Your views on marriage

dykesonbike.jpg

That's before makeup.:cool:
 
This could be taken as a direct threat against some members of the forum. There are a few in the G group. At least two in the T group. Probably a lot in the Q group and one prominent member in the HB group.

I see my sense of humor has once again been lost on someone.

ETA: Seems I am the one who missed the sense of humor. We're so subtle here at times, we become positively abstruse. That, or I'm just a true dumbass. You be the judge. :)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RJB
You should knock next time before entering your mom's bedroom.

That's the best burn I've seen in a VERY long time.

Pony up the rep, ye assenholes. The pilot has earned his this day.
 
That's the best burn I've seen in a VERY long time.

Pony up the rep, ye assenholes. The pilot has earned his this day.

The mission of the site has been accomplished. We are moving to another round.
 
If it flies, floats or fucks, it is cheaper to rent.
 
Marriage is two things.

(1) A cultural/religious idea

(2) A contract

Insofar as marriage is a contract, the state has the role of enforcing it, as with any contract.

The state has no role in marriage as a cultural/religious idea.

What does this mean in practice? Say two lesbians want to enter into a contract to hold their property in common. Should that be allowed? Sure, why not. The state should enforce that contract as it would any other contract of any kind between anyone. Say the lesbians want to refer to themselves as married. Should that be allowed? Sure, why not. Naming things oddly doesn't hurt anybody. Say the lesbians want to force the Catholic Church to call them married. Should the state enforce that demand? Of course not, as that would violate the church's property rights (not their "religious liberty," which thing does not exist, except as a sub-set of property rights).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top