Relationships failed when we let gays get married. Now

0/10 tbh

>>23280108
nice fits tbh

It's more the encouragement of divorces that ruined it.

>>23280127

Marriage is supposed to be a special relationship between husband and wife, but they had to fag it all up.

Now its just a farce.

>>23280108
>women are to blame
>gays are to blame
>jews are to blame
>multiculturalism is to blame
>the rich are to blame
>corporations are to blame
>the government is to blame
>everyone but me is to blame
getting real sick of your shit thb

File: koEif.png (25KB, 372x325px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 372x325px

>>23280195
>>23280108
Marriage was a farce as soon as there were financial benefits to getting married. It ruined the sanctity of marriage by giving incentives to people who aren't in love.

Gays just wanted to take away the sanctity of marriage, to mock it because they are bitches.

Now its all just a farce. There's nothing to protect.

>>23280108
>>23280195
>>23280239
marriage was ruined far into the 20th century. 'letting gays marry' is completely irrelevant to marriage's sanctimony, which it lost long ago.

>>23280195
A husband and wive that will stay together for the rest of their lives and inevitably raise kids.
Contraceptives and divorces killed marriage. Fags just pissed on the tombstone a little, is all.

>>23280225

That's why gays wanted it. For financial benefits.

They are the final nail in that coffin.

>>23280212
>>>anywhere but /r9k/

>>23280239
Gays didn't take away the sanctity of marriage, the financial benefits of marriage took it away.

If there weren't any financial benefits, Gay's would have no reason to marry. Therefore, Marriage could remain exclusively religious, therefore, Gay's wouldn't get married and gay's couldn't legally get married.

But because there are financial benefits, Gay's deserve the right to get married.

The reason why the Supreme Court chose "Gay's should be able to get married" vs "revoke the financial benefits of marriage" is because conservatives prefer the former over the latter.

Prove me wrong.

>>23280239
it was a mockery to begin with, you think a bunch of homos getting married could easily ruin a sacred tradition that spanned thousands of years? Not a very strong foundation if that were the case. Even if gay people never existed you would still be single, don't kid yourself.

File: 1439243042290.webm (917KB, 644x514px) Image search: [Google]

917KB, 644x514px

>>23280281
Yeah, no shit. Gay's never gave a shit about marriage, they aren't religious. If there were no financial benefits, gay's wouldn't care about getting married. The government ruined marriage, not gays.

Yes you won. You made a mockery of marriage. Congratulations on your victory against the oppressive patriarchy.

>>23280138
clown shoes is a no-no tbh

The existence of gays are a big burden

Two things bother me about gays:

1) People assume I'm gay

2) Girls who like me but don't want to be with me become lesbians

Really I just need a qt tomboy gf