Top ten reasons to vote Democrat.

[RickN]

#10. I vote Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry 
whatever I want. I’ve decided to marry my German Shepherd.

#9. I vote Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon at 15% isn’t.

#8. I vote Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.

#7. I vote Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

#6. I vote Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves. I am also thankful that we have a 911 service that gets police to your home in order to identify your body after a home invasion.

#5. I vote Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive and comfy.

#4. I vote Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits, and we should take away Social Security from those who paid into it.

#3. I vote Democrat because I believe that businesses should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the government for redistribution as the Democrat Party sees fit.

#2. I vote Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.

And, the #1 reason I vote Democrat is…….. because I think it’s better to pay $billions$ for oil to people who hate us, but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle, gopher, or fish here in America. We don’t care about the beetles, gophers, or fish in those other countries.

 

[Buddhaman]

I vote for whoever actually does the better job. And #10 is a straw man argument that ticks me off.

 

[Danny Tanner]

I vote for whoever actually does the better job. And #10 is a straw man argument that ticks me off.

Yep, because dogs can legally consent to marriage via written contract.

Even funnier is that same-sex marriage was practiced tens of thousands of years ago. It wasn't until the era of the Roman Empire when Catholics hijacked the concept and injected religion into the mix. So when people claim that we're redefining marriage, we're actually restoring it.

 

[Big_McLargehuge]

Yep, because dogs can legally consent to marriage via written contract.

Even funnier is that same-sex marriage was practiced tens of thousands of years ago. It wasn't until the era of the Roman Empire when Catholics hijacked the concept and injected religion into the mix. So when people claim that we're redefining marriage, we're actually restoring it.

It does worry me about the people who seem to not understand what "consent" means.

 

[ignerntbend]

Lots of kids reading the OSA. I caution all four of you. No more dirty talk. I won't warn you again.

 

[Big_McLargehuge]

Lots of kids reading the OSA. I caution all four of you. No more dirty talk. I won't warn you again.

I'll bet a benjamin that any kid browsing OSA already knows, understands, and uses on a regular basis all dirty words and innuendos.

 

[ignerntbend]

I'll bet a benjamin that any kid browsing OSA already knows, understands, and uses on a regular basis all dirty words and innuendos.

I assure you that none of the chiren reading OSA past one a.m. for lack of better entertainment are familiar with your inyourendos. Must I unsheathe my banhammer? Last warning.

 

[RickN]

I vote for whoever actually does the better job. And #10 is a straw man argument that ticks me off.

Actually they said that gay marriage was a strawman argument, that people being forced to participate against their beliefs was a strawman argument, that preachers being forced to perform a gay marriage was a strawman argument. I put nothing past them anymore and when I hear the term "strawman argument" I start expecting it to be the next thing the liberals push.

 

[Big_McLargehuge]

I assure you that none of the chiren reading OSA past one a.m. for lack of better entertainment are familiar with your inyourendos. Must I unsheathe my banhammer? Last warning.

Tell me THAT'S not inmyendo.

 

[RickN]

Even funnier is that same-sex marriage was practiced tens of thousands of years ago. It wasn't until the era of the Roman Empire when Catholics hijacked the concept and injected religion into the mix. So when people claim that we're redefining marriage, we're actually restoring it.

Actually not true. Same sex marriage was legal for a short while in ancient Rome and according to Wiki they were the first to legalize it and the first to outlaw it.

While it is a relatively new practice that same-sex couples are being granted the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly used by mixed-sexed couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world.[2] Various types of same-sex unions have existed, ranging from informal, unsanctioned relationships to highly ritualized unions.

A same-sex union was known in Ancient Greece and Rome,[2] ancient Mesopotamia,[3] in some regions of China, such as Fujian province, and at certain times in ancient European history.[4] These same-sex unions continued until Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. A law in the Theodosian Code (C. Th. 9.7.3) was issued in 342 AD by the Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans, which prohibited same-sex marriage in ancient Rome and ordered that those who were so married were to be executed. [5]

Same-sex marital practices and rituals were more recognized in Mesopotamia than in ancient Egypt. The Almanac of Incantations contained prayers favoring on an equal basis the love of a man for a woman and of a man for man.[6]

In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies.[7] Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.[8]

An example of egalitarian male domestic partnership from the early Zhou Dynasty period of China is recorded in the story of Pan Zhang & Wang Zhongxian. While the relationship was clearly approved by the wider community, and was compared to heterosexual marriage, it did not involve a religious ceremony binding the couple.[9]

Some early Western societies integrated same-sex relationships. The practice of same-sex love in ancient Greece often took the form of pederasty, which was limited in duration and in many cases co-existed with marriage.[10] Documented cases in this region claimed these unions were temporary pederastic relationships.[11][12][13][14][15][16][17] These unions created a moral dilemma for the Greeks and were not universally accepted.[18]

Among the Romans, there were instances of same-sex marriages being performed, as evidenced by emperors Nero who married an unwilling young boy [19][20][21] and (possibly - though it is doubted by many historians) the child emperor Elagabalus,[22] who both supposedly married a man, and by its outlaw in 342 AD in the Theodosian Code,[23] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[24]

In Hellenic Greece, the pederastic relationships between Greek men (erastes) and youths (eromenos) were similar to marriage in that the age of the youth was similar to the age at which women married (the mid-teens, though in some city states, as young as age seven), and the relationship could only be undertaken with the consent of the father.[citation needed] This consent, just as in the case of a daughter's marriage, was contingent on the suitor's social standing. The relationship consisted of very specific social and religious responsibilities and also had a sexual component. Unlike marriage, however, a pederastic relation was temporary and ended when the boy turned seventeen.

At the same time, many of these relationships might be more clearly understood as mentoring relationships between adult men and young boys rather than an analog of marriage. This is particularly true in the case of Sparta, where the relationship was intended to further a young boy's military training. While the relationship was generally lifelong and of profound emotional significance to the participants, it was not considered marriage by contemporary culture, and the relationship continued even after participants reached age 20 and married women, as was expected in the culture.[citation needed]

Numerous examples of same sex unions among peers, not age-structured, are found in Ancient Greek writings. Famous Greek couples in same sex relationships include Harmodius and Aristogiton, Pelopidas and Epaminondas and Alexander and Bogoas. However in none of these same sex unions is the Greek word for "marriage" ever mentioned. The Romans appear to have been the first to perform same sex marriages.

At least two of the Roman Emperors were in same-sex unions; and in fact, thirteen out of the first fourteen Roman Emperors held to be bisexual or exclusively homosexual.[25] The first Roman emperor to have married a man was Nero, who is reported to have married two other men on different occasions. First with one of his freedman, Pythagoras, to whom Nero took the role of the bride, and later as a groom Nero married a young boy to replace his young teenage concubine whom he had killed [26] named Sporus in a very public ceremony... with all the solemnities of matrimony, and lived with him as his spouse A friend gave the "bride" away "as required by law." The marriage was celebrated separately in both Greece and Rome in extravagant public ceremonies.[27] The Child Emperor Elagabalus referred to his chariot driver, a blond slave from Caria named Hierocles, as his husband.[28] He also married an athlete named Zoticus in a lavish public ceremony in Rome amidst the rejoicings of the citizens.[29]

It should be noted, however, that conubium existed only between a civis Romanus and a civis Romana (that is, between a male Roman citizen and a female Roman citizen), so that a marriage between two Roman males (or with a slave) would have no legal standing in Roman law (apart, presumably, from the arbitrary will of the emperor in the two aforementioned cases).[30]

Same-sex marriage was outlawed on December 16, 342 AD by the Christian emperors Constantius II and Constans. This law specifically outlaws marriages between men and reads as follows:

When a man “marries” in the manner of a woman, a “woman” about to renounce men, what does he wish, when sex has lost its significance; when the crime is one which it is not profitable to know; when Venus is changed into another form; when love is sought and not found? We order the statutes to arise, the laws to be armed with an avenging sword, that those infamous persons who are now, or who hereafter may be, guilty may be subjected to exquisite punishment. (Theodosian Code 9.7.3) [31]