The government is about to grow exponentially. Unnatural “marriage” requires very expensive contortions.
Natural marriage actually limits government spending and control.
41 comments
The government you're talking about must be working very differently to the one who rules my country. To my knowledge, the exact same "contortions" are required for all kinds of legal marriage, none of which is "unnatural". The government does some kind of check to see that I'm not already married, underage or closely related to the future wife/husband, which is basically a computer search. After the marriage they register me and my husband/wife as married to each other. VERY expensive contortions, indeed!
I wonder what fwdude imagines happens in "unnatural" marriages, that don't happen in "natural" marriages?
No marriage is natural, really, when you think about it. The natural thing is to get together with the person you're attracted to, for as long as you're attracted to that person, and then move on to the next attractive person.
What do these people actually mean by "growing government"? More Laws? More people hired by the authorities? More taxes?
Same-sex marriage won't produce more laws, that's absurd. It's possible that more people will be hired, but only because they have more business to attend to. It won't produce more taxes, actually even less, since same-sex marriages will also get a tax brake. So basically they are against people getting hired.
"Natural" marriage?
Humans are the only animals who get married. I've yet to see a pair of married cats, or starlings, or sharks.
ALL marriage is unnatural.
Let's see....straight marriage is the one that produces children couples can't afford, thus creating more need for big gubmint welfare and other services, and more gubmint control in the form of abortion crackdowns (which appears to be all the gubmint's doing these days). Then there's its 50 percent failure rate, which consumes massive amounts of gubmint spending on family court for divorces and child custody.
Looks like straight marriage is the less fiscally conservative option. We'd beter outlaw that.
Pirates prevent global warming.
@UHM:
"What do these people actually mean by "growing government"? More Laws? More people hired by the authorities? More taxes?"
In this case the OP is working off emotional reactions, not the actual meaning of the words.
Growing government and gay marriage cause the 'I hate liberals' reaction, so the two things are associated. It's like the one were muslims and atheists hate America so they are cooperating to impose sharia law on America. If you stop and think about it it makes no sense, but fundies never do that they keep running the crazy train at full throttle.
Same-sex marriage means fewer entries in the phone books! Won't someone think of the PHONE BOOKS!
(Wail, wail, gnash, gnash... What a world! What a world! mumble-mumble....)
(emph-ass-is added):
"The government is about to grow exponentially."
"Natural marriage actually limits government spending and control."
"Unnatural “marriage” requires very expensive contortions. "
Not as much as yours , fud00d. Your BS makes Shaun T's 'Insanity Workout' seem like Pilates for the over-60s, and his costs less than £100.
'Government growing exponentially ? Speaking as a "Star Trek" fan, give me just one good reason why a world run by the United Federation of Planets; a world where war, hunger, want, ignorance and bigotry are eliminated, is such a bad thing?
What the hell is "natural marriage?" Marriage is a man made construct that is practiced by only one species, humans, thus, by definition, marriage is NOT natural.
How so? How does limiting something shrink the size of government? Every other ban in all of written history has resulted in spending MORE money because now you have to enforce the ban and set up agencies to be in charge of enforcing the ban. If anything, now the government can get OUT of the marriage business and focus on more important things like education and infrastructure.
Enver Hoxha's Albania had "natural marriage" (i.e. cultural marriage) between one man and one woman. The government controlled 100% of the economy, 100% of the people and 100% of the spending. "Natural marriage" limited nothing. The same is pretty much true of any communist country there's ever been. Another indication that fundies don't have a clue what life under communism is actually like.
Oh, and there is no significant difference between the change in proportion of GDP spent by the public sector between 2000 and now by OECD countries that have and those have not legalized same-sex marriage.
Changes brought by same-sex couples being allowed to marry:
1) Gays and lesbians can get married.
2) See 1.
Nope, nothing about "expensive contortions" here. Looks like you're just fruitlessly reaching for arguments to continue a battle that you've already lost.
i'm going to go out on a limb and say you have no fucking clue about this topic. what do you expect the government will have to do? institute total marshal law to make it work?
do you expect nazis riding dinosaurs or something? LOL
> Unnatural “marriage” requires very expensive contortions.
Computer guy here. It only gets expensive if your government gets suckered into paying too much for a simple user interface change and a minor tweak of input-sanity-check layer. (But that's free enterprise for you.)
So, they'll have to change the marriage certificate template from "husband" and "wife" to "spouse" and "spouse" or somethign. What else? Go on, I'm listening.
Also, I don't think you're allowed to comlpain about big government unless you were against the Iraq war. You're against gay marriage because it might cost money, but are for a trillion dollar war...?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
