Here’s Ed Brayton’s “Dumbass Quote of the Day,” which comes from WingNutDaily’s Joseph Farah:
Legally speaking, though, even in an increasingly secular society like ours, there is a reason same-sex marriages could never be recognized. A marriage that is not consummated has long been considered incomplete, not deserving of any legal recognition whatsoever. A marriage union that remains unconsummated never happened in the eyes of the law. So please tell me how a same-sex couple consummates one of these make-believe marriages? Acts of sodomy were never considered consummation in the eyes of the law. Again, this suggests that whatever it is the homosexual activists are trying to achieve through their relentless campaign, it is not marriage.
Joseph Farah: Because his world loses all meaning when the genitals in the marital beds of people he doesn’t know don’t follow his preferred counts! One penis conquer one vagina! One penis of man with big porn-stache!
Posting today will be light and sporadic, due to The Holiday, but if you want to talk or confess, this can be an open thread.
Well, this was a key argument about letting inmates marry, especially if they would never be able to consummate it because they are behind bars. But the supreme court has already ruled that consummation is irrelevant.
So, is he saying that what happens between gays and lesbians is not sex? Fascinating. That means I’ve never had sex. I’m a 45 year old virgin – who has had a hell of a good time!
We’re all sweet, innocent virgins, you see.
Facials, Joe. Consummation by bukkake. Just as Jeziz intended. One man with his cadre of legally recognized (while Xtian pseudo moralists look the other way) ex-wives and subsequent wives…one wife after another…consummated in the name of your co-opted symbol of supremacy, Jesus Christypants.
Farah’s argument opens the door to polygamy, marriage between a person and an opposite sex animal, or for that matter polygamy involving people and barnyard animals of the opposite sex–you know, the things the fundies love to claim gay marriage will lead to. Under Farrah’s argument, a man and a female mule could consummate their love, but the homos are s**t out of luck.
Imagine how much more dangerous he’d be if he had a brain.
Hmmm…my partner and I did “something? ” this morning. Whew! I saw stars! If that wasn’t sex then what was it? I wish Joe would Just come out of the closet already …his internal homophobia is over the top! Comon Joe ..you need to see stars too!!
Farah is just plain wrong.
No state declares an unconsummated marriage void _unless_ one or both members of the couple raises the issue. That leaves it where it belongs: in the hands of the couple, not with government.
He’s seriously saying that it’s a legal requirement for people to have sex after they’re married? How exactly is something like that enforced? Would you have to bring proof that you had sex, or would you just do it right in front of the government official?
No, Makyui, he’s just trotting out another b******t argument, like “Marriage is about making babies!” Not only are convicted murderers (who are denied conjugal visits) allowed to get married, but people who are physically disabled in a way that makes then unable have intercourse are also allowed to get married.
What really, really pisses me off is: they KNOW how full of s**t they are. They KNOW it’s a bad faith argument. But they almost never get called on it.
Okay, so according to his argument a marriage is truly not a marriage until you have had sex? Okay, and what about those who are physically handicapped or paralyzed from the waist on down who cannot perform the sex act? So if a paraplegic gets married and he cannot perform sexual intercourse, then the marriage is null and void?
How about two elderly people who don’t want to have sex at all? So their marriage is not a marriage until they have had sex? All of this sounds like another b******t argument to me.
They will make anything up to make gay marriage sound bad. That is just the way it will be.