Shii Posted:

*sighs* I KNEW someone was going to bring this up. If you’d read the posts, plk, you’d know we aren’t talking about describing marriages in terms of who is able to have children or not. We’re merely discussing what constitutes a fetish.

spacekadt Posted:

You’ve brought it up and GR continues to. I think it’s a fair discussion point here… especially because she didn’t address it to you specifically or on a quote about something entirely different.

Generic Racist Posted:

I never posted anything pertaining to homosexuality. I never said it was wrong, or right, or a fetish or whatever.

the point was not fetish, the point was discussing marriage as a union between two people for the purpose of procreation.

Generic Racist Posted:

Marriage is not a right. It is a set of legal obligations imposed because the government has a legal interest in unions that have, among other things, the potential to produce children. No one is trying to “strip” homosexuals of their rights. What “really ****ing scary” is that i have been stripped of my RIGHT to bear arms as I please.

Generic Racist Posted:

The reason marriage is recognized by the government is they have vested interests in the marriage. Children are the future of the nation and government, so yes marriage has something to do with children AMONG OTHER THINGS. As I’ve said before, marriage is not a right. No where in the bill of rights does it say marriage is a right. Civil rights are rights IMPOSED BY THE GOVERNMENT. NOT AN INHERITANCE RIGHT. So if gays want marriage rights the government has to give it to them. Since we are supposedly self governing we should vote on the issue. If the amendment is unconstitutional then the courts will overturn it. Either way what is right will be done.