Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

 

2006-06-08 13:41:20
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6925|NJ
Epic post from Shawn, Dan...

Bob Dole - divorced the mother of his child, who had nursed him through the long recovery from his war wounds.

Newt Gingrich - divorced his wife who was dying of cancer.

Dick Armey - House Majority Leader - divorced

Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas - divorced

Gov. John Engler of Michigan - divorced

Gov. Pete Wilson of California - divorced

George Will - divorced

Sen. Lauch Faircloth - divorced

Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.

Rep. Bob Barr of Georgia - Barr, not yet 50 years old, has been married three times. Barr had the audacity to author and push the "Defense of Marriage Act." The current joke making the rounds on Capitol Hill is "Bob Barr...WHICH marriage are you defending?!?

Sen. Alfonse D'Amato of New York - divorced

Sen. John Warner of Virginia - divorced (once married to Liz Taylor.)

Gov. George Allen of Virginia - divorced

Ronald Reagan - divorced the mother of two of his children to marry Nancy Reagan, who bore him a daughter only 7 months after the marriage.

Henry Kissinger - divorced

Rep. Helen Chenoweth of Idaho - divorced

Sen. John McCain of Arizonia - divorced

Rep. John Kasich of Ohio - divorced

Rep. Susan Molinari of New York - Republican National Convention Keynote Speaker - divorced

So.......homosexuals are going to destroy the institution of marriage? Wait a minute, it seems the Christian Heterosexual Republicans are doing a fine job without anyone's help!

If you agree, like I do, that hypocricy and bigotry must end, repost this.
2006-06-08 13:47:59
RadioKon
Member
+2|6812|Atlanta, GA
Only defense I'll give them is the fact there politicians and dont have alot of time for a healthy marriage.
But a terd of a person can be democrat or republican.

I'm suprised at how everyone likes to point fingers.  Is it just b/c people need someone to blame?

I agree hypocricy and bigotry should end, but not gonna happen in politcs

2c
2006-06-08 13:55:37
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|6965|Salt Lake City

With divorce rates near 50%, the amount of domestic abuse, child abuse, child sexual abuse, child exploitation, and current figures for marital affairs, in a nation that claims numbers of ~70% being Christian, makes the marriage reform to the Constitution an absolute poster child in hypocrisy.
2006-06-08 14:04:25
Marconius
One-eyed Wonder Mod
+368|6923|San Francisco
How about this little postulation...

The christian "right" wants to repress sexuality and promote their form of "purity" in today's youth.  A case study of it can be observed with this form of Baby Boomer/WWII era divorce rates.  The repression of sexuality in a society, plus the constant separation of gender roles ends up causing women to be severely insecure about themselves, and leads to men falling into stronger and darker perversities the more they repress their own hormones/feelings. 

You end up having a society built like this, where women and men both don't understand what happens in bed due to a constant mental restraint about force-fed purity, and in the end, these restraints start to severely break up the feelings shared between the two people. 

It reminds me of Winston Smith from Orwell's 1984 having troubled sex with his wife.  She was brought up to naturally hate sex, but continues having it "For the Good of the Party," but naturally it is absolutely miserable for both of them.  This type of repressed sentiment is drawn out really well in that book, and is quite applicable here in the sense of sexuality and togetherness being crushed "for the good of faith."

My point is repression can easily be the cause of all the divorce, due to it holding back true understanding of both sexes, and it hindering the observed and experienced mentalities of both sexes.
2006-06-08 14:07:48
M1-Lightning
Jeepers Creepers
+136|6960|Peoria, Illinois
Yeah, we should just get rid of marriage altogether. I mean, what's the point? Can't we just profess our vows in private? Why must there be legal mojo involved? Get rid of employee health benefits to families, get rid of marriage related taxes and if someone wants to get married, they can have uncle Jesse pronounce them married and print a document off of his computer for them to frame.
2006-06-08 14:26:47
Psycho
Member since 2005
+44|7005|Kansas, USA

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
So are you saying one of them is a bigamist - or did one of their previous spouses die while they were married? You can't count their marriage to each other as two marriages. So if each was married and divorced twice before they married each other then it would be 5 marriages and 4 divorces.

As for the point of your whole post, I have no disagreement with you concerning the hypocrisy of the situation. However, the same holds true for both parties. You have liberals who attend rallies supporting alternative fuels and leave the even in a hybrid car only to switch to a Suburban or Explorer a block away. If you want to debate the issue of gay marriage - debate the issue not the character of the people in congress.

I for one am an agnostic who takes offense at much of the rhetoric coming from the religious right. However, I oppose gay marriage for other reasons. One - it's just not what was intended. Whether you are religious or if you just look at nature same sex unions doesn't fit. Two - If we allow same sex marriages, then why not multiple marriages? Some have argued it would also open the door to marriages to animals or children I think that's a stretch. But...in Holland there is a new political movement by pedophiles to reduce the age of consent down to 12 (<a href="http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19310781-2,00.html?from=rss" target="_blank">LINK</a>). So, I don't think it is so far fetched. Three - I believe children benefit from having a mother and a father. That's not to say a single parent cannot raise a child, but I think it should be obvious that having one of both parents would be the most beneficial.

Those are my opinions. I'm sure some will disagree with me on some of what I have said, but they are still my opinions. But, if you have a convincing argument, I'd like to hear it.

Last edited by Psycho (2006-06-08 14:27:54)

2006-06-08 14:36:37
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|6965|Salt Lake City

Psycho wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Rush Limbaugh - Rush and his current wife Marta have six marriages and four divorces between them.
So are you saying one of them is a bigamist - or did one of their previous spouses die while they were married? You can't count their marriage to each other as two marriages. So if each was married and divorced twice before they married each other then it would be 5 marriages and 4 divorces.

As for the point of your whole post, I have no disagreement with you concerning the hypocrisy of the situation. However, the same holds true for both parties. You have liberals who attend rallies supporting alternative fuels and leave the even in a hybrid car only to switch to a Suburban or Explorer a block away. If you want to debate the issue of gay marriage - debate the issue not the character of the people in congress.

I for one am an agnostic who takes offense at much of the rhetoric coming from the religious right. However, I oppose gay marriage for other reasons. One - it's just not what was intended. Whether you are religious or if you just look at nature same sex unions doesn't fit. Two - If we allow same sex marriages, then why not multiple marriages? Some have argued it would also open the door to marriages to animals or children I think that's a stretch. But...in Holland there is a new political movement by pedophiles to reduce the age of consent down to 12 (<a href="http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,19310781-2,00.html?from=rss" target="_blank">LINK</a>). So, I don't think it is so far fetched. Three - I believe children benefit from having a mother and a father. That's not to say a single parent cannot raise a child, but I think it should be obvious that having one of both parents would be the most beneficial.

Those are my opinions. I'm sure some will disagree with me on some of what I have said, but they are still my opinions. But, if you have a convincing argument, I'd like to hear it.
Yeah, look at what I said.  We have a divorce rate of nearly 50%.  This obviously doesn't mean that the father is necessarily out of the picture, but the strain on a kid of trying to live among two households is tough.

Look at the child/spouse abuse statistics in this country.  Is that any better way to grow up just because both of the so called adults are your birth parents?

So lets talk kids.  Since gays obvioiusly can't have any on their own, this would mean adoption of kids that currently have no parents; lesbians obviously have ways around this.  Given the magnitude of problems that exist within hetero marriages, and divorces, and absolutely no proof that a child growing up in a gay/lesbian household are any worse off or more inclined to become gay, this is simply not a valid argument.

If the religious conservatives want to keep "marriage" as a religious institution, let them have it.  That is no reason for gay/lesbian couples to not be afforded the same legal rights; this is where it gets tricky, because you are no longer withholding a simple religious definition, but actually denying LEGAL benefits based on sexuality.
2006-06-08 15:00:20
Random-Hero58
Member
+10|6788|TX
The leading cause of divorce is marriage, just like the leading cause of death is life.
2006-06-08 16:05:08
UON
Junglist Massive
+223|6882
Is the title supposed to say sham, or what?
2006-06-08 17:12:03
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6778|Southeastern USA
we will pray for you....
https://img220.imageshack.us/img220/2761/thsalt4cr.gif
2006-06-08 17:43:39
Ajax_the_Great1
Dropped on request
+206|6875
Difference = individuals getting divorced doesn't mean violation of sanctity. Means those individuals themselves did. Homosexuals getting married goes against the principles in general. Has nothing to do with individual choices.

That list is pretty funny though.
2006-06-08 17:45:28
Xietsu
Banned
+50|6785

M1-Lightning wrote:

Yeah, we should just get rid of marriage altogether. I mean, what's the point? Can't we just profess our vows in private? Why must there be legal mojo involved? Get rid of employee health benefits to families, get rid of marriage related taxes and if someone wants to get married, they can have uncle Jesse pronounce them married and print a document off of his computer for them to frame.
/FTW

Marconius wrote:

How about this little postulation...

The christian "right" wants to repress sexuality and promote their form of "purity" in today's youth.  A case study of it can be observed with this form of Baby Boomer/WWII era divorce rates.  The repression of sexuality in a society, plus the constant separation of gender roles ends up causing women to be severely insecure about themselves, and leads to men falling into stronger and darker perversities the more they repress their own hormones/feelings. 

You end up having a society built like this, where women and men both don't understand what happens in bed due to a constant mental restraint about force-fed purity, and in the end, these restraints start to severely break up the feelings shared between the two people. 

It reminds me of Winston Smith from Orwell's 1984 having troubled sex with his wife.  She was brought up to naturally hate sex, but continues having it "For the Good of the Party," but naturally it is absolutely miserable for both of them.  This type of repressed sentiment is drawn out really well in that book, and is quite applicable here in the sense of sexuality and togetherness being crushed "for the good of faith."

My point is repression can easily be the cause of all the divorce, due to it holding back true understanding of both sexes, and it hindering the observed and experienced mentalities of both sexes.
Yeah, honestly, religious repression hasn't gotten this far. Homosexuality usually just stems from ingrained attitudes (DNA) and segregation. All of the gays I know, they have either been shy as youths and more active within the female community (who knows, maybe being easily intimidated, lack of initial social self-confidence). People say you're born "gay", I say shenanigans.

Last edited by Xietsu (2006-06-08 17:47:54)

2006-06-09 01:18:37
Rosse_modest
Member
+76|7005|Antwerp, Flanders
What's a marrage? Is it sort of like a barrage?
2006-06-09 04:25:19
<[onex]>Headstone
Member
+102|6931|New York
People dont even want to get merried anymore, they want the freedom to be with whome they want, while haveing the security of someone to come home to that will be there for them.

Gay couples Just want the money, plain and simple. They have said it time and time again.

Im Merried, and would do it all over again if i had the chance. Its great when you find that someone out of the billions of peiople out there. After 15 years it still feels like the day we met!
2006-06-09 06:58:57
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6790
Headstone: What?  Are you drunk or something?  I don't understand.

Psycho wrote:

One - it's just not what was intended. Whether you are religious or if you just look at nature same sex unions doesn't fit.
IIRC, there are records of gay animals.  I'll see if I can find anything and get back to you.

Psycho wrote:

Two - If we allow same sex marriages, then why not multiple marriages? Some have argued it would also open the door to marriages to animals or children I think that's a stretch.
WTF does any of this have to do with gay marriage?  That's like saying that because drug A has been approved for sale, drug B, C, and D are likely to, because they are also drugs.

Psycho wrote:

Three - I believe children benefit from having a mother and a father. That's not to say a single parent cannot raise a child, but I think it should be obvious that having one of both parents would be the most beneficial.
So, having only one parent is worse than having two?  Besides, without getting married they could just as easily have one adopt the child and raise it together.  And I think you'll find there's plenty of evidence to suggest that children are better of being raised by two people of the same sex than in an orphanarium.

Ajax_the_Great1 wrote:

Difference = individuals getting divorced doesn't mean violation of sanctity. Means those individuals themselves did. Homosexuals getting married goes against the principles in general.
How so? What is it about the sanctity of marriage that it can remain unaffected by people ignoring the "Till death to we part line", but be affected by the "Man and woman wed in holy matrimony" line?  Do the lines have levels of criticality?  Are some parts of the core idea of marriage more core than other parts?  What about affairs, where do they fit in?


P.S.  I managed to combine John Howard and George Orwell there.  Woot!

Last edited by Bubbalo (2006-06-09 06:59:47)

2006-06-09 15:24:44
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6778|Southeastern USA

Rosse_modest wrote:

What's a marrage? Is it sort of like a barrage?
didn't they use marrage balloons over London?
2006-06-09 16:06:07
yerded
Bertinator
+255|6865|Westminster, California

Rosse_modest wrote:

What's a marrage? Is it sort of like a barrage?
I thought it was what you saw while walking throught the desert.

Last edited by yerded (2006-06-09 16:06:35)

2006-06-09 16:30:52
The_Mob_Returns
Member
+72|6951|Indianapolis, IN

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

in a nation that claims numbers of ~70% being Christian
That number I would dispute with you.  Sure they have done polls.  I could go out on the street and do a poll also.  They have also done other polls where 70% said yes we are Christians but then when they were asked simple theological questions about their faith less than half of them knew what they were talking about.  And as the questions went it became obvious that those who said they were Christians did not truly know what they were talking about.
2006-06-09 16:41:05
Rosse_modest
Member
+76|7005|Antwerp, Flanders

yerded wrote:

Rosse_modest wrote:

What's a marrage? Is it sort of like a barrage?
I thought it was what you saw while walking throught the desert.
That's a mirage.
2006-06-09 16:46:08
Rosse_modest
Member
+76|7005|Antwerp, Flanders

kr@cker wrote:

Rosse_modest wrote:

What's a marrage? Is it sort of like a barrage?
didn't they use marrage balloons over London?
I dunno. I couldn't care less about London or balloons. Maybe we should ask a balloon expert, any on tonight?

Couldn't find "marrage" in my English-Dutch dictionary, but it's only pocket sized so... I might check an encyclopedia tomorrow.

EDIT: It is possible marrage is not an English word and therefor I've been looking in the wrong dictionary. Will go to the library tomorrow to search dictionaries on other languages for any possible match.

I think it is CRITICAL to future communication on the BF2S forums that we find out what a marrage is.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to listen to some music and look for Marla Sokoloff pics on the internet.
Goodnight.

Last edited by Rosse_modest (2006-06-09 16:53:46)

2006-06-09 17:57:29
Major_Spittle
Banned
+276|6884|United States of America
I'm for Gay Marrage.  But I don't know what two guys slapping their salamis together has to do with marriage.

I'm for all people against marriage to exercise their right to not do it.

It is safe to say we are all the product of "one man and one women" (well, except CameronPoe), so how many are happy they are from a broken home vs the product of a happy Marriage.

And I don't want to hear crap from Bubbalo about how even though he barely survived being aborted by climbing out of the biohazard bin and was raised by 12 guys in a bath house, that he is happy with his moms decision and enjoyed growing up in a broken home.
2006-06-09 18:43:21
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6925|NJ

Rosse_modest wrote:

kr@cker wrote:

Rosse_modest wrote:

What's a marrage? Is it sort of like a barrage?
didn't they use marrage balloons over London?
I dunno. I couldn't care less about London or balloons. Maybe we should ask a balloon expert, any on tonight?

Couldn't find "marrage" in my English-Dutch dictionary, but it's only pocket sized so... I might check an encyclopedia tomorrow.

EDIT: It is possible marrage is not an English word and therefor I've been looking in the wrong dictionary. Will go to the library tomorrow to search dictionaries on other languages for any possible match.

I think it is CRITICAL to future communication on the BF2S forums that we find out what a marrage is.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to listen to some music and look for Marla Sokoloff pics on the internet.
Goodnight.
Missed an I marriage is what I meant to put
2006-06-09 18:52:22
TheCanadianTerrorist
Member
+111|6784

Rosse_modest wrote:

yerded wrote:

Rosse_modest wrote:

What's a marrage? Is it sort of like a barrage?
I thought it was what you saw while walking throught the desert.
That's a mirage.
He was fucking joking.

I think gay marriage should be allowed. Religion shouldn't play a part of two people uniting. Down with religion!
2006-06-09 20:21:11
Berserk_Vampire
Banned
+7|6917
Gay Marriage means NOTHING. The main point of getting married is to have children and they wont be called bastards.

Gays cant create children.
Gays spread disease and aids and stick their things in peanut cluster assholes.
Gays who grow up with adopted children is harmful and will grow up to be gay.

Marriage is between a man and woman you wanna be gay prance around find but dont think you have any special rights especially to ever get married.
2006-06-09 23:06:08
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6790

Major_Spittle wrote:

And I don't want to hear crap from Bubbalo about how even though he barely survived being aborted by climbing out of the biohazard bin and was raised by 12 guys in a bath house, that he is happy with his moms decision and enjoyed growing up in a broken home.
Oh yes, becuase I'm the one always bringing up personal examples.  I challenge you to find an incident in which I have done so.

 

Pages: 1 2 3 … 5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard