Originally Posted by mytmouse57

Awww.... let's lighten up with a few of the more snappy sayings on the subject of marriage over the years....

"Marriage is a time-honored institution. But, who wants to live in an institution for the rest of their lives?"

"I got a gun for my wife. Best trade I ever made."

"I wear the pants in the family. But my wife tells me when I can wear them, how to put them on and what styles and colors I'm allowed."

"Men are idiots, and I married their king."

"I still miss my ex. But my aim is improving."

"Married men don't live longer. It just seems that way."

"A husband and wife are driving down a country road when they see a corral full of jackasses. "Relatives of yours?" the husband asks. "Yes," the wife replies. "In-laws."

Originally Posted by garysher

What legitimate state interest exists for providing handicapped parking privileges?

Originally Posted by garysher

Or for redefining marriage to accommodate homosexuals?

Originally Posted by foundit66

Assisting those in need.

Why is this a legitimate state interest in one of the most uncaring western nations that prides itself on keeping goovernment out of people's lives??



The 14th amendment's requirements on equal rights (not equal restrictions) are what provide the legitimate state interest.

Originally Posted by garysher

Why is this a legitimate state interest in one of the most uncaring western nations that prides itself on keeping goovernment out of people's lives??

Originally Posted by garysher

"Neither men nor women are disproportionately disadvantaged or burdened by the fact that New York's Domestic Relations Law allows only opposite-sex couples to marry -- both genders are treated precisely the same way.

Originally Posted by foundit66

Originally Posted by garysher (And ANOTHER State Inches Forward....)
Why is this a legitimate state interest in one of the most uncaring western nations that prides itself on keeping goovernment out of people's lives??



A thorough non-sequitur.
The question is devoid of any point to the actual topic at hand, and does nothing but slur the U.S. government.
Come up with a real argument.
If you disagree that it is not a legitimate state interest, then say so.
Fabricating a "governmental stance" and then pretending that your make-believe governmental stance contradicts the interest does nothing to further this discussion.

Originally Posted by foundit66

1) The same thing was said of interracial marriage laws.
2) There they go again with this pretense that "treatment" or "restrictions" are somehow what satisfies the constitutional mandate of EQUALITY.
Our RIGHTS have to be equal.
A man can marry a woman.
A woman cannot marry a woman.
Unequal rights.

Originally Posted by garysher

[color=Red]Apparently you don't bother to read the many posts in which we have systematically dealt with these issues

Originally Posted by garysher

1) the comparison with US apartheid laws is bogus and disingenuous

Originally Posted by garysher

2) Your simplistic attempts to outsmart some of the highest courts in the land are slightly amusing and utterly worthless.

Originally Posted by foundit66

"dealt with"???
You saying "I don't agree with that" or "I think that is wrong but I can't give you any concrete reason why" is not "dealing" with anything garysher...
In your opinion.
Yet you repeatedly cannot explain WHY it is "bogus".
All you can do is say "bogus".
And AGAIN garysher does nothing but make claims.
WHERE am I wrong?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We have provided detailed deconstructions to your emotive analogies on innumerable occasions.

It seems your last resort is to stick your head in the sand and pretend you haven't read them




All you do here is make an appeal to authority fallacy, and nothing more.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I am quoting the findings of the highest court in one of the most liberal states in the USA - New York

All you can do is squeal and say you disagree - the very tactic of which you mistakenly accuse me!!





Or, should I use the same tactic for your utterly idiotic claim that homosexuality is a "choice", when ABSOLUTELY NO psychological expert claims that...

Originally Posted by garysher

Originally Posted by garysher

ABSOLUTELY NO psychological expert claims that homosexuality is genetic either!

The fact is that homosexuals lack the discipline and will power to override their unnatural cravings

Originally Posted by akuma

That is only YOUR opinion, not a fact.