#1 2013-07-16 23:28:59
Last edited by Emmeran (2013-07-16 23:29:25)
Offline
#3 2013-07-17 00:10:21
Thank you Kansas; children first after all, the rest is all just noise.
Offline
#4 2013-07-17 00:51:29
The court case also has a bonus implication for gay couples in Kansas. While they cannot get married, the courts can still divide their stuff.
:
Offline
#5 2013-07-17 01:00:36
I actually caught that bit - really aren't children and possessions the only reason the government has to be involved with marriage anyway?
Offline
#6 2013-07-17 02:17:39
I can't believe the $24,000 price tag for the jizz! For that price the wanker should have an IQ in the top 1%, be tall, strong, handsome, and have longevity in his ancestry with no genetic issues.
Offline
#7 2013-07-17 10:12:19
Given the looks of the two, not only are we lucky they do not dwell in the hetero-pool, I'd think that it would take $24k for me to get past the ugly and reliably deliver the baby batter.
Offline
#8 2013-07-17 10:38:09
whosasailorthen wrote:
Given the looks of the two, not only are we lucky they do not dwell in the hetero-pool, I'd think that it would take $24k for me to get past the ugly and reliably deliver the baby batter.
Jack Daniels is your friend in those situations...
Offline
#9 2013-07-18 02:05:07
fnord wrote:
For that price the wanker should have an IQ in the top 1%, be tall, strong, handsome, and have longevity in his ancestry with no genetic issues.
I was busy.
Offline
#10 2013-07-18 02:13:02
MSG Tripps wrote:
fnord wrote:
For that price the wanker should have an IQ in the top 1%, be tall, strong, handsome, and have longevity in his ancestry with no genetic issues.
I was busy.
Well Played!
Offline
#11 2013-07-18 11:45:07
Dmtdust wrote:
MSG Tripps wrote:
fnord wrote:
For that price the wanker should have an IQ in the top 1%, be tall, strong, handsome, and have longevity in his ancestry with no genetic issues.
I was busy.
Well Played
With.
Offline
#12 2013-07-19 00:10:34
Emmeran wrote:
I actually caught that bit - really aren't children and possessions the only reason the government has to be involved with marriage anyway?
Exactly, but gay people will gladly go hide behind the homophobic laws if it means they can keep "their" stuff and "their" children.
Offline
#13 2013-07-19 04:59:53
fnord wrote:
I can't believe the $24,000 price tag for the jizz!
Pretty expensive drink, ay Fnordio?
Offline
#14 2013-07-19 07:54:44
timmylean wrote:
Emmeran wrote:
I actually caught that bit - really aren't children and possessions the only reason the government has to be involved with marriage anyway?
Exactly, but gay people will gladly go hide behind the homophobic laws if it means they can keep "their" stuff and "their" children.
Gay people are human, and if laws that were intended to hurt you can be used to screw over an ex, why not! Homophobic laws that don't recognize our relationships can also be used to screw over creditors, which is why the Financial-Industrial Complex is in favor of Equal Marriage.
Offline
#15 2013-07-19 08:14:44
fnord wrote:
Gay people are human, and if laws that were intended to hurt you can be used to screw over an ex, why not!
Any port in a storm
Last edited by Emmeran (2013-07-19 08:15:25)
Offline
#16 2013-07-20 11:20:30
But what is the reaction in the community when one partner pulls this legal stunt?
Offline
#17 2013-07-20 17:43:13
timmylean wrote:
But what is the reaction in the community when one partner pulls this legal stunt?
If the community even becomes aware of the situation, I'm sure most people are disappointed. But then, people who would deny an ex contact with a child, or throw the ex out without a financial settlement probably don't place a high value on what other people may think.
Offline
