Excellent points.

Guess not. I was Patriot 6/43 ADA from 8/86 through 12/91.

You beat me to this!

I suspect this man is very shrewd. What he may be trying to do is set legal precedence that would be used for or against legal gay marriage when its argued in the courts. Either that or he's one seriously strange cookie.

By definition, a contract is an agreement between two parties. Therefore, there can be no "contract" between a person and a non-consenting, non-participating animal or inanimate object.

If marriage is defined as a civil union, it them becomes inclusive of any consenting beings. Then the argument of marrying a computer or pet is void because they can't consent.

How do we know if this guys computer is actually consenting to allow him to have sex all over it. He is opening his computer up to all kinds of digitally transmitted diseases against its will.
What does the mouse think of this?

When were you in Ft. Bliss? I was there from 8/86 though 12/87. Then shipped to Germany for 4 years. Yes, I remember hearing about those shows.

I do not find the idea of some very liberal state legalizing bestiality hard to believe. Heck I wouldn't be surprised if one of those states legalized pedophilia. I would be completely disgusted but not surprised. I honestly believe it is only a matter of time before something like that is floated as acceptable.

While I agree.

I have to point out that there are relationships that while they are accepted today that would have been illegal in the past and if we allow states to define these relationships as they see fit. Some of those relationships will be illegal when people cross state borders. I can imagine some state making it legal to marry an animal and another state maintaining the current legal definition of bestiality. So if that couple crossed the border they would then be subject to arrest and whatever penalty is set forth.

Actually, marriage is a religious contract and ceremony depicting the coming union between Christ and the church in heaven. Which is exactly why gays have been pushing to have "marriage" recognized. Next up will be a move to force churches to preform these marriages or fact the lose of their tax exemption status.

Currently pastors across the country have been warned by the IRS and legal counsel that they cannot speak about politics from their pulpit and in a few states like CA, speaking from the pulpit against homosexuals can be considered a hate crime. Business are being forced to provide services even when the religious beliefs of the owners demand that they not.

Soon the religious ceremony of marriage will mean nothing anyway and since this clod's sexual "Friend" (the current level of tolerance demanded for a marriage) is his computer - why not?

I agree with both of your points.

Though I have to wonder how states would address different definitions of marriage. For instance say Texas defines marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman and California defines marriage as between anyone or anything or any number of them at any age. They get married in California and then later move to Texas, some of the possibilities from California would be illegal without even addressing the marriage issue.

Exactly. I have mentioned to a gay friend that the problem isn't really the people who cast a vote for Prop 8 here in California - it's the fact that we all have to go to the government to get a license to wed.

mmhmm... I said this long long ago, when this whole "gay marriage" thing came out.

Why can't I marry my horse? Why can't I marry 18 people? Why can't my horse and my dog get married? Etc...

Government just redefining a legal term(marriage) on a whim is yet another sign of the stupidity of our nation

The Government shouldn't be recognizing "marriage" at all. They can recognize civil unions at whatever level (if they're given the authority to do so, which is zero at the Federal level), but not marriage.

They will continue to redefine marriage until anyone at any age can marry anyone or anything with any number of spouses that they desire. Their goal is simple, they want to destroy all vestiges of the "Traditional" lifestyle.

This is why the government should not be mixed up in the business of licensing marriages and providing tax-favored treatment. All unmarried individuals desiring tax breaks will seek an unending redefinition of marriage to realize their primary goal...