Hello Friend,
If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.
It will be the most efficient use of your time.
And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.
Thank you for visiting and have a great day!
Were you being sarcastic? I cant tell. Either way, I dont see what the problem is with 2 consenting adults getting married despite their sexual orientation.Hustlaz Ambition said:
It will when transgender children, gay adoption and gay rights take center stage. Have you felt the change from Feminism? Now you have rampant out of control feminists... shortly it will be militant gay activists and the thought police out in force. There's already people pushing for homosexual children's books in schools and giving children the right to choose.... this is all fvckin brainwashing, your society is about to collapse in on itself. You don't see China pushing this sh1t do you? They are busy making regular families, getting married, having children and kicking their economy into high gear. What a huge waste of tax payer dollars, now two mentally disfunctional people can get married and it only caused you to lose face on the international scene... man the Taliban must be rolling around on the floor laughing at you guys... homo's and the homo army coming to get them with more rights for homos then regular people and preferences given to homos and minorities in the USA... If I were in the US armed forces I would go A-wall at this point, what the hell are you fighting for?!? You are going to lose an eye or leg, fighting for homosexuals to have freedom and decadence to reign? You are fighting so that people can push a transgender child to use the same washroom as your daughter? You are fighting to hopefully confuse the lines of sexuality and eliminate the traditional family unit? My god that is some seriously twisted sh1t. Your future as a unified fighting force is looking very very bleak and without the military what the hell is the USA?
Do you see anything wrong with polygamous marriages, provided everyone involved is a consenting adult? Likewise, do you see anything wrong with marriage between a man and a beast? Serious question.Jaylan said:
can the beast sign the legal document?Bokanovsky said:
Why would a beast need to sign a legal document? Last time I checked, a beast was not required to sign a legal document if you wanted to turn it into into a hamburger or a pair of leather shoes. If it's okay to slaughter beasts without their legal consent, surely it's okay to marry them too?penkitten said:
In regards to polygamy, I have no issue with it if its between consenting adults.Bokanovsky said:
I see what you are saying, but consider this. Both polygamy and child marriage have a much longer cultural and religious history than homos in our world's history. Both were considered normal and quite common till the late 19th century mid 20th century. There is whole religions based on polygamy(Mormons, Muslims). In fact it is STILL practiced in certain parts in the world like Africa where dudes be having up to 9 wives. At no point ever in our history has homos been accepted as normal except for these last 6 years. So if a polygamist and pedo movement gets started they have a REALLY good case.Jaylan said:
Why is an animal's consent necessary in the first place? You don't ask a cow or fish for consent before you eat it, right? So why would you need consent if you wanted to marry one? And how is it a different can of worms? Why are the rights of homosexuals more important than the rights of polygamists and zoophiles?Jaylan said:
You are doing nothing but throwing around red herrings. Two consenting adults deciding to spend their life together is not AT ALL analogous to animals marrying people or polygamy. This is about Two adults. Not an adult and a dumb animal, and not about numerous people marrying one person.Bokanovsky said:
You do realize you are using red herring arguments not much different than the people who didnt want folks to inter-racially marry 50-60 years ago right?Hustlaz Ambition said:
I am not "throwing around" red herrings. You are just being deliberately obtuse. What makes 2 a magic number? Why is 2 okay and 3 is not? And what difference does it make if you throw a piece of property (which is what an animal is) into the mix as well?Jaylan said:
Whats so hard to understand? What two people do together in a marriage is not comparable to what 5 people do in another marriage. Especially when polygamy has LONG history of exploiting women and minors. So how about we talk about gay marriage between 2 individuals instead of using unrelated topics to try and bring it down.Bokanovsky said:
Again, your arguments are no different than those used in the past by folks who were against miscegenation. They said similar crap, that marriage was traditionally between people of the same race.
Ah, the favorite libtard shaming tactic - comparing gay marriage to miscegenation. Well, I have no problem saying that miscegenation should be against the law. Nothing good ever came from miscegenation. It just leads to all sorts of social problems (i.e. higher divorce rates for mixed couples, mixed race children feeling alienated because they don't have an identity, higher crime rates, etc.) I mean, look at countries with predominately mixed race populations (i.e. much of Latin America). They are all dirt poor and underdeveloped.Jaylan said:
5 people marrying does not affect me either. Nor does a woman marrying her chihuahua. If being personally affected is the yardstick by which morality is to be measured, marriage should be a free-for-all.Jaylan said:
It couldnt have anything to do with socialism, trade treaties, unstable governments or corrupt leadership. You know, much of the same things homogeneous Southeast Asia deals with(any area that is not mixed.) 
