Allowing bi-sex marriage?

[Bowser]

Please, I'm exploring the realities of BS here. Why isn't BS unions an issue?

 

[Athelwulf]

Please, I'm exploring the realities of BS here. Why isn't BS unions an issue?

The realities of BS? As in "bullshit"? That must be what ye'r talking about.

Bullshit unions aren't an issue kuz there is no such thing as a bullshit union.

 

[Athelwulf]

But in all seriousness . . . The issue of bisexual unions hasn't come up kuz we're still fighting for homosexual unions. Some 'phants are holding back the forward movement in our society.

 

[Bowser]

BS as in Bisexual. Look, why are the bisexuals not clamoring for their conjugal rights? There are so many of them.

 

[Bowser]

There it is. Thank you.

 

[Athelwulf]

BS as in Bisexual. Look, why are the bisexuals not clamoring for their conjugal rights? There are so many of them.

Because too many people are too focused on homosexual rights to care right now. Therefore, no clamoring.

I think I get what ye'r saying. Ya think the bisexuals should be fighting for their rights as well. I also would like to see an uprising by the bisexuals similar to that by the homosexuals. This would definitely be progress in the right direction.

EDIT: Oh, ya saw it . . . . . . Good.

 

[Tiassa]

• What next. Rise bisexuals... You should rightfully marry whomever and as many as you desire...uhm, love.

• Why isn't BS unions an issue?

• Look, why are the bisexuals not clamoring for their conjugal rights? There are so many of them.

I would point out the obvious to you, Bowser, but you've already covered it in the topic post. Something about jumping the gun goes here; or maybe premature ... oh, never mind.

Is it not perfectly obvious why "bisexual marriage" hasn't come up?

Or are conservatives still confused about the numbers? After all, the question is predicated on an issue that only marital traditionalists have difficulty understanding.

 

[Persol]

I may be missing the point, but bisexuals either have a heterosexual mate or a homosexual mate. In the first case they have no reason to fight for rights they already have. In the second case there is no substantial difference between them and the gay marriage advocates.

 

[Bowser]

I'm assuming that they have one of each, therefore, more than one partner.

 

[Athelwulf]

Some may be in such relationships. But just kuz they find both girls and guys hot doesn't mean they will be dating both a girl and a guy at the same time. For some, monogomy is their thing.

 

[Asguard]

for that matter there are hetrosexuals in multipul patener relationships as well

 

[Bowser]

<i>"for that matter there are hetrosexuals in multipul patener relationships as well"</i>

Very true. So...we need to bring them into the party, too. Would those be the Mormons?

 

[Persol]

So this thread has nothing to do with bisexuals, but bigamy. I know more straight people who were in bigamius (possibly not a word) relationships than bisexuals.

 

[Bowser]

<i>"bigamius"</i> Hmm, you might have coined a new word, my man. The topic does seem to be flowing. Maybe it's an exploration of forward thinking. I'm not certain, to be honest.

 

[Mystech]

What I can't understand is that why don't gay people just live together and make up a will so that anything they want can go to the other person if they should die.

They do, and believe it or not judges don't always pay attention to wills. There have been instances before where, despite having named their partner as the executor of their estate in their will, everything still ends up going to next of kin, IE the family which disowned them years ago.

Also, estate matters are not the only legal matter effected by a legal marriage contract.

What is the real point of gays getting married after all unless the agenda is to adopt a young child?

Hmm, an agenda to adopt a young child, you say? How hideously and unforgivably evil! Aside from the fact that your reasoning is entirely flawed (though really only because you haven't got your facts, straight, but that's forgivable, most people become complete idiots when it comes to legal matters that they've never looked into. . . if you don't believe me go start a thread about intellectual property laws), because there are very many other reasons to want the legal protections which marriage provides. Aside from that, you're ignoring the fact that same-sex partners already are adopting children, this isn't prohibited in very many places in the United States. So we've already got our hands on the children the breeders throw away! Oh no! Why is that such a bad thing?

Marriage is only good for the children that are concieved during the marriage so that they can have proper papers telling them and others who they are and who brought them into this world. It is also to show possesion of material things so if a divorce happens the property will be divided up.

I'm not sure where you're living, but in the United States the legal reality of the situation is quite a bit different. If you are in the US then I really don't know where you're getting this stuff about the kids from. I assure you a birth certificate will be issued regardless of whether a couple is married or not. Other than that, yes there are quite a lot of joint property rights, as you've stated, as well as tax considerations, and a load of secondary considerations including quite a few dealing with healthcare and also immigration.

So what's the big deal about just living together wherever the gay couple want to and just not tell anyone for what right is of it of others who is living with whom?

Eer that's a sort of roundabout way of saying I'm not entirely sure what.

 

[Mystech]

I'm assuming that they have one of each, therefore, more than one partner.

And that's your problem, right there. You were quite right to state, earlier in the thread that you know nothing about bisexuals. That truth is evident in the fact that you seem to be confusing them with polygamists. Being bisexual doesn't mean a person has multiple partners of both genders at the same time, just that they're open to relationships with either gender.

As such it would be unfair to characterize a theoretical marriage of several people as a "Bisexual union", and you've likely not heard anyone talking about such unions because everyone else has enough sense to look at the world around them and understand what the hell is going on, at least to some small degree. Give that a try, and I think a lot of troublesome questions in your mind might be cleared up.