want to get married? you have 3 years to pop out a baby.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Irvine511

Blue Crack Supplier
Joined
Dec 4, 2003
Messages
34,518
Location
the West Coast
i am laughing an evil little laugh right now ...

[q]KING5.com Staff and Associated Press

OLYMPIA, Wash. - An initiative filed by proponents of same-sex marriage would require heterosexual couples to have kids within three years or else have their marriage annulled.

Initiative 957 was filed by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance. That group was formed last summer after the state Supreme Court upheld Washington's ban on same-sex marriage.

Under the initiative, marriage would be limited to men and women who are able to have children. Couples would be required to prove they can have children in order to get a marriage license, and if they did not have children within three years, their marriage would be subject to annulment.

All other marriages would be defined as "unrecognized" and people in those marriages would be ineligible to receive any marriage benefits.

“For many years, social conservatives have claimed that marriage exists solely for the purpose of procreation ... The time has come for these conservatives to be dosed with their own medicine," said WA-DOMA organizer Gregory Gadow in a printed statement. “If same-sex couples should be barred from marriage because they can not have children together, it follows that all couples who cannot or will not have children together should equally be barred from marriage."

Supporters must gather more than 224,000 valid signatures by July 6 to put the initiative on the November ballot.

Opponents say the measure is another attack on traditional marriage, but supporters say the move is needed to have a discussion on the high court ruling.[/q]
 
wonderful. lets punish everyone for the views of some. forgive me for not laughing. i fail to see how the inability for homosexuals to be legally married is the fault of all, when it is a select group of bigots who've made it impossible.

i haven't had my second cup of tea yet this morning. i will blame that. but really, when it comes down to it, joking or not, the issue is not funny. if anything this just highlights how fucking ridiculous the ban on same-sex marriage really is.
 
Angela Harlem said:
if anything this just highlights how fucking ridiculous the ban on same-sex marriage really is.

Well then isn't it working? Maybe it will get some to think about it, can they walk the walk?

Maybe it will get some to actually question something in life and not just rely on traditions that rule in their favor.

Or maybe I'm being too optimistic.
 
nah, you're right. i've had my second cuppa now, btw. i'm all for doing whatever it takes, as ridiculous as it might be, to get some equality and fairness into this ridiculously imbalanced society of ours.
:sigh:
 
and i dont mean that literally, doing whatever it takes - such as imposing this equally ridiculous law. if, however, it makes those with tunnel vision stop and think, then great. let's exagerate up any bunch of possible laws to counter the ban on same-sex marriage.

i should give up this morning, huh.
:shifty:
 
Senator Brown deserves our thanks and praise. He realizes that the people have the constitutional right to define marriage for themselves.

This is some letter I found in Massachusetts.

This is the kind of doofus that'll maybe have to start thinking if the "right" to define marriage doesn't exactly go the way he wanted it to.
 
I only think it's funny that some people seem to need to be confronted with something like this to point out how ridiculous the whole marriage/procreation/gay marriage "flap" is. I can't believe anyone would actually think that means I'm laughing at the concerns for rights for gay people or that I think that is in any way "funny".
 
Back
Top Bottom