or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by SpamSandwich

 No. If the marriage (however one chooses to interpret the meaning) is consensual, then there is no issue.
I used "no more" because the article had estimates ranging as widely as 2-20%.
Apparently, people who identify as gay make up no more than 10% of the population: http://www.gallup.com/poll/6961/What-Percentage-Population-Gay.aspxThat's probably completely in line with historical numbers.
Currency fluctuations? Tariffs? Protectionism?
I suspect people with deeply held religious beliefs will either sue for them to receive equal protection or shut down their business.
That's funny. I'll have to remember that image and use it in 2016.
Actually, I wasn't being facetious. I don't have a problem with polygamy if everyone involved does it voluntarily.
I'm 100% on board with equal protection. I'm against governmental involvement with marriage and private consensual agreements. As I said, these arrangements (gay or straight) are private AND there should be no government extended benefits as a result of these presumably legally binding agreements.
I think polygamy is ready for a big comeback. In fact, this ruling provides excellent precedent.
No, that's not what I wrote. You're trolling.
New Posts  All Forums: