From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
   >On 22-May-14 18:57, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >> Stephen Sprunk   wrote:   
   >>> On 22-May-14 17:38, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>>> Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
   >>>>> On 22-May-14 13:44, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>>>>> What about marriage between children? What about marriage to   
   >>>>>>  animals or dead people   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Such entities lack the ability to consent, so it's moot.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> What does marriage have to do with consent?   
   >>>   
   >>> Marriage is a contract, and contracts require consent.   
   >>   
   >> Not when people change what marriage means so that it doesn't   
   >> require consent.   
   >   
   >I'm not aware of anyone proposing that, and since it violates such a   
   >basic tenet of contract law, I don't see the courts allowing it even if   
   >someone actually did try it.   
   >   
   >(Some of the more extreme religious nutjobs think this is _already_   
   >legal because they don't recognize our govt in the first place, so I   
   >don't consider that to count as a proposed change.)   
   >   
   >> You've never heard of chattel,   
      
   >That's called slavery, and it was outlawed in the US long ago.   
      
   Chattel and slavery and not synonyms.   
      
   I'm snipping the rest unread as your determination to spread ignorance   
   burns the eyes.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)