Funny how Morals are trotted out when this comes up.

Its less about who is doing to whom in the bedroom,but more of the fact that by wanting marrige,thy are choosing to commit to each other. Financially and legally. If two people cohabitating for decades,however the emotional and sexual arrangements might be,and one gets SICK,they need some sort of legal structure in order to help the sick person. A room mate has no legal rights...a spouse DOES.Marrige is a way of guarenteeing these rights,to say to that other person,"I'm There For You".

Isn't THAT Moral?

And as for poligamy...I can see that as another legitimate excuse for marrige...let the players of that game work out the social logistics themselves. Protect what their unions spawn. And lastly,for the Intolorant Religious out there...you need not participate in any of this. They ain't marrying you.And Religion is too fragile a Glass House for any of you to be lobbing Moral Stones from.

If you are going to use the bible as your moral cumpus then your pretty much fucked. for one thing its not constant and its easily open to interpretation what it actually says. its allso very clear that its as likely to be the word of god as any of the other religious books out there which is not very.


to use marrige as a bench mark for who you have sex with is a bit stupid , but at the same time just sleeping with annyone can be quite risky.

there is nothing stopping people shagging and still having something more meaningful and romantic as well especaily if they use protectoin and are carfull about it.

the whole marge thing makes sense when there is no contraception or protection against STD,S and having kids is a 1-10 chance of sex , obviously as it would be unfair for a child to have no parents.

This is why going by the bible is stupid , It was written in a time when there was no contraception and people could not control when they had kids.

by perpetuating this whole no sex before marriage thing you end up with more trouble u end up with girls taking it up the ass more or doing strange sexual things that are of more risk and should only be undertaken by sumone with exsperance and alot of confidence as to what they want or know what they are doing and the risks.

The only message should be ONLY HAVE SEX WITH SUM ONE THAT "YOU" RELAY WANT TO don't be pressured into it or feal that you have to. also only do it after having discussed it with them and once you relay know that person.

having said that im sure there are people who want to just go out and have a quick fuck if that's ohnislty what they want and they make that clear to the person they want to fuck then i dont have a problem with it so long as they ware protectoin and reduse STD pregnancy as much as possable.

Its all about honistiy and presenting things truthfully.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'gay, marrige, prop, california, dan, savage' to 'gay, marrige, prop, california, dan savage' - edited by xxovercastxx

"Defense of traditional marriage is more about making sure laws do not infringe on the rights and standards of people who are not gay."

-how does marrying gay people infringe ON ANYONES rights? you're saying that it lowers the standard of marrige? I think heterosexuals did that a LOOOOONG time ago. The divorce rate is over 50%, people go through spouces like sour patch kids, and in some places a husband can rape and beat his wife legally. Talk about lowering standards, look at your parents who they raised.

It shouldnt be important to them. They dont own marrige...they dont own people's sexual orientaion, and they certainly dont dictate the standard.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Are you ready for marrige? (part 2). Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Are you ready for marrige (part 1). Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

"you're just reciting the old "Democrats have no plan" talking points that talk radio's drilled into your skull."

Fine, but if you can tell me what the Democrats plan is in moderate detail, I will shake your hand and consider you an intellectually honest person. Because I have no idea what it is.

"it's sounds rather desperate on the part of the GOP - which is why they're cranking up the fear factor (terrorism! terrorism!) now that the campaign season's officially started."

So are you telling me that there is no terrorist threat from the Muslim world, or that it's simply overrated?

" "The liberal adgenda is higher taxes, unrestricted abortion, gay marrige, the erosion of personal stanards, political correctness and appesement of those who would attack us."

...was just hilarious. Thanks. And you accuse us of having nothing positive to say."

Look, if it's not, then tell me what it is...prove me wrong.

I wish I could return the compliment, Wumpus, but you're just reciting the old "Democrats have no plan" talking points that talk radio's drilled into your skull. (The Michael Weiner-Savage "islamofascism" misnomer is also a dead giveaway.) It has no basis in truth, and frankly, it's sounds rather desperate on the part of the GOP - which is why they're cranking up the fear factor (terrorism! terrorism!) now that the campaign season's officially started.
To respond to your other "point", that tape is from a rally, not a policy meeting. You don't talk about those things there any more than the Religious Right would at those ridiculous "Justice Sunday" rallies they've had. And this:
"The liberal adgenda is higher taxes, unrestricted abortion, gay marrige, the erosion of personal stanards, political correctness and appesement of those who would attack us."
...was just hilarious. Thanks. And you accuse us of having nothing positive to say.

Finally, an intelligent response.

"Liberals just happen to think we should also strive to do better socially, not just economically. It doesn't mean "Bush-hating" or "hating America first" (two signs of a real intelligent debator), it just means expecting us to live up to the expectations of our Constitution, not simply compare ourselves to the rest of the world."

What part of this speech was about doing better socially?

The liberal adgenda is higher taxes, unrestricted abortion, gay marrige, the erosion of personal stanards, political correctness and appesement of those who would attack us. But they can't get up in front of a crowd and say it. There was a democratic political ad posted by you two weeks ago about "A new direction for america." The problem with the ad is that it won't tell you what that direction is. Every fundraising speech they give, Howard Dean will tell you that they have a "new comprehensive plan" for _-insert issue here-_ but they won't tell you what that plan is. They'll toss out a few vague generalities at leave it at that.

But this speech doesn't talk about any of that. The title says it all. It's an "Anti-Bush" protest. They all get together and talk about how much we hate Bush, how much we hate America and for all of his chanting about the truth, I will submit to you that Rocky Anderson would not know the truth if it landed on his head. More importantly in his entire speech, Anderson does not offer a single solution, he has no answers, he doesn't know how to protect America from another attack and he's not going to tell you what he is going to do to fix things. When he looks out over the global-political landscape, he sees Bush's America as the enemy, as the oppressor. He doesn't want to talk about the groups and countries who have stated as their goal to see America torn down and destroyed; paging Islamic Fascist.

As the city's mayor, his term is up, once he's done, he's out. He is not staking anything on this protest, he's not risking his job. This man does not have the spine that you think he does.