[I kid you not, that is this person's actual username]
Ah, there is REteach spouting the usual pro-homosexual activist agenda. Doesn't Proposition 8 send a message to you activists? Marriage had ALWAYS been defined as the union of one man and one woman for procreation and the raising of children. Activist courts tried to change that definition. Isn't that a legislative responsibility? How can secularism override basic physiological facts? This is a victory for not religion, but nature.
29 comments
Marriage had ALWAYS been defined as the union of one man and one woman for procreation and the raising of children.
Nope. I checked. The bible is *very* clear on this. I can have as many wives as I want.
My wife however tells me I only want one.
"Marriage had ALWAYS been defined as the union of one man and one woman for procreation and the raising of children."
No, it hasn't. To think otherwise betrays your severe lack of knowledge of such things. The Church didn't even have a formal definition for marriage until the 16th century and prior to that a ceremony wasn't even required by them so shut the fuck up.
hmmm, if nature is against homosexuality, than why do 1500 animal species (that we know of) practice homosexuality?
also, did some one forget about polyandry?
Never mind that from what I've heard, the wording of Proposition 8 manages to interdict all marriagefertile heterosexual includedoutright. I do not doubt that once that is discovered and confirmed, they'll be very quick to let its opponents' bid to overturn it go through...
Indeed, it has sent a message to me. Now I know for sure that there are still a lot of hateful bigots out there who think they can control other people's personal freedoms because they see their actions as icky. However, I also see that they are not the overwhelming majority and am confident that it likely won't be long before reason wins out.
Marriage has more to do with religion than nature dipshit. Also, doesn't it seem weird to put a question about equal rights to vote? If they had done it that way several years ago, many men would likely have voted against giving up their slaves and letting their wives vote. (I am of course assuming that, as in those days, only the male citizens voted). Just a thought though...
Big fail for you, it only became one man one woman in YOUR religion in the dark ages, prior to that same sex could fuck and marry all they liked and people could have a goddamned harem of wives, most of which were around 13 and up in age
"This is a victory for not religion, but nature. "
I didn't realize nature had defined marriage a particular way.
"Marriage had ALWAYS been defined as the union of one man and one woman for procreation and the raising of children"
Wrong!
Another fundie who ain't read his Bible, or knows anything about history.
Intel has always been defined as the company that makes Pentium and Core 2 x86 / x64-based processors.
By introducing the Core i7 line, they are trying to change who they are. Isn't that like betraying themselves? How can you do something differently or better?
In order for something to ALWAYS be true, it must be true in every instance. So, in order for your statement to be false, marriage must have been defined as something other than what you state. For instance, when marriage was defined as the union between one man and more than one woman. Or, in other countries, where it is defined as the union between two people of either sex.
Therefore, you are full of shit.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
