http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091016/ap_o...ial_rebuff

I really don't know what to think.

Some Rabbis refuse to marry non-Jewish couples. Is there a difference?

Well a Rabbi is bound to what he feels is acceptable in his religion. A judge is bound by the law, a law that has been up to the supreme court. A judge is also paid for by the taxpayers, and these people pay his salary to exercise the law.

(10-16-2009 11:43 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Well a Rabbi is bound to what he feels is acceptable in his religion. A judge is bound by the law, a law that has been up to the supreme court.

As a point of clarification, this guy is not a judge. He is a "justice of the peace," which usually means that he is not even a lawyer. The American Bar Association has lobbied to have these kind of positions removed for a while now.

(10-16-2009 11:47 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:43 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Well a Rabbi is bound to what he feels is acceptable in his religion. A judge is bound by the law, a law that has been up to the supreme court.

As a point of clarification, this guy is not a judge. He is a "justice of the peace," which usually means that he is not even a lawyer. The American Bar Association has lobbied to have these kind of positions removed for a while now.

I can tell you are really undecided. Its not like these 2 will have any trouble getting hitched. Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

At present, it's wrong. Fundamentally, however, why is it the government's business to get involved in anyone's marriage? Why do I need a license to get married? Why are marriages now institutions that need to be recognized by the state, and not just my religion of choice?

Why? The f'n tax code. That's the only reason. We need the Fair Tax.

...and the judge needs to go. If he rules like this, then he's not ruling by rule of law, but the rule of his opinion.

wrong

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

(10-16-2009 12:12 PM)Rebel Wrote:  At present, it's wrong. Fundamentally, however, why is it the government's business to get involved in anyone's marriage? Why do I need a license to get married? Why are marriages now institutions that need to be recognized by the state, and not just my religion of choice?

Why? The f'n tax code. That's the only reason. We need the Fair Tax.

...and the judge needs to go. If he rules like this, then he's not ruling by rule of law, but the rule of his opinion.

Does this mean you support gay marriage? I though you have said you were opposed to it, but I may very well be mistaken.

(10-16-2009 01:02 PM)BleedsHuskieRed Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 12:12 PM)Rebel Wrote:  At present, it's wrong. Fundamentally, however, why is it the government's business to get involved in anyone's marriage? Why do I need a license to get married? Why are marriages now institutions that need to be recognized by the state, and not just my religion of choice?

Why? The f'n tax code. That's the only reason. We need the Fair Tax.

...and the judge needs to go. If he rules like this, then he's not ruling by rule of law, but the rule of his opinion.

Does this mean you support gay marriage? I though you have said you were opposed to it, but I may very well be mistaken.

I said at the present I was supportive of civil unions. However, it's not my business, nor is it the government's business. Our government shouldn't be in the business of picking and choosing one over another. I'm an individualist and a Fair Tax supporter. Name one other reason the government needs to know who is and who isn't married if not for tax purposes.

(10-16-2009 12:49 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

What doozy? You are sheltered if you think mulatto children are extraordinary or bizarre. Some of the most beautiful women in the world today are mulatto. Halle Berry is mulatto. Their skin is not too light not to dark, makes them very attractive. There are many first-generation offspring in the US. I don't get it doozy?

(10-16-2009 01:37 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 12:49 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

What doozy? You are sheltered if you think mulatto children are extraordinary or bizarre. Some of the most beautiful women in the world today are mulatto. Halle Berry is mulatto. Their skin is not too light not to dark, makes them very attractive. There are many first-generation offspring in the US. I don't get it doozy?

Doozy as in he can't believe you called them mulatto.

We all may be crotchety ol' conservatives, but certainly some words (like mulatto) have been relegated to the dustbin of history for good reason.

Disclosure. My neighbor has two mixed race kids. So I am biased I guess.

(10-16-2009 01:37 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 12:49 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

What doozy? You are sheltered if you think mulatto children are extraordinary or bizarre. Some of the most beautiful women in the world today are mulatto. Halle Berry is mulatto. Their skin is not too light not to dark, makes them very attractive. There are many first-generation offspring in the US. I don't get it doozy?

Your claim above is that having mulatto children is fashionable, which I don't understand. If your point was that people of mixed race can be attractive, I won't disagree but it certainly wasn't clear from the sentence above.

(10-16-2009 12:12 PM)Rebel Wrote:  At present, it's wrong. Fundamentally, however, why is it the government's business to get involved in anyone's marriage? Why do I need a license to get married? Why are marriages now institutions that need to be recognized by the state, and not just my religion of choice?

Why? The f'n tax code. That's the only reason. We need the Fair Tax.

...and the judge needs to go. If he rules like this, then he's not ruling by rule of law, but the rule of his opinion.

Bingo!!!...WTF is the government doing in the marriage business anyway?

This guy is wrong...He is paid from the theft of others....He should do his damn job without comment.

(10-16-2009 01:47 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 01:37 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 12:49 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

What doozy? You are sheltered if you think mulatto children are extraordinary or bizarre. Some of the most beautiful women in the world today are mulatto. Halle Berry is mulatto. Their skin is not too light not to dark, makes them very attractive. There are many first-generation offspring in the US. I don't get it doozy?

Your claim above is that having mulatto children is fashionable, which I don't understand. If your point was that people of mixed race can be attractive, I won't disagree but it certainly wasn't clear from the sentence above.

Clear or not, you certainly took it a negative way. We know where your mind is. Check that, we know where your mind has been.

I got NEWS for you, I like the term mulatto, and those that see it as a Political Incorrect word, fine, dustbin it, or whatever the hell else you want to do with it. It is a word, like it or not. Look it up!!! But don't tell me I cannot/should not, use it because you are hypersensitive to it. BOO-HOO, does it hurt? I don't like the terms Mixed-breed or bi-racial or multiracial, so what!!!? I'm not crying about it. Does that matter to you? No it does not. Liberal leaners. Like that any better. How about, Cracker.

(10-16-2009 12:49 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

Quote:Main Entry: mu·lat·to
Pronunciation: \mə-ˈla-(ˌ)tō, mu̇-, myu̇-, -ˈlä-\
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural mu·lat·toes or mu·lat·tos
Etymology: Spanish mulato, from mulo mule, from Latin mulus
Date: 1593
1 : the first-generation offspring of a black person and a white person
2 : a person of mixed white and black ancestry
3 : 2008 US presidential nominee and 2009 US president

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mulatto

Anyway, this is wrong on so many levels. But like Sum said, they'll find a way to get married.

(10-16-2009 12:49 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

President Obama perhaps?

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:47 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:43 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Well a Rabbi is bound to what he feels is acceptable in his religion. A judge is bound by the law, a law that has been up to the supreme court.

As a point of clarification, this guy is not a judge. He is a "justice of the peace," which usually means that he is not even a lawyer. The American Bar Association has lobbied to have these kind of positions removed for a while now.

I can tell you are really undecided. Its not like these 2 will have any trouble getting hitched. Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

It apparently is "in vogue" to be a southern racist too. Although, I guess it never really fell out of favor down there.

Btw, we know there is someone that has had thousands of jobs during his time on this earth. I have to wonder, was the man in this story the man we've come to know and love(in a non-sexual way, of course) from these boards?

(10-16-2009 12:12 PM)Rebel Wrote:  At present, it's wrong. Fundamentally, however, why is it the government's business to get involved in anyone's marriage?

Agree

Why do I need a license to get married? Why are marriages now institutions that need to be recognized by the state, and not just my religion of choice?

Couldn't agree more

Why? The f'n tax code. That's the only reason. We need the Fair Tax.

* Hospital Visitation Rights – Married couples have the automatic right to visit each other in the hospital and make medical decisions. Same sex couples can be denied the right to visit a sick or injured partner in the hospital.

* Health insurance – Same-sex couples have no automatic right to visit one another in the hospital or make medical decisions for one another. Having medical power of attorney documents may help, but there’s no guarantee and hospital will recognize those documents.

* Spousal Privilege – Same-sex couples have no right to refuse to testify against one another. So everything you say, write, email, fax, etc. to your partner is admissible in court and can be used against. you.

* Inheritance rights – Same-sex couples have no automatic rights to inheritance in the absence of a will.

* Family leave – Same-sex couples have no legally protected right to unpaid leave to care for an ill spouse.

* Pensions – Most pension plans only pay survivor benefits to a legal spouse. Same-sex partners get no pension support for surviving partners.

* Nursing homes – Same-sex couples have no legal right to live together in a nursing home and spend their final years together.

* Home protection – The laws that protect married couples from being forced to sell their homes to cover high nursing home bills don’t apply to same-sex couples. A same-sex partner can be forced to sell, and forced out of the home to satisfy nursing home bills if he/she lives in the home but does not own it.

* Retirement savings – Married people can roll over a deceased spouses 401(k) into an IRA without paying taxes. Same-sex partners must withdraw everything, pay income taxes on it, and lose the tax deferral benefits.

* Taxes – Marries spouses may inherit unlimited property from a deceased spouse, tax free. Same-sex partners pay taxes on any amount over set state and federal limits.

* Social Security benefits – Unless you’re married, you get no Social Security from a dead spouse. If you have kids, they will get it and you may be custodian of it until they’re adults.


Even out the legal benefits, and there's no longer a realistic reason for this to be a government issue. It should have always been left to the churches to decide.

(10-16-2009 05:44 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 01:47 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 01:37 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 12:49 PM)Brookes Owl Wrote:  

(10-16-2009 11:59 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Its in vogue to have mulatto children these days.

Where did you come up with this doozy?

What doozy? You are sheltered if you think mulatto children are extraordinary or bizarre. Some of the most beautiful women in the world today are mulatto. Halle Berry is mulatto. Their skin is not too light not to dark, makes them very attractive. There are many first-generation offspring in the US. I don't get it doozy?

Your claim above is that having mulatto children is fashionable, which I don't understand. If your point was that people of mixed race can be attractive, I won't disagree but it certainly wasn't clear from the sentence above.

Clear or not, you certainly took it a negative way. We know where your mind is. Check that, we know where your mind has been.

I got NEWS for you, I like the term mulatto, and those that see it as a Political Incorrect word, fine, dustbin it, or whatever the hell else you want to do with it. It is a word, like it or not. Look it up!!! But don't tell me I cannot/should not, use it because you are hypersensitive to it. BOO-HOO, does it hurt? I don't like the terms Mixed-breed or bi-racial or multiracial, so what!!!? I'm not crying about it. Does that matter to you? No it does not. Liberal leaners. Like that any better. How about, Cracker.

Your post is so full of bull**** it's not worth a response but I'm doing it anyway because I just finished a lousy round of golf and I need to vent a little. Go back to my previous post, for crying out loud. I said NOTHING about your use of the word mulatto. Lord Stanley is right that I don't like the word but I didn't want to start a pissing match (go figure). One more time: Your statement implies that, because of prevailing taste, parents are actually marrying interracially so that they can have mixed race children. THIS is a "doozy" and I find it bizarre (hence my original question). Did you mean to write it? If not, just say you weren't being clear and move along.