive drunk and arguing that polygamy allows fringe religions to commit the crime of child molestation is just stupid. Those fuckers are banging little girls because they like to rape 12 year old virgins, polygamy and Jesus the magic zombie are just excuses.
Last edited by Emmeran (2010-11-29 20:10:07)
Offline
#3 2010-11-30 10:30:06
Don't confuse polygamy (church sponsored multiple marriage, generally exclusive for the woman and mutual for the man) with polyamory (a more freewheeling and egalitarian approach free of religious overtones).
If I read it right, the court is trying to use polygamy statutes to control what is essentially polyamory.
Of course, all of this would be moot if the courts just stopped trying to legislate morals.
Offline
#4 2010-11-30 21:43:42
The state should not recognize marriage. Marriage is a tribal custom. Whether you swear you're married to a jewish zombie or skip around a fire naked and covered in woad with a firecracker up your arse and consider yourself married to whoever is next to you when it goes off, the marriage thing is not something the state should be involved with.
Most of the "priviliges" now associated with marriage should be sent to contract law, and adjudicated as such.
Offline
#5 2010-11-30 21:50:17
peco wrote:
The state should not recognize marriage. Marriage is a tribal custom. Whether you swear you're married to a jewish zombie or skip around a fire naked and covered in woad with a firecracker up your arse and consider yourself married to whoever is next to you when it goes off, the marriage thing is not something the state should be involved with.
Most of the "priviliges" now associated with marriage should be sent to contract law, and adjudicated as such.
Ah but the elephant in the room is and always will be the children; as much as I hate government involvement in marriage we have a vested interest in representing the rights and welfare of the child (no matter how badly it is sometimes done).
Offline
#6 2010-11-30 22:37:34
The idea of being naked covered in woad and dancing around a fire sounds like a fun (and perhaps traditional!) way to conduct a marriage ceremony! However, I think most brides and grooms will forgo the modern innovation of a firecracker up the ass!
Last edited by fnord (2010-11-30 22:39:49)
Offline
#7 2010-11-30 22:57:39
Emmeran wrote:
Ah but the elephant in the room is and always will be the children; as much as I hate government involvement in marriage we have a vested interest in representing the rights and welfare of the child (no matter how badly it is sometimes done).
The technology exists nowadays to ensure people who have children support them and contribute to their well-being. While I haven't any problems with the state offering civil unions to anyone who wants a state-sanctified relationship, you're right, the kids have to be protected. You breed'em, you feed'em but marriage or civil unions aren't really necessary in that case.
Offline
#8 2010-11-30 23:04:12
Taint wrote:
The technology exists nowadays to ensure people who have children support them and contribute to their well-being. While I haven't any problems with the state offering civil unions to anyone who wants a state-sanctified relationship, you're right, the kids have to be protected. You breed'em, you feed'em but marriage or civil unions aren't really necessary in that case.
At the risk of being redundant; you and I have always seen eye-to-eye on this issue.
Just the same, I will condemn you for not doing your part to combat the growing Idiocracy; dude - hook up with some smart Lesbians and artificially inseminate, please just give the world a few more intelligent people.
Offline
#9 2010-11-30 23:19:43
Emmeran wrote:
Taint wrote:
The technology exists nowadays to ensure people who have children support them and contribute to their well-being. While I haven't any problems with the state offering civil unions to anyone who wants a state-sanctified relationship, you're right, the kids have to be protected. You breed'em, you feed'em but marriage or civil unions aren't really necessary in that case.
At the risk of being redundant; you and I have always seen eye-to-eye on this issue.
Just the same, I will condemn you for not doing your part to combat the growing Idiocracy; dude - hook up with some smart Lesbians and artificially inseminate, please just give the world a few more intelligent people.
You're kind and it was only a few years ago that I gave up hope of ever having kids. I just can't afford them. When I was doing social services work, it used to drive me crazy when I'd have to work with fucking adults who should never had kids and who did their damnedest to make sure the sprouts they had were miserable.
Offline
#10 2010-11-30 23:26:48
Thanks to social workers, welfare, and turd world aid programs helping the stupid and defective all over the planet to successfully reproduce, the human race is devolving. It will take major plagues, famines, and other methods of weeding out the stupid and unfit to prevent this.
Offline
#11 2010-11-30 23:27:43
Taint wrote:
You're kind and it was only a few years ago that I gave up hope of ever having kids. I just can't afford them. When I was doing social services work, it used to drive me crazy when I'd have to work with fucking adults who should never had kids and who did their damnedest to make sure the sprouts they had were miserable.
My friend, children cost nothing but time and love; words do not exist to describe the emotional reward of bettering our world through creation of the future (particularly the competent future). Kids don't cost, they are the ultimate investment in the future.
Offline
#12 2010-12-03 23:19:07
I've never wanted children. The world has too many people as it is, and I can't fix it by adding more.
Laws can protect kids with very little modification.
Offline
