RE: No gay marriage! ?

RE: No gay marriage! ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 5:45:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marc2b We need a constitutional amendment that requires legal recognition of marriage between any two consenting adults (and perhaps more than two – but I don’t want to get into that now). Don't see that happening really. Even Obama for instance, has said that he believes marriage is between a man/woman, but will leave it up to the states to decide for themselves.

DomKen -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 6:40:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Yeah, but there really is absolutely zero benefits that can't be arranged without requiring marriage. Actually there are many benefits of marriage that cannot be arranged without a marriage license. Spousal privilege Medical decision making (compare the ease with which a spouse is allowed to make emergent decisions v a holder of a medical power of attorney) Legal next of kin status (determines who is notified by police and other authorities) Adoption (most states have laws favoring adoption by married couples) There are literally hundreds of laws that specify some government granted benefit to spouses that cannot be acquired in another manner.

aravain -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 8:33:50 AM)
DomKen said it well... but let me point out, also, that allowing a contract between two people has nothing to do with sin. Right now I could go get married to my best friend and just rake in the benefits of the contract signed and approved of by the state (all told, it would be a worse deal for her), and that includes tax breaks/incentives among other things. I can't imagine government ever 'getting out' of marriage, though... unless there was a complete overhaul of it, and I would be more than tentative to support such a venture. The basic rights of myself to join my life with another person of my life is being infringed upon. How would you like it if someone said 'sorry, you can't marry women, you can ONLY marry Iguanas by the law'? It is essentially the same thing with denying two men the right to marry.

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 8:53:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Yeah, but there really is absolutely zero benefits that can't be arranged without requiring marriage. Actually there are many benefits of marriage that cannot be arranged without a marriage license. Spousal privilege Medical decision making (compare the ease with which a spouse is allowed to make emergent decisions v a holder of a medical power of attorney) Legal next of kin status (determines who is notified by police and other authorities) Adoption (most states have laws favoring adoption by married couples) There are literally hundreds of laws that specify some government granted benefit to spouses that cannot be acquired in another manner. Yes, they all can be arranged to be available in other manners, it's just a matter of coding them into law with the same penstrokes that are used to get government out of marriage.

DomKen -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 11:42:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Yeah, but there really is absolutely zero benefits that can't be arranged without requiring marriage. Actually there are many benefits of marriage that cannot be arranged without a marriage license. Spousal privilege Medical decision making (compare the ease with which a spouse is allowed to make emergent decisions v a holder of a medical power of attorney) Legal next of kin status (determines who is notified by police and other authorities) Adoption (most states have laws favoring adoption by married couples) There are literally hundreds of laws that specify some government granted benefit to spouses that cannot be acquired in another manner. Yes, they all can be arranged to be available in other manners, it's just a matter of coding them into law with the same penstrokes that are used to get government out of marriage. Do you have any idea what it would cost to rewrite every federal, state and local law which includes the word spouse or marriage?

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 1:00:43 PM)
Yep. "All rules involving marriage are hereby superceded by the following:" Then figure out what benefits actually should still remain that actually need to be codified. (Many are obsolete or don't need to be bothered. You can set medical proxies, financial arrangements, etc as it is with a living will for instance already). Do you have any idea how much effort is wasted arguing and fighting over the issue that could be resolved to the satisfaction of all parties saving cost down the road? And in the end, things could be a hell of a lot simpler than they are now.

DomKen -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 1:34:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Yep. "All rules involving marriage are hereby superceded by the following:" You don't think that would be legally binding do you?

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 1:48:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Yep. "All rules involving marriage are hereby superceded by the following:" You don't think that would be legally binding do you? If the appropriate language was passed by Congress in a law, of course. I was just portraying the idea, not suggesting anything verbatim.

DomKen -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 2:35:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Yep. "All rules involving marriage are hereby superceded by the following:" You don't think that would be legally binding do you? If the appropriate language was passed by Congress in a law, of course. I was just portraying the idea, not suggesting anything verbatim. It doesn't work that way.

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 2:42:55 PM)
Having spent a few years working in government, I've seen more than one instance of broad changes made by repealing a series of old changes. At the state level, true. On the other hand, my mother has worked at the Federal level out of the White House and she sees no reason why it couldn't be done either.

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 2:50:44 PM)
But to toss some other food for thought out there...if drugs were legalized at a Federal level, that would automatically supercede thousands of statutes/laws regarding the prohibition and prosecution of drug related crimes.

DomKen -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 3:47:31 PM)
Actually no it wouldn't. The feds can make something legal and local jursidictions can still forbid it.

LookieNoNookie -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/10/2009 6:18:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy http://crooksandliars.com/julia-rosen/ad-will-make-you-sick I fail to see how it takes from others rights. Tho- I dont view this as the issue of our lifetime. Food on the table is the issue of our day. Not these side issues. Working in group homes- everyone has a different idea as to how a home/household should be run. Basically while we can all get along in public. (for the most part) But up close- to live together- set up household, it wont work. As the years- go on- I see more households- go from 1 or 2 people- to move in friends or relatives. (out of necessity) Assuming there IS Social Security- why would anyone ruin it by a same sex marriage. (or even a traditional marriage!) Do you see households getting larger? If so when? I am surprised by the recent 2 states doing the gay marriage thing. The banking crises is so much bigger. (to the system) -(flatter me all ya like- just don't pick my pocket) Your turn. The whole gay marriage thing is just completely ridiculous. (WAIT!!!!!!!). (I don't have my rainsuit on yet!!!!!) Two people...who love each other, wanting to share a life, children, a mortgage, life insurance...... Marriage. Pretty simple stuff. Why the hell is the state involved in the paperwork anyways? The issue shouldn't be at all whether or not two people who love each other should or can get "married"...it should be "why the fuck does the state have any voice in this issue in the first place?" It has nothing to do with the state.

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/11/2009 3:59:28 AM)
Exactly Lookie. If people still need tax breaks for raising dependants, give them tax breaks for raising dependants. Tax breaks for buying a home? Give 'em a tax break for buying a home. And so on.

Raiikun -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/11/2009 4:00:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Actually no it wouldn't. The feds can make something legal and local jursidictions can still forbid it. Which is a seperate thing from my point entirely.

DomKen -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/11/2009 8:03:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun But to toss some other food for thought out there...if drugs were legalized at a Federal level, that would automatically supercede thousands of statutes/laws regarding the prohibition and prosecution of drug related crimes. How did my previous response not apply to this post?

lonelyblueboi -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/12/2009 3:04:16 PM)
Apparently Raiikun thinks kink is okay but being gay is a sin. Right.... that makes sense. I'm sure the logic of that is the same logic that made same race marriage okay but interracial marraige sinful 50 years ago, when the courts declared it discriminatory!

xBullx -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/12/2009 4:35:04 PM)
ok, ok, ok................I'm good with all the whatever you need to do stuff to be blissfully happy as the person you are............ But,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, We have to ban men in assless chaps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! An Iowan that is for free people freely living to the beat of their own drum.

SpinnerofTales -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/12/2009 8:20:36 PM)
I am in as in favor of gay marriage as I am of straight marriage, but I WOULD like to point out one little fact: Half the marriages in this country end in divorce. The other half end in death. And we want to do this why?

kittinSol -> RE: No gay marriage! ? (4/13/2009 5:54:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales And we want to do this why? Why not? Gambling is an attractive proposition, in a life that inevitably ends in death :-) .

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.125