Defend marriage! ONE MAN - ONE WOMAN

You know you’re making god cry with this kind of talk, don’t you?

You forgot one
-If either party in the marraige dies, the remaining party must marry another widow(er) within three months and have children with them within a year.

No no no no no no no no no - if either party dies the other must kill themselves.

Tears of joy, my friend. You have any idea how old God is?

Can we get a 40 year grace period on that? I was planning to move to Oregon when I turn 80.

Yes, I well remember the headline in the Globe and Mail on the day it happened: MARRIAGE MEANINGLESS. Since then, darkness has fallen over Canada, and we eke out a precarious life gnawing ice-covered bones as we scuttle from cave to cave.

But it does. As you pursue your unnatural lane-splitting ways, you distract the rest of us, and we have to pay extra attention to you lest we have a wreck.

Look, I already have enough trouble keeping my property up to my neighbors’ standards.

If half can perfectly refinish their older houses (with hand tools and scrap lumber no less) and the other half have perfectly decorated homes, and all have perfectly environmentally positive landscaping, what am*** I*** going to do?

Move to Canada. We have plenty of cave space.

Heh, heh.

That “One man, one woman” bit cracks me up. I am guessing that the OP was joshing.

I think that a kid having two mommies is just fine, seriously. Even better if they can be legally married.

Keith Olbermann speaks.

What is it to you?

Grr. Cave tiny. Same sex married couples get gooder caves under socialist overlords.

All this talk of ‘one man + one woman’ and making divorce harder completely misses the point.

  1. Marriage should only be allowed in a proper (i.e. Protestant) Church.
  2. Both parties must declare in front of the congregation that they believe in Creationism.
  3. They must forever swear to renounce Satan, Socialism and Evolution.
  4. Both parties must have the same skin colour.

:smack::eek::rolleyes:

I’m out.

A number of posters have shown this to be not a particularly good analogy.

How about: Saying that allowing homosexual marriage degrades heterosexual marriage is like saying that seeing a gay man wearing a blue shirt makes all of your blue shirts less valuable.

Actually it is a fabulous gabardine teal pullover.

It’s not so much my, er, personal hobbies as it is the good voters of the state of California rendering my marriage tenuous, at best. :frowning:

:smiley:

That’s not teal, it’s cerulean. Spot the straight guy…

:stuck_out_tongue:

So let me get this straight. You’re saying that the only valid marriages are same-sects marriages?