Active Users:1100 Time:23/11/2024 01:23:03 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though. Dreaded Anomaly Send a noteboard - 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM
and granted, the UN is not the US, but the US falls under the UN, does it not? I've never really understood exactly how that relationship works out, but we're really not supposed to violate the UN declarations of human rights, are we?


Article 16 (UDHR)
1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

So, emphasis mine, clearly comments on age, race, nationality and religion, does not mention sexual preference.
Reply to message
Let's ban all Christian Marriage. Dannymac - 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM 1533 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me. Helene - 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM 962 Views
One small problem... Phelix - 07/08/2010 08:02:34 AM 981 Views
Re tax. Rebekah - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1015 Views
That seems sensible to me. SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 858 Views
Not sure what you mean by "demoted." Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:50:02 PM 1016 Views
Nice. *NM* Camilla - 07/08/2010 08:58:20 AM 585 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people. Cannoli - 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM 1186 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there! Dannymac - 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM 995 Views
Who else should make those decisions? Cannoli - 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM 946 Views
I'd totally... Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 911 Views
I'd totally... ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1057 Views
You'd defend this idiot? *NM* Ectheledhel - 08/08/2010 06:40:34 AM 474 Views
Indeed ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 995 Views
I used to think Joel was the biggest rambler on this site. I am seriously reconsidering. everynametaken - 08/08/2010 05:24:56 AM 981 Views
And my assessment of one poster as the most content-poor, non-contributing slug is unchanged Cannoli - 08/08/2010 07:17:02 PM 894 Views
Um, ok. *NM* everynametaken - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 476 Views
*Shakes Head* Dannymac - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 864 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM* ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM 504 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense. Great Lord of Chaos - 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM 958 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. ßelals Girl - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 919 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! Vodalus - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 873 Views
whoops *NM* ßelals Girl - 09/08/2010 02:22:49 AM 439 Views
Re: *Shakes Head* Cannoli - 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM 910 Views
I still do not see how you think marriage is a "pointless" institution LadyLorraine - 08/08/2010 08:05:45 PM 1010 Views
No, I was referring to same-sex marriage. Real marriage hardly counts as a novelty. *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 02:28:43 PM 418 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about. Dannymac - 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM 854 Views
You cannot be that stupid. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM 1141 Views
There's a lot of ridiculous arguments here, but I'll focus on just one of them... Legolas - 11/08/2010 03:38:05 PM 1017 Views
Incorrect. Genders are not treated equally. Dreaded Anomaly - 11/08/2010 07:53:00 PM 1229 Views
all you need is enough support to pass an amendment random thoughts - 08/08/2010 02:46:08 PM 850 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM 885 Views
And what is wrong with polygamy? *NM* Ectheledhel - 09/08/2010 10:36:53 AM 476 Views
Did I say there was anything? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:03:10 AM 1002 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 923 Views
Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 876 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Camilla - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 858 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? Isaac - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 968 Views
Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 828 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 957 Views
Re: Not really snoopcester - 09/08/2010 02:14:43 PM 839 Views
Re: Not really Isaac - 09/08/2010 03:06:31 PM 983 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives. Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM 999 Views
... Camilla - 11/08/2010 03:22:50 PM 878 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 11:25:39 AM 887 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 11:51:50 AM 849 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too snoopcester - 09/08/2010 01:18:35 PM 944 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too Isaac - 09/08/2010 02:54:19 PM 963 Views
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM 1014 Views
Re: Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:24:06 AM 824 Views
Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Dannymac - 10/08/2010 04:09:43 PM 939 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. Isaac - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 827 Views
Great post Danny SilverWarder - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 694 Views
It should be noted again... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM 990 Views
and how is it not a right? LadyLorraine - 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM 863 Views
My definition of rights... Jeordam - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 989 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM 754 Views
+1 Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:11:22 AM 1040 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM 852 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM 977 Views
If we need a more specific resolution... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM 1160 Views
No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 05:25:57 AM 848 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 03:04:39 PM 1162 Views
That's really a ridiculous stance, you do realize. Legolas - 10/08/2010 03:23:02 PM 814 Views
The point is that marriage IS a right, one which cannot be denied based upon sexual orientation *NM* Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:04:16 PM 678 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context Isaac - 10/08/2010 03:46:56 PM 1039 Views
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though. Dreaded Anomaly - 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM 852 Views
It also doesn't say they can Isaac - 10/08/2010 04:41:18 AM 856 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. Legolas - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 844 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so Isaac - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 869 Views
I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point. LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:09:32 PM 844 Views
Re: I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point. Isaac - 10/08/2010 06:33:56 PM 776 Views
It's mentioned as a right in some SC decision quoted in that Walker opinion. *NM* Legolas - 10/08/2010 06:51:13 PM 429 Views
To clarify for you SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM 777 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM 1222 Views
I'm not sure that I would call the Security Council the 'Enforcement Body' SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:43:02 PM 825 Views
The fact that it is capable of authorizing the use of military force makes it an enforcement body Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 10:33:59 PM 1088 Views
Disagree - but it's most a matter of definition there SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:31:53 PM 992 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless.... Jeordam - 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM 785 Views
and the Constitution dictates nothing about marriage. *NM* LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 11:46:24 PM 457 Views
That means it is up to the people. And they say "No." *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:13:12 PM 462 Views
No, but it does dictate things about rights and discrimination SilverWarder - 12/08/2010 03:48:02 PM 1031 Views
Why don't YOU back up your assertion that the right to marry exists? *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:16:02 PM 475 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right. Dreaded Anomaly - 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM 930 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction... Vodalus - 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM 1006 Views
I agree LadyLorraine - 10/08/2010 06:11:19 PM 734 Views
Yeah but this can't be used to prove that it IS a right... Napoleon62 - 10/08/2010 07:30:57 PM 1085 Views
Note it all you want... Dannymac - 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 726 Views
No, they seek to expand the terms of the partnership. Homosexuals can & do get married normally *NM* Cannoli - 11/08/2010 03:14:25 PM 480 Views
The best one yet. Camilla - 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM 973 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM 849 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM 957 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM 838 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane Camilla - 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM 960 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel SilverWarder - 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM 936 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel Camilla - 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM 924 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes