Supreme Court Will Review DOMA, Prop 8 Challenges

[lides]

Wondering wrote:

"Same sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, therefore, we can broach it anytime with your child."
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
If you still don't see the link then color yourself as stupid as lides is.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/news/fr...
Wondering, do you get any of your information from any other source than hate groups?

This still does nothing to illustrate a link between allowing same sex marriage and school curricula. It does, however, illustrate a disconnect between you and reality.

[WeTheSheeple]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
It is if you're gay. Laws that aren't 'special' are the same all over the country.

Then marriage laws for heteros are "special" as well, because they're not the same all over the country either- for example, first cousins can marry in some states but not in others, and NO, those marriages are NOT recognized by all other states either- Kentucky in particular.

So straights have "special" laws as well.

Hmmmmm, I guess we're equal again.

[WeTheSheeple]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
...and you called me a moron! Show me where I said "it's gay marriage now." Marriage laws and forms were changed to accommodate gays, special laws and special forms.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gay+ma...

While they may have been changed to accomodate the new law, they're not special forms just for the gays; they are the same forms for everyone.

[Wondering]

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Then marriage laws for heteros are "special" as well, because they're not the same all over the country either- for example, first cousins can marry in some states but not in others, and NO, those marriages are NOT recognized by all other states either- Kentucky in particular.
So straights have "special" laws as well.
Hmmmmm, I guess we're equal again.

The common thread is one man and one woman. It's the law of the land.
Respected in all 50 states. If a state changes the law for gays, those are special laws. If, or when, gay marriage is accepted in all 50 states the 'special' will no longer apply.

[WeTheSheeple]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
The common thread is one man and one woman. It's the law of the land.
Respected in all 50 states. If a state changes the law for gays, those are special laws. If, or when, gay marriage is accepted in all 50 states the 'special' will no longer apply.

To YOU the common thread is one man and one woman. To ME the common thread is two people.

Sorry, but as I pointed out not all straight marriages are accepted or respected in all 50 states either.

So by your own definition that makes them "special" as well.

[Wondering]

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
To YOU the common thread is one man and one woman.

You don't have a mother and father?

[Wondering]

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
While they may have been changed to accomodate the new law, they're not special forms just for the gays; they are the same forms for everyone.

Yes, but the were changed eSPECIALly for gays. The common forms in this country say 'bride' and 'groom.' The special forms ignore gender. Party A and Party B could be anything or anyone.

[DaveinMass]

Wondering wrote:

You don't have a mother and father?

It takes a sperm and an egg. Which is different than a discussion of marriage. And for kids raised in same-sex families, no, they may not have someone to call mother or father. Get over it!

Considering that the vast majority of children being raised in same-sex families were adopted, the courts approved the couple to adopt and raise those kids in the 'best interest of those kids'. Who approved you to raise your kids?

[DaveinMass]

Wondering wrote:

Yes, but the were changed eSPECIALly for gays. The common forms in this country say 'bride' and 'groom.' The special forms ignore gender. Party A and Party B could be anything or anyone.

Oh, the horror! The Commonwealth changed the application to marry form. We'll never be able to figure out how to fill it out and determine who we are marrying! Oh, the horror! How dare couples determine for themselves who gets listed first! What is this world coming to.

**** POST ALERT **** This message was sarcasm.**** Those afflicted with being fanatically homophobic please be warned that this message was sarcasm.**** The poster of this message recognizes that being homophobic often causes an inability to recognize sarcasm.**** POST ALERT **** This message was sarcasm.****

[quest]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, but the were changed eSPECIALly for gays. The common forms in this country say 'bride' and 'groom.' The special forms ignore gender. Party A and Party B could be anything or anyone.

LOL! Tell us how straight couples are harmed by the form change, Dear.
You are bemoaning that the courts removed a SPECIAL designation for the terms Bride and Groom. And you are doing that by complaining that making the forms gender neutral make the forms, "special" forms?
Priceless.

[Jane Dodo]

straight shooter wrote:

<quoted text>
LAME!
very lame!
you failed, but you are use to that eh HAUS?

Have you even looked up the word 'haus'? You are hilarious!

[Quest]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
You don't have a mother and father?

I did, and they were simply WONDERFUL. I could not have asked for better, and I hope that I am 1/10th of the parent that they were. I was very blessed.

They were straight.

A friend of mine was raised by a Mother and man, too. She was sexually abused by her sperm donor from a very young age. She never had anything she could really call a Father.

Another good friend was raised by only a Father - her egg donor ran off when she was a baby. She never had anything to call a Mother. Her Father was a good man, and did the best he could, but had a tough time alone.

My children have a total of three Moms and a Dad, from their point of view. Two sets of parents has it's up and downs, of course. They like the multiple birthday and Christmas parties and gifts, as well as dual vacations with the families. Always someone to talk to, and always someone to listen. They aren't so fond of being answerable to four adults for any bad grades or mistakes in judgement.

Our kids have two straight parents and two gay parents.

Very good friends of mine are raising three teenage sons - and those boys have two Moms. They are active in Band and in Church, get good grades, and adore their parents (and try them as well). One was the biological son of one Mm, the other two were adopted out of foster care.

I know a couple who have adopted 4 children - boys and girls - all special needs, and they have one foster child they want to adopt. These are both men so their children have two Fathers. I don't know how they do it and remain sane, but they do. One Dad sings in our church choir. Their children's challenges run the gamut from Down Syndrome, to Autism, and their most recent child is a 15 year old girl who has been in multiple foster homes before settling in with them. She has an attitude a mile wide, but a quick mind and a survivor's soul. She's driving them nuts by testing their resolve at every turn, but I think they are winning her heart.

She asked to be baptized last summer.

And you have never met a single one of these parents, or their children.

Gender isn't the basis for good parenting, and you know it, so why pretend otherwise. Parenting is a calling, and so many Moms and Dads have answered.

And some of those are gay.

Someday you will have to face the simple fact that you have NO logical or rational reason to demand that the children of gay parents be raised by parents who can never marry.

[Wondering]

DaveinMass wrote:

<quoted text>
It takes a sperm and an egg. Which is different than a discussion of marriage. And for kids raised in same-sex families, no, they may not have someone to call mother or father. Get over it!

Everyone has a mother and father. It's better for the kids if they're married.

[Wondering]

quest wrote:

You are bemoaning that the courts removed a SPECIAL designation for the terms Bride and Groom. And you are doing that by complaining that making the forms gender neutral make the forms, "special" forms?
Priceless.

You have it backward. Do you think Sheeple was Party A or Party B?
On my marriage certificate I can clearly be identified. Now, Party A or B could be almost anything. I suppose the new forms save trees.

[Wondering]

Quest wrote:

<quoted text>
I did, and they were simply WONDERFUL. I could not have asked for better, and I hope that I am 1/10th of the parent that they were. I was very blessed.

Every kid deserves a loving mother and father. Sad that it doesn't always work out that way.

[Quest]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
Everyone has a mother and father. It's better for the kids if they're married.

No, dear. Most of us consider a Mother and a Father to be more than a sperm or egg donor.
That you do not says quite a bit about your family and your experiences in life.
And yes, we know that you don't believe that adoptive parents actually have children - you have made these odd comments before.
Ad they are still not rational.

[WeTheSheeple]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
You don't have a mother and father?

Yes, I had a mother and a father.

That has nothing to do with marriage.

I would have had a mother and a father whether they were married to each other or not.

Marriage is 2 people in a civil contract, regardless of gender, regardless of whether they have kids.

[WeTheSheeple]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, but the were changed eSPECIALly for gays. The common forms in this country say 'bride' and 'groom.' The special forms ignore gender. Party A and Party B could be anything or anyone.

So they could be chairs or trees?

I don't think that's true.

Party A can be a man or a woman, just as Party B can be a man or a woman.

The forms were changed because the law changed; they were changed for everyone.

What's the big deal?

[WeTheSheeple]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
Everyone has a mother and father. It's better for the kids if they're married.

Everyone has parents. It's better for the kids if they're married; including same-sex parents.

[WeTheSheeple]

Wondering wrote:

<quoted text>
You have it backward. Do you think Sheeple was Party A or Party B?
On my marriage certificate I can clearly be identified. Now, Party A or B could be almost anything. I suppose the new forms save trees.

Nope, Party A can only be one of two people; just as Party B can only be one of two people. You can't be both Party A & Party B. Nothing other than the 2 people applying for the license can be Party A & Party B.

And on my marriage certificate I can just as clearly be identified; my name is right there for all to see.

Oh, I see, you're worried someone won't be able to figure out just by looking at you if you were the bride or the groom, so you needed to be identified as such on your marriage license?

Try growing a mustache, maybe that'll help. Or have our wife shave her's!