Pa. governor won't appeal ruling legalizing gay marriage

You admitted to bigotry. There is no saving face for you.

- - - Updated - - -

Paternity has nothing to do with marriage.

 

You did ask a question. I answered it. But your pretend question that you didn't ask doesn't exist. Or you would have asked it.

 

He blatantly started he was.

But this is just starting the obvious nothing more.

 

Bwhahahahaha. As if such a thing were possible. Please.

 

Good, its time every state strikes down their gay marriage bans. It doesn't make sense in this day and age.

 

??? No, you simply claimed it was and showed us nothing.

I didn't claim to be stupid.

 

Can you quote the text of any of these "gay marriage bans"? Sexual orientation isn't relevant. No where is it even mentioned in any marriage statute. Marriage isn't limited to husbands and wives to keep out the gays. Just as procreations requirement of a mother and father isn't a nefarious plot by mother nature to exclude the gays. The nuclear family, husbands and wives becoming fathers and mothers to their children, the foundation of societies around the world, isn't an institution created in order to exclude the gays, it is merely a reflection of that biology of procreation.

 

What are you babbling on about now?

In black and white, right there in the statute. Defines by law the effects of being "married" to the mother. Your baseless claims to the contrary are meaningless.

 

Gay people can adopt kids, or already have kids from a previous relationship. (my best friends aunts for instance have 3 from one of their previous relationships). There are also straight people who get married with no intention on ever having kids. Are you saying that having kids should be a requirement of marriage?

 

Your confession.

In what law. I need a link. See you have self confirmed your own bigotry so I can't trust your words, besides that you don't speak with any authority, or frankly any logic.

So I don't trust the words of somebody who blatantly claimed bigotry. Sorry. Post something with substantial backing or it's just a lie.

- - - Updated - - -

No, he is saying you aren't married until you have a child. It's a pretty warped misinterpretation of law, but anything to protect his agenda I suppose.

 

Some states recognize some marriages performed in another state, but not same sex marriages.
That is discrimination between two classes of legally married people.
And it's unconstitutional...

 

??? No. Having kids isnt the concern. Procreation continues on, without marriage. The concern is single mothers procreating without marriage.

 

Notice that no where in your post did you as much to even refer to a law that discrinminated against gays.

States can refuse to recognize underage marriages from states that allow people of a younger age to marry than their own state laws allow, so I see no reason they couldnt do the same in the case of marriages between people of the same sex from another state. Its called the public policy exception to the full faith and credit clause.

 

Correct. If you and the other poster were to ignore me, my end of the conversation wouldnt change. Why do you keep reposting this?

The paternity laws in all 50 states. Links to two of them have been provided, I see no need to provide the other 48.

Never confirmed any such thing. That was you delusion that confirmed my bigotry

Not saying any such thing. My, watch the silly boy/girl grasp for one strawman after another. So typical for you.

 

Maybe you are unaware of it, but several states have recently had their Anti-Same Sex marriage laws tossed out for that specific reason....
So I guess you're right, because they aren't laws anymore.....but they used to be....

 

The solution to your dilemma is simple. You should be campaigning for a Constitutional amendment requiring all women of childbearing age to be married.

 

Up throught the 50s most states prohibited by law having sex with a woman that isnt your wife or even cohabitating with them. I prefer the freedom of government only encouraging marriage as opposed to requiring it.

 

Perhaps you aren't the only American who values their freedom?

Food for thought...

 

Maybe you were unaware but even more states have in place laws that dont recognize same sex marriages from any state.

 

Does anybody here really not see where this is going? Is there any point to this? If I'm not mistaken, all of the states that have gay marriage also recognize marriages from other states where it's legal. Get over it!

 

I've observed all my life that you can be Absolutely Certain, or you can be probably correct, but you can't be both.

 

Maybe you are unaware that these are being weeded out, one by one. There might be some legitimate dispute over whether same-sex marriage itself is something we as a society wish to permit, but there is NO legitimate dispute over whether a marriage legal in one state, can be unrecognized in another. There isn't even any legal contest, which is why even red states aren't appealing these decisions.

 

????There are no laws prohibiting gays from engaging in sexual relations or cohabitating together. Government license isn't required to exercise any right they please. Couples of the same sex simply don't get the tax breaks and governmental entitlements when they do.

 

Wouldn't matter if it was only one state. Irrelevant to my point regarding the public policy exception to the full faith and credit clause

 

Im making an argument based upon constitutional law, not the popular sentiment of voters, legislatures or judges.