I agree with you. and also, for those who use the quote "separation of church and state" selectively; the way it's SUPPOSED to be meant, is that the state cannot have a say in which religion is allowed in the US and cannot make laws telling the church what they must preach. This does not however, mean that a church, or religion can do whatever they please, and the state can't say nay about just bc it's under the blanket of "the church". Federal and state laws, are still federal and state laws. To quote Thomas Jefferson and James Madison on the issue:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. (Jefferson)

August 15, 1789. Mr. [Peter] Sylvester [of New York] had some doubts...He feared it [the First Amendment] might be thought to have a tendency to abolish religion altogether...Mr. [Elbridge] Gerry [of Massachusetts] said it would read better if it was that "no religious doctrine shall be established by law."...Mr. [James] Madison [of Virginia] said he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that "Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law."...[T]he State[s]...seemed to entertain an opinion that under the clause of the Constitution...it enabled them [Congress] to make laws of such a nature as might...establish a national religion; to prevent these effects he presumed the amendment was intended...Mr. Madison thought if the word "National" was inserted before religion, it would satisfy the minds of honorable gentlemen...He thought if the word "national" was introduced, it would point the amendment directly to the object it was intended to prevent. (Madison)

well you are commenting in Rovers forums under a thread I started about scissoring and butt-pirating, so maybe slightly dumb isn't sooo far off

BUT i like that you always agree with me so you get an internet high-five!!

You can't handle the truth.

Yea yea yea. Church and State and all that. I agree with Rover. If they want to be miserable like all the straight couples, why not let them?

I think there is also some kind of fear that procreation will drop if everyone pairs up with the same sex. But with all the porn and toys and shit like that I think the population is doing just fine. If not, then I guess only Porn stars will be having babies cuz they're the only ones fucking!

Actually, if everyone goes same sex, then there would probably only be same sex porn...

Yep. We're fucked!

I think the world population is doing so fine it's ruinning the planet..

Gay marriage should be legal, along with prostitution...

only reason Duji is against legal prostitution is because then she'd NEVER get a date let alone a husband

I hate hearing the reproduction argument, too. Gay people can't get married because then there's no reproduction. Well...some women can't have children either. Some men don't have a sperm count. So should it be illegal for them to get married too?

Gingy, are you asking because you want to stick your penis in another mans pooper?

Oh I missed you Gingy!

well, Lishy maybe you should take your fingers out of your patients assholes all day long and use it to post more


DxLISH wrote:


..and yes

Lets all meet at Chick fil A to discuss this