I normally don't read forwarded emails but this one caught my attention.
I feel that it will give an idea of what will happen when order is disrupted.



Wanna get married? ( A scene at City Hall in San Francisco )

"Next."

"Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license."

"Names?"

"Tim and Jim Jones."

"Jones? Are you related? I see a resemblance."

"Yes, we're brothers."

"Brothers? You can't get married."

"Why not? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"

"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"

"Incest?" No, we are not gay."

"Not gay? Then why do you want to get married?"

"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other. Besides, we don't have any
other prospects."

"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've been denied equal
protection under the law. If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman."

"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have. But just because
I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim."

"And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us just because we are not gay?"

"All right, all right. I'll give you your license. Next."

"Hi. We are here to get married."

"Names?"

"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."

"Who wants to marry whom?"

"We all want to marry each other."

"But there are four of you!"

"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert, Jane loves me and June, June
loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the
only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."

"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."

"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"

"No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that it's just for couples."

"Since when are you standing on tradition?"

"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."

"Who says? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. The more the better.
Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection
under the law. Give us a marriage license!"

"All right, all right. Next."

"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."

"In what names?"

"David Deets."

"And the other man?"

"That's all. I want to marry myself."

"Marry yourself? What do you mean?"

"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together.
Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."

"That does it! I quit!! You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"

Food for thought?

Hey that’s a good one Delroy the person issuing the magazine licenses did the right thing shut up and walk away. Your faith or belief dose not let you marry a type of person then don't marry them fine, but don't force your faith or belief on others. Christ never did.
It amazes me that Christians think they have the exclusive on marriage or unions. You try to make people think that marriage started form Christianity. That is hogwash. People were being married long before Christ walked the earth. Even in the same Bible you claim to be the word of the Creator there are marriages of more than 2 people. How about the Indians that lived in the Bahamas when Christopher Columbus came (and proved the world is round)? They had marriage that was not Christian.. Oh that’s right they were converted to Christianity. Where are they now??? Enslaved and murdered by Christians.
Marriage is not an exclusive to Christianity.

hmm..well if marriage had been going on before christ and the other points that you had listed...i guess that people can marry children since that too is another pre-christ act that is documented. like i said in another post it really doesnt matter because once one marriage barrier falls the others will steadily crumble whether people like to admit it or not. people will eventually be conducting commitment ceremonies with their pets considered to be life partners (i'm sure this has also come to pass). just my thoughts...

hmm..well if marriage had been going on before christ and the other points that you had listed...i guess that people can marry children since that too is another pre-christ act that is documented. like i said in another post it really doesnt matter because once one marriage barrier falls the others will steadily crumble whether people like to admit it or not. people will eventually be conducting commitment ceremonies with their pets considered to be life partners (i'm sure this has also come to pass). just my thoughts...


I am sure that when a pet reaches adulthood and can say, "I do" marriage is ok. Marriage of children is much older than Christianity. For Jews the age of adulthood is 13. Want more examples???

i dont need anymore age examples. i wasnt asking anything just trying to understand why people are only pushing for ONE kind of marriage when there are so many other un-supported groups out there. could it be that no one cares about them? do people find it immoral? i find this all very interesting.

then they are gonna find a rapist gene, that says rapists are mentally imbalanced, and should be treated and let go not imprisoned.

anyone know why we can't marry more than one person in the bahamas by the way or why we can't have concubines. just curious

There has to be a clear, concise, and constitutional definition of marriage to avoid cases of absurdity as was posed in Delroys post. This entire issue of same sex marriage does pose what I call a "slippery slope issue". WHere do we draw the line???

There has to be a clear, concise, and constitutional definition of marriage to avoid cases of absurdity as was posed in Delroys post. This entire issue of same sex marriage does pose what I call a "slippery slope issue". WHere do we draw the line???


Actually the line has already been drawn. This is a dead subject in America now after a unanimous vote to ban this practice in the states.