About Me

Name: vladseventysix
Email: vladseventysix@yahoo.com
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

2 Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 41

Posted by vladseventysix on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 9:00:11 PM
-----If the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with human physical relations, then how can a man and a woman be legally acknowledged physically mating with each other with the Institution of Marriage? Same sex marriage advocates claim that the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with human physical relations. They must make this claim in order to have any case for same sex marriage because if the Institution of Marriage does have anything to do with human physical relations it is most assuredly a man and a woman physically mating with each other. For example, a man and a woman physically mating with each other are infinitely superior to the Institution of Marriage. They always have been and they always will be! A man and a woman physically mating with each other is how the human species perpetuates homosexuals! Same sex marriage advocates also claim that the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with same gender physical relations, that is to say "homosexual relations". However, there are two different views of human physical relations that exist in physical reality. Each is valid in and of itself. The first view is that when a human being physically touches another human being then human physical relations exist in physical reality. When they stop physically touching each other then human physical relations no longer exist in physical reality. This view is valid in and of itself. The other view is that all human relations are inherently physically mating less. This view is also valid in and of itself.----When a man and a woman don't physically touch other, stand two feet apart from each other and say "hi" to each other, that is an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. They never physically touched each other so of course their relationship is physically mating less and their relationship exists in physical reality because they exist in physical reality and by comparison to them physically mating with each other in physical reality. When a man and a woman shake hands with each other that is also an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. Whether there is any physical contact or not the relationship between a man and a woman is always physically mating less human relations in physical reality unless and untill they physically mate with each other.----When a man and a woman are physically mating with each other that is not an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. Therefore there are two types of human physical relations that exist in physical reality, mating and mating less, and this is physical reality that human beings can do absolutely nothing about. Please note that this dichotomy of human physical relations does not apply to same gender relations. Two members of the same gender shaking hands is not an example of "physically homosexual less" human relations in physical reality. It is an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. That there is no analogous dichotomy of same gender physical relations in physical reality is physical reality human beings can do absolutely nothing about, not religious dogma.----Separation of Church and State properly applied would mean that the State has its Institution of Marriage with public civil law, the Church would have its Institution of Marriage with religious law, and they can have absolutely nothing to do with each other. The State could not legally acknowledge the Church Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form or have anything to do with the Church Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form. The Church could not legally acknowledge the State Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form or have anything to do with the State Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form. However, nobody wants Separation of Church and State to be properly applied! Why does the State legally acknowledge the Church Institution of Marriage when it should not be doing so? 1. Because the State and Church have always agreed that the Institution of Marriage legally acknowlegdes a man and a woman physically mating with each other. 2. Tradition! It's an old dead white guy tradition that desperately needs to be as dead as they are.----So then how are same sex marriage advocates misapplying Separation of Church and State to the Institution of Marriage? When a man and a woman walk into a church to get married they are considered by that church to be physically mating less with each other. After the marriage ceremony that church considers them to be legally acknowledged by that church's religious law as physically mating with each other, i.e., husband and wife. Since the State legally acknowledges this marriage with public civil law, same sex marriage advocates claim that, due to separation of Church and State, the State must legally acknowledge them with public civil law as being physically mating less with each other, because the Church legally acknowledges them as physically mating with each other with that church's religious law. So called "Separation of Church and State". Please note that with same sex marriage the State will no longer legally acknowledge a man and a woman legally married to each other as being husband and wife, that is to say as physically mating with each other. The State will legally acknowledge them as being "participant A" and "participant B", that is to say as being physically mating less with each other. This is the so called "equality" of same sex marriage because all same gender relations are and can only be physically mating less.----There is no such thing as equality as far as the Institution of Marriage is concerned. In fact that's the point of the Institution of Marriage, to differentiate opposite gender physical relations and put those differentiated opposite gender physical relations on a pedestal with special legal status, rights, benefits, and privileges. That's what the Institution of Marriage is, that's what the Institution of Marriage does. It legally acknowledges that opposite gender physical relations are unequal in physical reality. Which is why same gender relations have absolutely nothing to do with the Institution of Marriage. However same sex marriage will flip this dichotomy around by legally differentiating same gender physical relations instead of opposite gender physical relations. That is to say with same sex marriage a man and a woman will be legally acknowledged as being homosexual physical relations (i.e., homosexual "union") because a man and a woman can be legally acknowledged as being physically mating less. With same sex marriage two human beings shaking hands will be "physically homosexual less" human relations instead of being physically mating less human relations. There is only one Institution of Marriage! The only question is which human physical relations is this one and only Institution of Marriage going to differentiate and there are only two options, opposite gender (physically mating from physically mating less), or same gender,(homosexual from homosexual less, even though the are both physically mating less, i.e., exactly the same thing). Which is why with same sex marriage a man and a woman physically mating with each other has absolutely nothing to with the Redefined Institution of Marriage because in same sex marriage theory all human relations are inherently "homosexual less" not inherently mating less. It would be nice if there were a marital paradigm that could include  both a man and a woman physically mating with each other and physically mating less human relations. However, do to the nature of the beast that is not possible.----Human beings can legally acknowledge the existence of human physical relations with public criminal law, (rape, incest, prostitution), with public civil law, (Institution of Marriage), and with religious law, (Institution of Marriage, adultry). To say that it is absolutely impossible to legally acknowledge the existence of human physical relations with public civil law or with religious law is of course a big fat P.C. mindf**k lie! Perhaps heterosexuals should exercise their inherent authority by creating an Institution of Mating to legally acknowledge the existence of human physical relations with public civil law so a man and a woman can be legally acknowledged physically mating with each other, other than being a criminal offense! The human species does not revolve around homosexual relations in physical reality. The human species does revolve around a man and a woman physically mating with each other in physical reality. If that is not "Politically Correct" well that's just to damned bad. I would like to think that there is a very special place reserved in hell for "Political Correctness" and same sex "marriage" and it is right next to Adolph Hitler!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 41

Posted by vladseventysix on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 3:09:10 PM
If the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with human physical relations, then how can a man and a woman be legally acknowledged physically mating with each other with the Institution of Marriage? Same sex marriage advocates claim that the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with human physical relations. They must make this claim in order to have any case for same sex marriage because if the Institution of Marriage does have anything to do with human physical relations it is most assuredly a man and a woman physically mating with each other. For example, a man and a woman physically mating with each other are infinitely superior to the Institution of Marriage. They always have been and they always will be! A man and a woman physically mating with each other is insanely important because that is how the human species perpetuates homosexuals! Same sex marriage advocates also claim that the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with same gender physical relations, that is to say "homosexual relations". However, there are two different views of human physical relations that exist in physical reality. Each view is valid in and of itself.  The first view is that when a human being physically touches another human being then human physical relations exist in physical reality. When they stop physically touching each other then human physical relations no longer exist in physical reality. This view is valid in and of itself. The other view is that all human relations are inherently physically mating less. This view is also valid in and of itself. ---When a man and a woman don't physically touch each other, stand two feet apart and say "hi" to each other, that is an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. They never physically touched each other so of course their relationship is physically mating less and there relationship exists in physical reality because they both exist in physical reality and by comparison to them physically mating with each other in physical reality. When a man and a woman shake hands with each other that is also an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. Whether there is any physical contact or not the relationship between a man and a woman is always physically mating less human relations in physical reality unless and until they physically mate with each other.---When a man and a woman are physically mating with each other that is not an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. Therefore there are two types of human physical relations that exist in physical reality, mating and mating less, and this is physical reality human beings can do absolutely nothing about. Please note that this dichotomy of human physical relations that exist in physical reality does not apply to same gender relations. Two members of the same gender shaking hands is not an example of "physically homosexual less" physical relations in physical reality. It is an example physically mating less human relations in physical reality. Two members of the same gender trying to physically mate with each other, i.e., "homosexual relations", is also an example of physically mating less human relations in physical reality. That there is no analogous dichotomy of same gender physical relations in physical reality is physical reality human beings can do absolutely nothing about, not religious dogma. ---- Seperation of Church and State properly applied would mean that the State would have its Institution of Marriage with public civil law, the Church would have its Institution of Marriage with religious law, and they can have absolutely nothing to do with each other. The State could not legally acknowledge the Church Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form or have anything to do with the Church Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form. The Church could not legally acknowledge the State Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form or have anything to do with the State Institution of Marriage in any way shape or form. However nobody wants Seperation of Church and State to be properly applied! Why does the State legally acknowledge the Church Institution of Marriage when it should not be doing so? 1. Because State and Church have always agreed that the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledges that a man and a woman are physically mating with each other. 2. Tradition! It's an old dead white guy tradition that desperately needs to be as dead as they are! ---- So then, how are same sex marriage advocates misapplying Seperation of Church and State to the Institution of Marriage? When a man and a woman walk into a church to get married they are considered by that church to be physically mating less with each other. After the marriage ceremony that church considers them to be legally acknowledged by that church's religious law as physically mating with each other, i.e., husband and wife. Since the State legally acknowledges this marriage with public civil law, same sex marriage advocates claim that, due to seperation of Church and State, the State must legally acknowledge them with public civil law as being physically mating less with each other because the Church legally acknowledges them as physically mating with each other with that church's religious law. So called "Seperation of Church and State". Please note that with same sex marriage the State will no longer legally acknowledge a man and a woman married to each other as being husband and wife, that is to say as physically mating with each other. The State will legally acknowledge them as being "participant A" and "participant B", that is to say as being physically mating less with each other. This is the so called "equality" of same sex marriage because all same gender relations are and can only be physically mating less. ---- There is no such thing as equality as far as the Institution of Marriage is concerned. In fact that's the point of the Institution of Marriage, to differentiate opposite gender physical relations and put those differentiated opposite gender physical relations on a pedestal with special legal status, rights, benefits, and privileges. That's what the Institution of Marriage is, that's what the Institution of Marriage does. It legally acknowledges that opposite gender physical relations are unequal. Which is why same gender relations have absolutely nothing to do with the Institution of Marriage. However same sex marriage will flip this dichotomy around by legally differentiating same gender physical relations instead of opposite gender physical relations. That is to say with same sex marriage a man and a woman will be legally acknowledged as being homosexual physical relations because a man and a woman can be legally acknowledged as being physically mating less. With same sex marriage two human beings shaking hands will be "homosexual less" physical relations instead of mating less physical relations. There is only one Institution of  Marriage! The only question is which human physical relations is this one and only Institution of Marriage going to differentiate and there are only two options, opposite gender, (physically mating from physically mating less), or same gender, (homosexual from homosexual less, even though they are both physically mating less i.e., the same exact thing). Which is why with same sex marriage a man and a woman physically mating with each other has absolutely nothing to do with the Redefined Institution of Marriage because in theory all human relations are inherently "homosexual less". It would be nice if there were a marital paradigm that could include both a man and a woman physically mating with each other and physically mating less human relations. However do to the nature of the beast that is not possible.---- Human beings can legally acknowledge the existence of human physical relations with public criminal law, (rape, incest, prostitution), public civil law, (Institution of Marriage), and with religious law, (Institution of Marriage, adultry). To say that it is impossible to legally acknowledge the existence of human physical relations with public civil law or with religious law is of course a big fat P.C. mindf**k lie! The human species does not revolve around homosexual relations in physical reality. The human species does revolve around heterosexual relations in physical reality. If that is not "Politically Correct" well that's just to damned bad! I would like to think that there is a very special place reserved in hell for "Political Correctness" and same sex marriage and it is right next to Adolph Hitler!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 40

Posted by vladseventysix on Thursday, May 07, 2009 12:12:44 PM
Question--Does the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledge a man and a woman physically mating with each other? If the answer is yes that means that same gender relations have absolutely nothing to do with the Institution of Marriage. If the answer is no that means that the only way human beings can legally acknowledge a man and a woman physically mating with each other with public law is with public criminal law as being a criminal offense, and that it is absolutely impossible to legally acknowledge a man and a woman physically mating with each other, other than being a criminal offense with public civil law. Question--If the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with a man and a woman physically mating with each other, then how can a man and a woman be legally acknowledged physically mating with each other with the Institution of Marriage? Answer--They can not! They can only be legally acknowledged as being physically mating less with each other, just like all same gender relations are physically mating less. So called "equality". Question--Why can't the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledge same gender relations as being physically mating? Answer--Because a man and a woman can be legally acknowledged as being physically mating less. Observation--Whether the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledges a man and a woman physically mating with each other as being the perpetuation of the human species, or whether the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledges a man and a woman being physically mating less with each other as being the perpetuation of the human species, either way the perpetuation of the human species will continue! Whether the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledges a man and a woman physically mating with each other as being the perpetuation of the human species, or whether the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledges homosexual relations as being the perpetuation of the human species, either way the perpetuation of the human species will continue! Isn't that funny? Or doesn't that explain alot! The law could legally acknowledge two dogs smelling each others butts as being the perpetuation of the human species and the perpetuation of the human species would continue anyways. So then, who's to argue with the precious, precious law?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 39

Posted by vladseventysix on Sunday, May 03, 2009 3:52:05 PM
Why is the State compelled to legally acknowledge a religion's Institution of Marriage? Answer: Separation of Church and State! Well, what do you know! Conservatives and same sex marriage advocates have common ground. Neither wants Separation of Church and State to be applied properly to the Institution of Marriage. Adolf Hitler had a good idea when he said you should lump your enemies together!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason their has never been same sex marriage. An update 38

Posted by vladseventysix on Monday, April 27, 2009 8:04:27 PM
Separation of Church and State properly applied means the State should not legally acknowledge any religious institutions, including the Institution of Marriage. When a man and a woman obtain a marriage license from the State they should not be able to go to ANY church or religion to get married. They should ONLY be able to get married by the State, using State public civil law to get married with a State marriage license. The State can have absolutely nothing to do with ANY Church or religious Institution of Marriage, and any Church or religion can have absolutely nothing to do with any State Institution of Marriage. A man and a woman may choose one or the other or both. However if they choose only the Church Institution of Marriage their marriage will only be acknowledged by that Church and not by the State, and vice versa. Human beings can legally acknowledge human physical relations with State public criminal law ( rape, incest, prostitution ) and with religious law ( Institution of Marriage ). In fact human beings can legally acknowledge human physical relations with any type of law if human beings are willing to acknowledge it. For example, State public civil law, i.e., the State Institution of Marriage. Same sex marriage advocates claim that since the Church's Institution of Marriage legally acknowledges human physical relations with Church law this means that , due to Seperation of Church and State, it is absolutely impossible for the State's Institution of Marriage to legally acknowledge human physical relations. The three s's of political correctness slick, subtle, and sneaky.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 37.

Posted by vladseventysix on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 11:24:11 AM
Same sex marriage will legally acknowledge homosexual relations as being the perpetuation of the human species because a man and a woman as a couple can be legally acknowledged physically mating less, just like homosexual relations can be legally acknowledged physically mating less. Whether the Institution of Marriage legally acknowledges ALL marriages physically mating, or ALL marriages physically mating less, either way the perpetuation of the human species will continue! Isn't that funny, or doesn't that explain a lot? There's an old saying: "Fact is stranger than fiction"!
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 36.

Posted by vladseventysix on Saturday, February 28, 2009 8:24:02 PM
Can you imagine someone making the claim that the criminal charge of rape has absolutely nothing to do with human physical relations, absolutely nothing to do with human beings legally acknowledging the existence of human physical relations? Isn't it odd human beings can legally acknowledge human physical relations with the criminal charge of rape, but, that it is absolutely impossible for human beings to legally acknowledge human physical relations with the Institution of Marriage?
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 35.

Posted by vladseventysix on Sunday, February 08, 2009 3:08:10 PM

To the Editor: Perhaps heterosexuals should exercise their inherent authority by creating an Institution of Mating. Same sex marriage advocates claim the Institution of Marriage is a human construction, therefore human beings can construct more than one Institution of Union. Human beings can legally acknowledge the existence of physical mating as being rape, as being incest, as being prostitution, as being a sexual offense. Same sex marriage advocates claim the Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with human physical relations, absolutely nothing to do with human beings legally acknowledging the existence of human physical relations.Therefore, it is absolutely impossible for a man and a woman to be legally acknowledged as physically mating with the Institution of Marriage. With the Institution of Marriage a man and a woman can only be legally acknowledged as physically mating less. Perhaps heterosexuals should exercise their inherent authority by creating an Institution of Mating to legally acknowledge the existence of physical mating other than being a sexual offence, so a man and a woman can be legally acknowledged as physically mating other than being a sexual offence. If heterosexuals cannot legally acknowledge a man and a woman as physically mating other than being a sexual offence by what physical mating is, i.e.,  THE physical union of a man and a woman--then heterosexuals will legally acknowledge a man and a woman as physically mating other than being a sexual offence by what physical mating is not, e.g., first and foremost physical mating is not same gender relations. Heterosexuals must exercise their inherent authority by creating a more perfect Institution of Union. Sincerely, I prefer the term witch hunter.You may address me as Mr. Witch Hunter. P.S. Oh ye of little faith.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 34.

Posted by vladseventysix on Monday, January 26, 2009 2:01:57 PM

Perhaps heterosexuals should start an Institution of Mating that does legally acknowledge the existence of mating other than being a sexual offense. With same sex marriage a man and a woman will  legally be acknowledged as being mating less relations. So, am I to conclude equality like beauty is in the eye of the beholder? Perhaps same sex marriage advocates should stop playing with fire.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air Tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 33.

Posted by vladseventysix on Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:32:26 PM

Will somebody please explain how a man and a woman can be married as heterosexual relations if gender, mating, and baby, all have absolutely nothing to do with the Institution of Marriage. So, am I to conclude a man and a woman can be married as non-heterosexual relations? So, am I to conclude equality like beauty is in the eye of the beholder? And if same sex marriage advocates are wrong then what are the consequences and why should those consequences be re-evaluated? So, am I to conclude the claim of infallibility for same sex marriage is based on personal faith? Nobody, but, nobody has the right to be liked. Nobody, but, nobody has that Royal Prerogative. The case against same sex marriage can be made without calling anybody any names. There's an old saying,  "Winston! We do it for the power"! Air tight!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 32.

Posted by vladseventysix on Friday, November 07, 2008 1:10:40 PM

The Institution of Marriage differentiates opposite-gender human relations. Which is why it is absolutely impossible for opposite-gender human relations to share the Institution of Marriage. Which is why it has never been done. Matingless opposite-gender human relations and heterosexual human relations that do not perpetuate the human species are not the same human relations in physical reality. They are both opposite-gender human relations in physical reality, they both have the same result ( i.e.,  they both do not perpetuate the human species) in physical reality, none the less matingless opposite-gender human relations and heterosexual human relations that do not perpetuate the human species are two completely different and seperate human relations. The Institution of Marriage differentiates these two opposite-gender human relations which is why it is absolutely impossible for these two opposite-gender human relations to share the Institution of Marriage. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 31

Posted by vladseventysix on Saturday, July 26, 2008 4:18:46 PM

So, am I to conclude as far as human relations are concerned, human beings can legally acknowledge heterosexual human relations as being rape, as being incest, as being prostitution, but, it is absolutely impossible for human beings to legally acknowledge heterosexual human relations as being the Perpetuation of the Human Species as far as human relations are concerned? Therefore, there are four options: 1. Abolish the Institution of Marriage. 2. Heterosexual relations are legally the Perpetuatiun of the Human Species. 3. Homosexual relations are legally the Perpetuation of the Human Species. 4. Heterosexual relations and homosexual relations are both legally the Perpetuation of the Human Species.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 29

Posted by vladseventysix on Friday, July 18, 2008 7:11:23 PM

There are four options: 1. Abolish the Institution of Marriage for violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. Heterosexual relations are legally the Perpetuation of the Human Species. 3. Homosexual relations are legally the Perpetuation of the Human Species. 4. Heterosexual relations and homosexual relations are BOTH legally the Perpetuation of the Human Species. With option four heterosexuals and homosexuals would constantly battle across the entire spectrum of humanity socially, culturally, societally, civilizationally, over which relations IS the Perpetuation of the Human Species. However short or long it takes for this battle to be resolved homosexuals can only lose in the end. And when that day comes the phrase "NEVER AGAIN" will be given whole new meaning so choose well! Of course option three is even worse and is pure black vile evil. Perhaps there is a fifth option, heterosexuals can start an Institution of Mating that does have something to do with the Perpetuation of the Human Species. That way homosexuals can have the Institution of Marriage which has nothing to do with the Perpetuation of the Human Species and heterosexuals can have the Institution of Mating which does have something to do with the Perpetuation of the Human Species. I wonder if marriage is an euphemism for mating?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 21

Posted by vladseventysix on Monday, June 23, 2008 6:08:43 PM
 Human beings and human relations exist in both human objective (i.e., physical) reality as well as in human subjective reality. In human objective (i.e., physical) reality, as far as human relations are concerned, the perpetuation of the human species is predicated on mating, heterosexual human relations in objective (i.e., physical) reality. In human subjective reality, as far as human relations, that exist in human subjective reality, (e.g., the law) are concerned, the perpetuation of the human species is predicated on mating, heterosexual human relations that exist in human subjective reality (i.e., the law, marriage!). Human beings accurately matching-up what the perpetuation of the human species is predicated on in human subjective reality, mating, heterosexual human relations in human subjective reality, (i.e., the law, marriage) with what the perpetuation of the human species is predicated on in human objective (i.e. physical) reality, mating, heterosexual human relations in human objective (i.e., physical) reality, forms the Institution of Marriage. And it's that simple. Human beings accurately matching-up human relations in human subjective reality (i.e., the law, marriage), with human relations in human objective (i.e., physical)  reality (i.e., mating, heterosexual human relations) forms the Institution of Marriage. Not too many people know and/or understand this simple fact. What is difficult to understand is that a man and a woman (in objective reality) can be mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality) or, a man and a woman (in objective reality) can be matingless opposite gender human relations (in objective reality) but, a man and a woman (in objective reality) can not be both mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality) and matingless opposite gender human relations (in objective reality) at the same time (in objective reality)! The Institution of Marriage legally predicates the perpetuation of the human species on mating, heterosexual human relations, in objective reality. With the Institution of Marriage when a man and a woman (in objective reality) get married (i.e., have the perpetuation of the human species legally predicated on them) they can only be legally married as being mating, heterosexual human relations in objective reality. With the Institution of Marriage when a man and a woman (in objective reality) get married (i.e, have the perpetuation of the human species predicated on them) it is absolutely impossible for them to be legally married as being matingless opposite gender human relations in objective reality.  And the reverse is true!  A matingless Institution of (same sex) Marriage will legally predicate the perpetuation of the human species on matingless human relations in objective reality. With a matingless  Institution of (same sex) Marriage when man and a woman (in objective reality) get married (i.e., have the perpetuation of the human species predicated on them) they can only be legally married as being matingless opposite gender human relations in objective reality. With a matingless Institution of (same sex) Marriage when a man and a woman (in objective reality) get married (i.e., have the perpetuation of the human species predicated on them) it is absolutely impossible for them to be legally married as being mating, heterosexual human relations in objective reality.  And that is the one and only way the Institution of Marriage between a man and a woman in objective reality, can be redefined in objective reality, i.e., from mating heterosexual human relations in objective reality to matingless opposite gender human relations in objective reality. So, say farewell to precious, precious, equality of human relations at least as far as the Institution of Marriage is concerned. The Institution of Marriage legally predicates the perpetuation of the human species on mating heterosexual human relations (in objective reality). It doesn't matter if that mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality) occurs for a trillionth of a second (in objective reality), or, if that mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality)  occurs for twenty years (in objective reality). The Institution of Marriage legally predicates the perpetuation of the human species on that trillionth of a second (in objective reality) or, on that twenty years (in objective reality), i.e., on mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality). And, of course, the reverse is true. A matingless Institution of (same sex) Marriage will legally predicate the perpetuation of the human species on matingless human relations (in objective reality). It doesn't matter if that matingless human relations (in objective reality) occurs for a trillionth of a second (in objective reality), or, if  that matingless human relations (in objective reality) occurs for twenty years (in objective reality). A matingless Institution of (same sex) Marriage will legally predicate the perpetuation of the human species on that trillionth of a second (in objective reality), or on that twenty years (in objective reality) i.e., on matingless human relations ( in objective reality). It is absolutely impossible (in and of itself) for the legal relationship between marriage (what the perpetuation of the human species is predicated on in human (legal) subjective reality, mating heterosexual human relations in human (legal) subjective reality) and what the perpetuation of the human species is predicated on in objective reality, mating, heterosexual human relations in human objective reality, to be equal. By legally forming the Institution of Marriage, marriage (legal subjective reality) makes mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality) legally superior (in legal subjective reality) to mating, heterosexual human relations( in objective reality). So, say farewell to precious, precious equality of human relations at least as far as the Institution of Marriage is concerned (again). This of also woks both ways, i.e., with a matingless Institution of (same sex) Marriage. So, therefore the question is which matingless human relations (in objective reality)? A hug? A kiss? A handshake? A pat on the back? A punch on the nose? Anal sodomy? A woman can not physically enter another woman with her reproductive organs, but a man can physically enter another man with his reproductive organ via anal sodomy. A man can also (besides mating) physically enter a woman with his reproductive organ via anal sodomy. So, am I to conclude a matingless Institution of (same sex) Marriage will legally predicate the perpetuation of the human species on anal sodomy (in objective reality) and that all marriages will legally be anal sodomy (in objective reality)? Perhaps same sex marriage means what it says and will legally predicate the perpetuation of the human species on matingless same sex relations i.e., two males performing anal sodomy. Perhaps, (though unlikely) any Institution of Marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the perpetuation of the human species in objective reality. Perhaps, any Institution of Marriage  involves only human relations in human subjective reality, especially human subjective reality of the law. In that case,  just what exactly and precisely word for word is this so called right, that supersedes the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, that it is incumbent upon the state to legally sanction intimate adult relations (objective, or, subjective)? Shouldn't the Institution of Marriage be abolished? Doesn't true equality of human relations demand it! The Institution of Marriage can be stigmatizing to the unmarried, discriminatory to the unmarried, preferential treatment for the married, all those nasty, nasty things that Political Correctness adamantly and vehemently insists must be completely, totally, 100 per cent, absolutely, zero tolerance eliminated from society to achieve precious, precious equality of human relations. The Institution of Marriage can be abolished to achieve equality of human relations, but, mating, heterosexual human relations can not be abolished to achieve equality of human relations, not unless one wants the equality of extinction! Shouldn't the Institution of Marriage be abolished? Doesn't true equality of human relations demand it? So, say farewell (yet again) to precious, precious, equality of human relations at least as far as the Institution of Marriage is concerned. The answer is yes. The United States Supreme Court has no choice, as per the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, but, to strike down the Institution of Marriage as unconstitutional. There's an old saying, "What's good for the goose is good for the gander". Therefore I propose a Constitutional Amendment that will legally predicate the perpetuation of the human species on mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality). The Constitutional legal definition of mating, heterosexual human relations (in objective reality) will be, "any mating heterosexual human relations between a man and a woman in objective (i.e., physical) reality". The Constitutional legal verification will be, "from between twenty four hours after and one year after a man (in objective reality) and a woman (in objective reality) receive official legal State sanction by the State that the perpetuation of the human species has been legally predicated on them as being mating, heterosexual human relations in objective reality, the man and the woman must both sign an affidavit affirming that they have consummated (by mating in objective reality) their official State sanction. If  the man and/or woman do not sign the affirmation affidavit with in the prescribed time, then the official State sanction they have received shall be automatically and instantly annulled. If the man and the woman lie on their affirmation affidavit then the Constitutional legal penalty shall be, a one dollar fine, non-negotiable. This Constitutional Amendment will give the State Constitutional authority to legally sanction mating, heterosexual human relations and it will be written into the Amendment that this authority supersedes the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. There is absolutely nothing wrong with human beings accurately matching-up their subjective reality, (especially subjective reality of the law) with human beings and human relations in objective reality. In fact it's a very good idea! Unless, of course, your P.C. Mindf***ed.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Air tight! The real reason there has never been same sex marriage. An update 20

Posted by vladseventysix on Saturday, June 21, 2008 5:31:19 PM

Let's pass legislation (i.e., Constitutional Amendment) legally predicating the perpetuation of the human species on mating, heterosexual human relations! This law will apply equally to the rich as well as to the poor. So, am I to conclude equality like beauty is in the eye of the beholder? And if same sex marriage advocates are wrong then what are the consequences and why should those consequences be reevaluated? This action is the only viable course to take. And yes, it will change the Institution of Marriage in this country. There is no choice. This must be done!

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous123Next »