I take it you happen to be reading out.com and came across this article.
I take it you happen to be reading out.com and came across this article.
dontcare wrote:
Some good news for a change. Marriage is a sacred bond, completed with vows, taken by a man and a woman, I agree with Vladimir Putin's decision.
If it's such a sacred bond, why do 50% of the marriages in the U.S. end in divorce?
It used to be banned in many states. The Supreme court flourished by Clinton and Obama struck down these bans and made it legal everywhere.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
dontcare wrote:
Some good news for a change. Marriage is a sacred bond, completed with vows, taken by a man and a woman, I agree with Vladimir Putin's decision.
If it's such a sacred bond, why do 50% of the marriages in the U.S. end in divorce?
50% is pretty darn good. That's approaching sacred for sure. We are talking about staying married with one person for a very good number of years, "'until death do us part" ! Nothing more sacred than that except for having people in congress for life. Then when you consider that just as many people have two divorces as there are married people who never do divorce , pretty darn sacred for those who really mean it.
To be fair, voting in Russia is a bit of a farce. A vote against Putin means you disappear or your vote gets lost.
Pendejon wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
If it's such a sacred bond, why do 50% of the marriages in the U.S. end in divorce?
50% is pretty darn good. That's approaching sacred for sure. We are talking about staying married with one person for a very good number of years, "'until death do us part" ! Nothing more sacred than that except for having people in congress for life. Then when you consider that just as many people have two divorces as there are married people who never do divorce , pretty darn sacred for those who really mean it.
My first first bond was more financial liability than sacred. Although we didn't have children, she only worked part-time at most. When we ended our bond, I had to pay 40% of the difference in our incomes for a period of time equal to 1/2 of the length of our marriage. Sacredly living together would have been far better for me.
Just now? Russia hasn't recognized gay marriage in its 1000+ years of existence
I thought it was already illegal there.
Keep in mind Russia just made it legal for women to drive trucks.
Great that the OP thinks this is so good for families. Not sure how keeping 2 people from marrying has any effect on a heterosexual couples marriage.
The Unkle wrote:
Responding to the will of the people
Exactly the reason I prefer the US as a constitutional republic where we do not have majority rule in an absolute sense.
barry 70 wrote:
It used to be banned in many states. The Supreme court flourished by Clinton and Obama struck down these bans and made it legal everywhere.
"flourished"? Kennedy, a Reagan appointee wrote the majority opinion.
I would have preferred this be done through legislation, but the 14th Amendment is on point as lawyers like to say.
Also, this was 6 years ago not sure two dudes (or women) marrying has caused the problems we face today unless COVID was cast upon us by a vengeful God like a hurricane.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Pendejon wrote:
50% is pretty darn good. That's approaching sacred for sure. We are talking about staying married with one person for a very good number of years, "'until death do us part" ! Nothing more sacred than that except for having people in congress for life. Then when you consider that just as many people have two divorces as there are married people who never do divorce , pretty darn sacred for those who really mean it.
My first first bond was more financial liability than sacred. Although we didn't have children, she only worked part-time at most. When we ended our bond, I had to pay 40% of the difference in our incomes for a period of time equal to 1/2 of the length of our marriage. Sacredly living together would have been far better for me.
Depends on the state and some details.
The fake news lying media doesn't cover it because Russia does not give a damn what SJWs think. The lying fake media is not covering the riots across the USA from the police officer murdeing a civilian because it does not fit their narrative. We need to revel against the fake news media, the controlling evil minded government and the scamming big pharmaceutical companies.
Luv2Run wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
My first first bond was more financial liability than sacred. Although we didn't have children, she only worked part-time at most. When we ended our bond, I had to pay 40% of the difference in our incomes for a period of time equal to 1/2 of the length of our marriage. Sacredly living together would have been far better for me.
Depends on the state and some details.
No common law marriage out here in California.
another example of christianity's hate and insatiable quest for domination
The Unkle wrote:
Responding to the will of the people
He is the will of the people.
Luv2Run wrote:
I thought it was already illegal there.
Legality was always a moot issue in any case. The only legal issues that couldn't be duplicated with a civil contract are the ones rooted in the biological realities of reproduction.
The fact that "civil unions" just weren't good enough is proof that "gay marriage" was always about using the law to force people to say "marriage." I saw that coming 20 years ago but people kept harping about religion and morals instead. Now here we are, disagree and it's "hate speech," you're fired, etc etc.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
Isn't Russia a foreign country? If he was murdering gay people it would be a story here, but banning gay marriage, not so much.
No its not a foriegn country.
Bootlickers in here cheering civil rights restrictions as usual.
Not a libertarian to be seen.
Christian conservatives are going the way of the dinosaur at least. Boomers are 'aging-out' to put it gently.
^ well, isn't that special
Bad Wigins wrote:
^ well, isn't that special
You're allowed to have a gay wedding in Russia if you can find 2600 other couples to join you at once :)
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it
Strava thinks the London Marathon times improved 12 minutes last year thanks to supershoes
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Clayton Murphy is giving some great insight into his training.
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
NAU women have no excuse - they should win it all at 2024 NCAA XC