Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Please show me where a man is not able to marry another man.
What I am opposed to is the state sanctioning such "marriages" and giving the partners benefits. This confers extra benefits on some people, favoring them at the expense of other solely based on their sexual preference of the moment. This would appear to fail the constitutional provisions of the 14th Amerndment.
Simple question: Are you in favor of giving tax breaks to people because of whom they like to fuck?
No no, it wouldn't be "extra benefits." Straight men would be allowed to marry other men as well and reap the same benefits.
You are exactly right!
So lets say Cuyo and I are old college friends. I lost my job and need medical care (this is supposing Obamacare hasn't eliminated employer sponsored coverage). He and I can just declare ourselves "married" and bango-- I get the benefit of his coverage. We don't have to touch dicks or anything.
Remind me how this is supposed to be good for society?
Agreed. Government should get out of marriage altogether. Civil unions for all from the State; Marriage from the private institution from which you seek it, if such institution is willing to provide it to you.
That is my stance as well...
What is the difference between "civil union" and "marriage" under that scenario?
Agreed. Government should get out of marriage altogether. Civil unions for all from the State; Marriage from the private institution from which you seek it, if such institution is willing to provide it to you.
That is my stance as well...
What is the difference between "civil union" and "marriage" under that scenario?
I would ask how you possibly got that out of anything I wrote. But I am dealing with a mental midget who cannot do simple math, so what can anyone expect?
LOL! Are you really going to bring up the fact again that you don't know how to calculate a basic percentage increase. Shall I link to that post where you put your ignorance on full display, just so you can ignore it, AGAIN?
Sure, go ahead and show what a tool bag you are and incapable of telling how much different 85 and 90 are.
Please show me where a man is not able to marry another man.
What I am opposed to is the state sanctioning such "marriages" and giving the partners benefits. This confers extra benefits on some people, favoring them at the expense of other solely based on their sexual preference of the moment. This would appear to fail the constitutional provisions of the 14th Amerndment.
Simple question: Are you in favor of giving tax breaks to people because of whom they like to fuck?
No no, it wouldn't be "extra benefits." Straight men would be allowed to marry other men as well and reap the same benefits.
You are exactly right!
So lets say Cuyo and I are old college friends. I lost my job and need medical care (this is supposing Obamacare hasn't eliminated employer sponsored coverage). He and I can just declare ourselves "married" and bango-- I get the benefit of his coverage. We don't have to touch dicks or anything.
Remind me how this is supposed to be good for society?
Agreed. Government should get out of marriage altogether. Civil unions for all from the State; Marriage from the private institution from which you seek it, if such institution is willing to provide it to you.
That is my stance as well...
What is the difference between "civil union" and "marriage" under that scenario?
That is my stance as well...
What is the difference between "civil union" and "marriage" under that scenario?
Gays do not want to marry because of tax incentives, hospital benefits or other financial incentives. Neither do most heterosexuals. They want to be able to stand up in front of society, publicly declare their love for one another and have society recognize their union. They want to call their partner their husband or wife.
Mostly, they want society to treat them like they treat any other couple
Do you give a flying fuck about homosexuals and how they live their lives?
This is a spin off of Dr House's comment to Jerkbert in the thread on conservative homosexuals.
I want people to live in dignity and peace.
Ergo, I care.
Do you give a flying fuck about homosexuals and how they live their lives?
This is a spin off of Dr House's comment to Jerkbert in the thread on conservative homosexuals.
As long as they do not make demands to be allowed to 'marry', are kept out of positions in public schools and otherwise keep their perversions private and in the closet, no.
Gays do not want to marry because of tax incentives, hospital benefits or other financial incentives. Neither do most heterosexuals. They want to be able to stand up in front of society, publicly declare their love for one another and have society recognize their union.
They want to call their partner their husband or wife.
Mostly, they want society to treat them like they treat any other couple
Do you give a flying fuck about homosexuals and how they live their lives?
This is a spin off of Dr House's comment to Jerkbert in the thread on conservative homosexuals.
Still not one person opposed to homosexuals being married is able to say how gays being legally married actually impact their life in any way.
Do you give a flying fuck about homosexuals and how they live their lives?
This is a spin off of Dr House's comment to Jerkbert in the thread on conservative homosexuals.
Nope, could care less about homosexuals.
Homosexuals are always announcing to the world they are gay and want special attention and special rights, when no one gives a shit.
That is my stance as well...
What is the difference between "civil union" and "marriage" under that scenario?
Gays do not want to marry because of tax incentives, hospital benefits or other financial incentives. Neither do most heterosexuals. They want to be able to stand up in front of society, publicly declare their love for one another and have society recognize their union. They want to call their partner their husband or wife.
There, now you are actually telling some truth. This whole debate about "gay marriage" is really about gays trying to force the rest of society into treating them like "any other couple". The Thought Police are out!Mostly, they want society to treat them like they treat any other couple
What is the difference between "civil union" and "marriage" under that scenario?
Gays do not want to marry because of tax incentives, hospital benefits or other financial incentives. Neither do most heterosexuals. They want to be able to stand up in front of society, publicly declare their love for one another and have society recognize their union. They want to call their partner their husband or wife.
Mostly, they want society to treat them like they treat any other couple
So you want government to force acceptance of a chosen behavior because it fits your agenda... got it
Sorry... but I'll take freedom over government forced acceptance
I could choose to tattoo my face like a baboon and put 75 piercings in it... and with that choice comes the possibility of one or many or all people not accepting it.... too bad, too sad.... it's not a job of government to make other people accept your personal choices
Still not one person opposed to homosexuals being married is able to say how gays being legally married actually impact their life in any way.
Still not one person opposed to homosexuals being married is able to say how gays being legally married actually impact their life in any way.
It doesn't impact my life, and by the way there is nothing preventing homos from getting married. You're talking about state recognition of such marriages. What does it effect you or any other homo if myself or the rest of society doesn't recognize their "gay marriage"?
What is the difference between "civil union" and "marriage" under that scenario?
Gays do not want to marry because of tax incentives, hospital benefits or other financial incentives. Neither do most heterosexuals. They want to be able to stand up in front of society, publicly declare their love for one another and have society recognize their union. They want to call their partner their husband or wife.
They already have that ability and right. No state outlaws gay marriages. True conservatives like myself would oppose any such law because government can't ban religious ceremonies. Any gay person can go to a church that performs "gay marriages", slip rings on each other's fingers, and call their partner "my husband" or whatever. NOTHING prevents this now.
There, now you are actually telling some truth. This whole debate about "gay marriage" is really about gays trying to force the rest of society into treating them like "any other couple". The Thought Police are out!Mostly, they want society to treat them like they treat any other couple
