What an interesting claim that I’m sure bosbfdsfd is going to come clarify and elucidate at some point between now and the heat death of the universe. 
And if the right was serious about civil rights, they’d be for multiple marriage right now, not fighting like rabid weasels against public opinion for the next 30 years.
An irrelevant and nonsensical comparison.
Look here and scroll down to attitudes by political party. Twice as many democrats as republicans have supported gay marriage since 2001. That’s a HUGE difference. And we don’t really know that it’s “a few years before the right did”, because the right still doesn’t.
Wow that’s a stupid remark and a terrible analogy. Here are two reasons why:
(1) Extending straight marriage to gay marriage, legally, is trivially easy. Extending two-partner marriage to n-partner marriage is a legal nightmare
(2) The percentage of the population who is gay is vastly higher than the percentage who is openly poly. Everyone has a proverbial gay uncle bob. Very few people have poly uncle bobs.
Public opinion is still pretty closely divided, thus those against gay marriage are represented in our democracy. Those against multiple marriage are represented by both parties, until enough people are in favor of it, at which time the Democrats will come out for it and then pat themselves on the back for their morality.
“If we keep repeating our lies about being for ‘equality,’ maybe they’ll stop calling us out on our bigotry and hatred. And if not, we can always call them racist!”
Golly, political non-coward Obama seems to be missing from that list until 2012. I wonder why that is?
It’s because all politicians follow opinion rather than lead it otherwise they’d never get elected. Once they’re safely in office and preferably not facing another election, then they can start leading.
As for democracy even the Athenians who invented it were wise enough to restrict the franchise.
Because we understand that Cruz is eligible for the Presidency.
Also because we vote while we are still alive. We don’t start voting Democrat until after we die.
Well, sure, if you go to Heaven. Me, I vote for them now because my chances aren’t very good.
I disagree.
Ontario Family Law Act re. child, spouse and parent support, and property matters
Ontario Children’s Law Reform Act re. parenting, e.g. custody and access
Ontario Children’s Law Reform Act re. parenting, e.g. custody and access
Ontario Succession Law Reform Act re. inheritances with or without a will
BTW, up here we don’t conduct plural marriages and don’t let people immigrate here if they are in a plural marriage, but our laws have been amended to deal with plural marriages when end up here anyway. (I’d like plural marriages to be permitted.)
I would think the issues surrounding transgender people are much more complex than multiple marriage.
Republicans are allowed to vote because it keeps them occupied rather than masturbating in public.
Speaking of multiple marriage, I think it should be allowed only if it can be show that it is becoming common for the man or men in a group to be voted out by the women. So far what I see are many examples that use old time religion models were the women have very little to say if the men want to get another woman into the group.
Yes, much in the way public opinion on interracial marriage was closely divided in the 90s.
And, at the same time, the Republicans will continue to oppose it, fighting with insane fervor, even trying to claim that marriage licenses aren’t valid if only signed by deputy county recorders, etc. – long after the tipping point in public opinion.
Which is worse? Not getting on the trolley at the first stop? Or trying to derail the trolley when it is now filled with passengers?
That’s stupid. The issues regarding transgendered people are trivial in comparison. Just treat them as their current gender.
Men and Women – and transmen and transwomen – are all identical under the laws of inheritance, property ownership, visitation rights in hospital and major medical decisions, etc. There is no change in the laws necessary to accommodate the property laws of the transgendered.
For multiple partners in marriage, there’s a shit-ton of new laws needed.
You’re too silly for words. Do you ever think before you post?
I’d very much prefer they engaged in the latter rather than the former.
Even if it were illegal, they could dispense with legal representation, as they can get themselves off.
bosbfdsfd, I’ll assume your lack of response indicates: I got nuthin.
Eh, he’s still got quite a bit of time before heat death.