Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Voters have moved on from that, obviously.The idiots who passed DOMA on the federal level ensured this is a court issue and not a state level one.
This is about rights and equal protection of the laws, which puts it squarely in the judicial branch's bucket. You can thank the bigots for that.
.
Its actually about the desire to be accepted by society, as shown by the rejection of civil unions that would give the exact same rights as a marriage, but would not be called such.
Well, gay marriage should be a state decision and not federal one..So good for them.
And exactly how are the states supposed to vote on whether or not a gay couple is eligible for Social Security death benefits?
How is Kansas supposed to decide if gays can file a federal married tax return?
Rights are not to be voted on. They are rights.
.
Synergy.
It's when one side gets tired of fighting the other side and concedes.
the Gay Mafia has Synergy now. No stopping them now. Cornhole plugs for everybody!
and Obama supports it. As would any non-Christian would.
Voters have moved on from that, obviously.Its actually about the desire to be accepted by society, as shown by the rejection of civil unions that would give the exact same rights as a marriage, but would not be called such.
and if voters want to move on from that its fine by me. The consituion is silent on contracts such as marriage. It neither bans nor guarantees gay marriage. Thus is should be left up to the legislatures.
Voters have moved on from that, obviously.Its actually about the desire to be accepted by society, as shown by the rejection of civil unions that would give the exact same rights as a marriage, but would not be called such.
and if voters want to move on from that its fine by me. The consituion is silent on contracts such as marriage. It neither bans nor guarantees gay marriage. Thus is should be left up to the legislatures.
Synergy.
It's when one side gets tired of fighting the other side and concedes.
the Gay Mafia has Synergy now. No stopping them now. Cornhole plugs for everybody!
and Obama supports it. As would any non-Christian would.
Well, gay marriage should be a state decision and not federal one..So good for them.
And exactly how are the states supposed to vote on whether or not a gay couple is eligible for Social Security death benefits?
How is Kansas supposed to decide if gays can file a federal married tax return?
Rights are not to be voted on. They are rights.
.
Let's breal this down,so it's easy to understand.The states that legalized(as it should be)same sex marriage will be the states that give Social Security benefits (as it should be).Married LEGALLY means that they will LEGALLY be able to file as a married couple on their tax returns.
Voters have moved on from that, obviously.
and if voters want to move on from that its fine by me. The consituion is silent on contracts such as marriage. It neither bans nor guarantees gay marriage. Thus is should be left up to the legislatures.
So race is a biological condition, gender is a biological condition. You are for it being up to the legislatures based on the biology of gender. Are you for it being up to the legislatures based on the biology of race?
>>>>
Voters have moved on from that, obviously.
and if voters want to move on from that its fine by me. The consituion is silent on contracts such as marriage. It neither bans nor guarantees gay marriage. Thus is should be left up to the legislatures.
Nobody should be permitted to vote on what rights other citizens are entitled to
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper
A certain victory for queers and homosexuals.................
The time has come to redefine "Marriage" after six thousand years
and if voters want to move on from that its fine by me. The consituion is silent on contracts such as marriage. It neither bans nor guarantees gay marriage. Thus is should be left up to the legislatures.
So race is a biological condition, gender is a biological condition. You are for it being up to the legislatures based on the biology of gender. Are you for it being up to the legislatures based on the biology of race?
>>>>
being born without sight is a biological condtion, yet we deny blind people driver's liscences. Isnt that a violation of equal protection based on biology?
And no, race is different, as there is nothing biologically different between a mixed racial marriage and a same race marriage.
Unless they are using props, there is a difference biologically between heterosexual and homosexual relationships.
and if voters want to move on from that its fine by me. The consituion is silent on contracts such as marriage. It neither bans nor guarantees gay marriage. Thus is should be left up to the legislatures.
So race is a biological condition, gender is a biological condition. You are for it being up to the legislatures based on the biology of gender. Are you for it being up to the legislatures based on the biology of race?
>>>>
being born without sight is a biological condtion, yet we deny blind people driver's liscences. Isnt that a violation of equal protection based on biology?
And no, race is different, as there is nothing biologically different between a mixed racial marriage and a same race marriage. Unless they are using props, there is a difference biologically between heterosexual and homosexual relationships.
Cool. Maybe all the dykes in Northern Virginia will move to Maryland and not tax our public safety so much with their domestic violence calls.
And it was done the right way, via a popular vote, not making up some right and going through the courts.
The courts are where you decide if reciprocity applies to these marriages or not.
The idiots who passed DOMA on the federal level ensured this is a court issue and not a state level one.
This is about rights and equal protection of the laws, which puts it squarely in the judicial branch's bucket. You can thank the bigots for that.
.
Its actually about the desire to be accepted by society, as shown by the rejection of civil unions that would give the exact same rights as a marriage, but would not be called such.