Defense of Marriage Compromise Proposal

I hate to piss on your parade, but....
That's a kinky enough activity that I find it hard to believe that you hate to do it
I'd like to open the bidding on my divorce. That's right, for a price I will get straight married and divorced to create another slot. I'm guessing there is a gay marriage institution available to pay me if individuals are not willing to take personal action to increase the number of gay marriages. Come to think of it, straight people can bid too - to keep me from doing it (this year).

Plan ruined.
It just creates one more potential license and if you are serious about selling out on your marriage, dissolves one more non-serious marriage. Perhaps there should be some sort of penalty for offering to sell out on your marriage before actually filing for divorce. This would lower churning out license opportunities with fake marriages.

Perhaps also, the license sold could be only for the period of time that the marriage was actually in existence, making a 50-year marriage going into divorce more valuable than a 3 month marriage.

Another possibility is to make a sellable license only available if the marriage lasted a minimum amount of time such as 2 or 3 years. Another anti-churning measure could be to require a person that has been divorced to acquire an auctioned license to remarry, even if the remarriage is to the opposite gender.

Thanks for pointing out a potential issue for the apple pie industry lobbyists to resolve prior to drafting the bill.
 
In fairness, I think I am about as "serious" on criminalization as many who use the "defense of Marriage" phrase are serious about actually defending marriage. Many people that use the phrase "defending marriage" are usually not really serious about actually defending it in a meaningful way.

Oh, I got that. I think you're right about the last statement, too. But there's only so much you can do with the reductio ad absurdum approach, and I think in this case you're just a little off the target. If you really think people are hiding behind the phrase "defending marriage" (or better yet, "sacred institution") go straight after that.
 
I'm a polygamist, currently with two wives. Can I sell some of my divorces?
In the U.S., there would be only one "free" license for the first one. Perhaps you could purchase a license for the second wife. If you have any excess wives that are properly licensed, maybe you should be required to sell off the excess wife through the private market for straight monogamous marriage instead of being able to go the divorce-and-government-auction route on the excess inventory. That would push things more to the one man-one woman ideal.
 
This is America. So is this. And this and this, and yes, this.

This is the face of evil. Don't be fooled.
hulk.jpg


33.jpg


1372.jpg


image%7B0%7D_thumb%5B4%5D1.png


dym5l39a.jpg
 
Oh, I got that. I think you're right about the last statement, too. But there's only so much you can do with the reductio ad absurdum approach, and I think in this case you're just a little off the target. If you really think people are hiding behind the phrase "defending marriage" (or better yet, "sacred institution") go straight after that.
I'm not too Swift.
 
Never? Are you a parent?
Replace "never" with "most of the time and my first reaction" :p
 
Sorry wont go along with this if Divorce is to be criminalize.
 
what? marriages need to be defended now? quick! waterboard all potential divorcees! they are marriage-terrorists...

but seriously. i find it preposterous that a nation like the US who most of the time turns a blind eye towards polygamy (which is not something I have a problem with if it is between consenting adults) and marriage between more or less close relatives is up in arms about a non-issue like same-sex marriage (I realize it is not the US but merely a part of its inhabitants, forgive me for paraphrazing).

is it a religious thing? if so, please allow me to quote the West Wing:

"President Josiah Bartlet: Good. I like your show. I like how you call homosexuality an abomination.
Dr. Jenna Jacobs: I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President. The Bible does.
President Josiah Bartlet: Yes it does. Leviticus.
Dr. Jenna Jacobs: 18:22.
President Josiah Bartlet: Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I have you here. I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? While thinking about that, can I ask another? My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police? Here's one that's really important because we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you? One last thing: while you may be mistaking this for your monthly meeting of the Ignorant Tight-Ass Club, in this building, when the President stands, nobody sits. "

PS: for the record, I do not like my countrys stance on same-sex marriages either.
 
Yes I support this proposal. We should also legalize selling children into cannibalism to reduce poverty
 
That's a kinky enough activity that I find it hard to believe that you hate to do it

I's a figure of speech and I thought the "parade" rather funny. Don't be gross.
 
Back
Top Bottom