Killing Homosexual Marriage

[Spinster]

Not so, Boss. Beginning June 1, 2015, Obimination, but Executive Order, mandated any same sex partners living together were automatically married

You have a serious reading comprehension problem. My post stated, June 1, 2014, not 2015, idiot.
Here is the list of 2015 Executive Orders from the Federal Register:

• EO 13707: Using Behavioral Science Insights To Better Serve the American People
• EO 13706: Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors
• EO 13705: Designating the International Renewable Energy Agency as a Public International Organization Entitled To Enjoy Certain Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities
• EO 13704: Presidential Innovation Fellows Program
• EO 13703: Implementing the National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States for 2015-2020
• EO 13702: Creating a National Strategic Computing Initiative
• EO 13701: Delegation of Certain Authorities and Assignment of Certain Functions Under the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015
• EO 13700: Establishing an Emergency Board To Investigate Disputes Between New Jersey Transit Rail and Certain of Its Employees Represented by Certain Labor Organizations
• EO 13699: Establishing the Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health
• EO 13698: Hostage Recovery Activities
• EO 13697: Amendment to Executive Order 11155, Awards for Special Capability in Career and Technical Education

Federal Register | 2015 Barack Obama Executive Orders


********************************************

Mind pointing out which one make any two same sex persons living together married?



>>>>

 

[Nosmo King]

Could at least one opponent to marriage equality point out the harm, the tangible danger same sex marriage poses? What possible difference could marriage equality make to you if you are not homosexual and desirous of matrimony? What would be the point of taking away the right to marry? What noble purpose would be served by rescinding marriage equality?

 

[Syriusly]

Ladies and Gentlemen, now that we have been so thoroughly entertained by the liberal secular push for homosexual marriage legalization in all 50 states... {yay}... We can sit back and look forward to it's demise.

What's that, Boss? Did you mean to say "demise?" What's wrong with you man, the high court just ruled it constitutional across the land... it hardly seems likely we're going to see it's demise! What kind of drugs are you smoking these days? ...Yes, I know... bold statement... I've been known to make those here. It's what I do!

What the giddy left has not come down off their clouds enough to realize is how much vehement opposition is out there, who have no intention of accepting this as a "norm" of society. Oh yes, the studies all show there has been a growing acceptance of gay marriage but we have to look at the reason for this. Homosexuals represent somewhere around 10% of the population, studies vary but in that ballpark. The gay marriage initiative has been pushed largely by heterosexuals, not homosexuals. Heterosexuals, you have to believe, are not supporting it because homosexuality appeals to them personally, it is because there has been a perceived discrimination and inequity presented. The poor gays are being denied something.. that is what has fueled heterosexual support.

Now, what they have been denied is same-sex marriage licenses, which curiously didn't exist because marriage is the union of a man and woman. SCOTUS has now ruled that States cannot ban same-sex marriages through licenses which restrict that. So now, a marriage license has to be issued to same-sex couples the same as traditional male-female couples. Gay Marriage, here to stay, right? Not so fast....

There is no Constitutional requirement for the State to issue marriage licenses or recognize marriages of any kind. Regardless of whether they do or not, it doesn't change what any two people want to call marriage. I have pointed out numerous times in these long thread debates, that I attended a gay wedding in 1986, in rural Alabama.... of all places. No one came and stopped it, no one protested or caused a scene, it was a beautiful ceremony conducted by a Rastafarian pastor on a nice Spring day, on a mountainside in the country. We threw rice, the couple went on a honeymoon, they had a wedding cake and wedding album. In every sense of the word, in their hearts and souls, they are married. It does not matter that the State of Alabama doesn't recognize it.

So again, it is this perception of inequity and discrimination which has prompted the heterosexual support behind gay marriage. If States remove themselves from the issue by rendering marriage licensing obsolete, there is no more inequity or discrimination. Without that perception, the heterosexual support for gay marriage dissipates and eventually goes away, along with the popularity of gays marrying. After all, if there is no benefit to marriage from government, what is the point for homosexuals? Sure, there might be that rare case like the gay wedding I attended in 1986, but I am betting the vast majority of gay couples wouldn't really give a crap about "marrying" if there weren't some benefit.

Is my idea an unconventional strategy? Perhaps, but there are not many options remaining if we hope to get rid of this atrocious SCOTUS ruling. There isn't enough support to adopt a Constitutional Amendment and prohibition amendments don't historically last anyway. No other viable legal options remain, it's settled law according to SCOTUS. Keep in mind that even slavery could not be ended in this country without Amending the Constitution because of SCOTUS ruling.... even after a Civil War! So this is here to stay... as long as States authorize marriage licenses.

So Boss, how do we deal with the many intricacies of insurance, property rights, taxes, etc., if we don't have some government method of defining domestic partnerships? Well, contracts! That's how we do it. The same as my gay friends from 1986 have done it. They obtained a series of various contract agreements to cover those bases as they arose and they have no real issue in that regard other than taxation, which is minimal. And as more and more States abandon marriage licensing, this contract process will become more standard with insurance and other things... it will simply be a matter of filling out a form and submitting it... done! Equality!

Oh... So you're gonna take your ball and go home? Well, yes... in a manner of speaking, that's exactly what we are going to do. You didn't think we're just going to let you hijack the traditional institution of marriage and get away with that, did you? A non-sequitur... that's what you turn the SCOTUS ruling into. That effectively Kills Homosexual Marriage.

Boss, states not ratifying gay marriage will have zero to do with the whole senario. Beginning June 1, 2014, Obomination, by way of Executive Decision, made any and all same sex partners living together officially married. I remember it well as I was so outraged. .

Did you happen to be hit hard on the head that day? Or suffer some kind of stroke?

I am just wondering what kind of event would lead to your hallucinations.

You, of all people, implying another human as damaged is the most laughable thing I've seen in years!

Oh I am sure you find lots of things laughable.......things in your head....things no one else can see....things that no one else would invent.....

Like the concept of homosexuality?

No, no one would ever buy that absurdity

Never mind then

'concept of homosexuality'

as absurd as the concept of Christianity.

 

[Syriusly]

[
Look it up asshole. I gave you the effective date. It was all over the news at the time. How'd you manage to miss it, or were you just into switch hitting at that time? Fuck off!

The voices in your head are not 'the news'

No, the voice I do hear in my head is your bitchy fem little voice saying your screen name, and that's not news as you make lame attempts at attacking me constantly. STFU for once in your life.

Don't you find it hard to type when you are busy with a magnifying glass trying to find that teeny tiny dick you thought you had somewhere down there?

 

[Boss]

Could at least one opponent to marriage equality point out the harm, the tangible danger same sex marriage poses? What possible difference could marriage equality make to you if you are not homosexual and desirous of matrimony? What would be the point of taking away the right to marry? What noble purpose would be served by rescinding marriage equality?

Your argument has been made and SCOTUS has ruled. Are you hoping to discover some right-winger who has been living under a rock and is not aware of the recent ruling? Why else would you present an argument for what is now settled law?

The thread OP is about killing homosexual marriage. I've outlined my plan very clearly and concisely. You kill it by rendering it irrelevant. Once the government is removed from sanctioning marriages, there is no more issue to exploit... no more perception of inequity.. and eventually, no more gay marriage to speak of. It all disappears as quickly as it emerged in society and life goes on.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Not so, Boss. Beginning June 1, 2015, Obimination, but Executive Order, mandated any same sex partners living together were automatically married

You have a serious reading comprehension problem. My post stated, June 1, 2014, not 2015, idiot.
Here is the list of 2015 Executive Orders from the Federal Register:

• EO 13707: Using Behavioral Science Insights To Better Serve the American People
• EO 13706: Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors
• EO 13705: Designating the International Renewable Energy Agency as a Public International Organization Entitled To Enjoy Certain Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities
• EO 13704: Presidential Innovation Fellows Program
• EO 13703: Implementing the National HIV/AIDS Strategy for the United States for 2015-2020
• EO 13702: Creating a National Strategic Computing Initiative
• EO 13701: Delegation of Certain Authorities and Assignment of Certain Functions Under the Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015
• EO 13700: Establishing an Emergency Board To Investigate Disputes Between New Jersey Transit Rail and Certain of Its Employees Represented by Certain Labor Organizations
• EO 13699: Establishing the Advisory Board on Toxic Substances and Worker Health
• EO 13698: Hostage Recovery Activities
• EO 13697: Amendment to Executive Order 11155, Awards for Special Capability in Career and Technical Education

Federal Register | 2015 Barack Obama Executive Orders


********************************************

Mind pointing out which one make any two same sex persons living together married?



>>>>

Well where the fuck is it? I could not find it. No one could find it. It exists only in your warped and defective brain.

 

[Pop23]

Boss, states not ratifying gay marriage will have zero to do with the whole senario. Beginning June 1, 2014, Obomination, by way of Executive Decision, made any and all same sex partners living together officially married. I remember it well as I was so outraged. .

Did you happen to be hit hard on the head that day? Or suffer some kind of stroke?

I am just wondering what kind of event would lead to your hallucinations.

You, of all people, implying another human as damaged is the most laughable thing I've seen in years!

Oh I am sure you find lots of things laughable.......things in your head....things no one else can see....things that no one else would invent.....

Like the concept of homosexuality?

No, no one would ever buy that absurdity

Never mind then

'concept of homosexuality'

as absurd as the concept of Christianity.

Are you a Christian?

 

[Nosmo King]

Could at least one opponent to marriage equality point out the harm, the tangible danger same sex marriage poses? What possible difference could marriage equality make to you if you are not homosexual and desirous of matrimony? What would be the point of taking away the right to marry? What noble purpose would be served by rescinding marriage equality?

Your argument has been made and SCOTUS has ruled. Are you hoping to discover some right-winger who has been living under a rock and is not aware of the recent ruling? Why else would you present an argument for what is now settled law?

The thread OP is about killing homosexual marriage. I've outlined my plan very clearly and concisely. You kill it by rendering it irrelevant. Once the government is removed from sanctioning marriages, there is no more issue to exploit... no more perception of inequity.. and eventually, no more gay marriage to speak of. It all disappears as quickly as it emerged in society and life goes on.

What is the purpose of killing Gay marriage? Why is it such a threat? Why bother at all?

And state sanctioned marriage creates a new legal entity. It essentially melds the fortunes of two people and creates a next-of-kin relationship where no such relationship previously existed. It provides protections and benefits not available through similar contracts. The state has established special courts to dissolve those contracts.

Churches sanctify marriages, but the state license establishes them.

So again I ask, why be concerned about marriage equality? Where's the threat? Why the opposition?

 

[Pop23]

Could at least one opponent to marriage equality point out the harm, the tangible danger same sex marriage poses? What possible difference could marriage equality make to you if you are not homosexual and desirous of matrimony? What would be the point of taking away the right to marry? What noble purpose would be served by rescinding marriage equality?

Your argument has been made and SCOTUS has ruled. Are you hoping to discover some right-winger who has been living under a rock and is not aware of the recent ruling? Why else would you present an argument for what is now settled law?

The thread OP is about killing homosexual marriage. I've outlined my plan very clearly and concisely. You kill it by rendering it irrelevant. Once the government is removed from sanctioning marriages, there is no more issue to exploit... no more perception of inequity.. and eventually, no more gay marriage to speak of. It all disappears as quickly as it emerged in society and life goes on.

What is the purpose of killing Gay marriage? Why is it such a threat? Why bother at all?

And state sanctioned marriage creates a new legal entity. It essentially melds the fortunes of two people and creates a next-of-kin relationship where no such relationship previously existed. It provides protections and benefits no available through similar contracts. The state has established special courts to dissolve those contracts.

Churches sanctify marriages, but the state license establishes them.

So again I ask, why be concerned about marriage equality? Where's the threat? Why the opposition?

That entity could have been established without all the drama.

Marriage established a new family where one didn't previously existed for a very clear reason. It was an attempt to create order in what once was a chaotic process, tracking bloodlines.

That was not necessary with homosexual couples (unless a gay man married a lesbian).

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

There is nothing wrong with legal homo marriage as long as it's between a homo man and a lesbian. That scenario can procreate so the protection of legal marriage is valid.

 

[LoneLaugher]

What our incredibly long winded OP is saying...is that in his plan, nobody will be married. Two people who love each other will just draw up a series of contracts because the state government will no longer sanction a thing called "marriage".

Since a gay couple and a straight couple can both avail themselves of the exact same series of contracts, there will be no problem, dumb shit. That will be known as equality.

The OP likely thinks that some states......especially his backwater home....will make some or all of these contracts void if both parties are of the same sex....thereby "killing" the homosexual union business. Won't happen, dummy.

This is an incredible thread fail.

 

[Nosmo King]

Could at least one opponent to marriage equality point out the harm, the tangible danger same sex marriage poses? What possible difference could marriage equality make to you if you are not homosexual and desirous of matrimony? What would be the point of taking away the right to marry? What noble purpose would be served by rescinding marriage equality?

Your argument has been made and SCOTUS has ruled. Are you hoping to discover some right-winger who has been living under a rock and is not aware of the recent ruling? Why else would you present an argument for what is now settled law?

The thread OP is about killing homosexual marriage. I've outlined my plan very clearly and concisely. You kill it by rendering it irrelevant. Once the government is removed from sanctioning marriages, there is no more issue to exploit... no more perception of inequity.. and eventually, no more gay marriage to speak of. It all disappears as quickly as it emerged in society and life goes on.

What is the purpose of killing Gay marriage? Why is it such a threat? Why bother at all?

And state sanctioned marriage creates a new legal entity. It essentially melds the fortunes of two people and creates a next-of-kin relationship where no such relationship previously existed. It provides protections and benefits no available through similar contracts. The state has established special courts to dissolve those contracts.

Churches sanctify marriages, but the state license establishes them.

So again I ask, why be concerned about marriage equality? Where's the threat? Why the opposition?

All the drama? Just issue marriage licenses. Problem solved. Why the opposition? What damage is wrought by marriage equality?

That entity could have been established without all the drama.

Marriage established a new family where one didn't previously existed for a very clear reason. It was an attempt to create order in what once was a chaotic process, tracking bloodlines.

That was not necessary with homosexual couples (unless a gay man married a lesbian).

 

[Boss]

What our incredibly long winded OP is saying...is that in his plan, nobody will be married. Two people who love each other will just draw up a series of contracts because the state government will no longer sanction a thing called "marriage".

Since a gay couple and a straight couple can both avail themselves of the exact same series of contracts, there will be no problem, dumb shit. That will be known as equality.

The OP likely thinks that some states......especially his backwater home....will make some or all of these contracts void if both parties are of the same sex....thereby "killing" the homosexual union business. Won't happen, dummy.

This is an incredible thread fail.

Make contracts void if parties are of the same sex? What the hell do you mean? How would anyone do that?

Thread fail or not, this is what you can expect to see happening across America in the coming years. The SCOTUS ruling didn't settle this issue for society... sorry... just didn't.

 

[LoneLaugher]

What our incredibly long winded OP is saying...is that in his plan, nobody will be married. Two people who love each other will just draw up a series of contracts because the state government will no longer sanction a thing called "marriage".

Since a gay couple and a straight couple can both avail themselves of the exact same series of contracts, there will be no problem, dumb shit. That will be known as equality.

The OP likely thinks that some states......especially his backwater home....will make some or all of these contracts void if both parties are of the same sex....thereby "killing" the homosexual union business. Won't happen, dummy.

This is an incredible thread fail.

Make contracts void if parties are of the same sex? What the hell do you mean? How would anyone do that?

Thread fail or not, this is what you can expect to see happening across America in the coming years. The SCOTUS ruling didn't settle this issue for society... sorry... just didn't.

You think when all is said and done.....homosexual couples and heterosexual couples will be treated exactly the same by the state? Is that it?

 

[Boss]

What our incredibly long winded OP is saying...is that in his plan, nobody will be married. Two people who love each other will just draw up a series of contracts because the state government will no longer sanction a thing called "marriage".

Since a gay couple and a straight couple can both avail themselves of the exact same series of contracts, there will be no problem, dumb shit. That will be known as equality.

The OP likely thinks that some states......especially his backwater home....will make some or all of these contracts void if both parties are of the same sex....thereby "killing" the homosexual union business. Won't happen, dummy.

This is an incredible thread fail.

Make contracts void if parties are of the same sex? What the hell do you mean? How would anyone do that?

Thread fail or not, this is what you can expect to see happening across America in the coming years. The SCOTUS ruling didn't settle this issue for society... sorry... just didn't.

You think when all is said and done.....homosexual couples and heterosexual couples will be treated exactly the same by the state? Is that it?

Just as much as they are now or ever have been.

 

[Nosmo King]

There is nothing wrong with legal homo marriage as long as it's between a homo man and a lesbian. That scenario can procreate so the protection of legal marriage is valid.

Is the marriage of two elderly people invalid? Is procreation a requirement of marriage? Your argument falls on its face.

 

[LoneLaugher]

What our incredibly long winded OP is saying...is that in his plan, nobody will be married. Two people who love each other will just draw up a series of contracts because the state government will no longer sanction a thing called "marriage".

Since a gay couple and a straight couple can both avail themselves of the exact same series of contracts, there will be no problem, dumb shit. That will be known as equality.

The OP likely thinks that some states......especially his backwater home....will make some or all of these contracts void if both parties are of the same sex....thereby "killing" the homosexual union business. Won't happen, dummy.

This is an incredible thread fail.

Make contracts void if parties are of the same sex? What the hell do you mean? How would anyone do that?

Thread fail or not, this is what you can expect to see happening across America in the coming years. The SCOTUS ruling didn't settle this issue for society... sorry... just didn't.

You think when all is said and done.....homosexual couples and heterosexual couples will be treated exactly the same by the state? Is that it?

Just as much as they are now or ever have been.

Are you OK?

You've basically suggested that gay people be treated the same as straight people. That makes you one of the people pushing the gay agenda. Welcome to the right side of history, dumb shit.

 

[Nosmo King]

What our incredibly long winded OP is saying...is that in his plan, nobody will be married. Two people who love each other will just draw up a series of contracts because the state government will no longer sanction a thing called "marriage".

Since a gay couple and a straight couple can both avail themselves of the exact same series of contracts, there will be no problem, dumb shit. That will be known as equality.

The OP likely thinks that some states......especially his backwater home....will make some or all of these contracts void if both parties are of the same sex....thereby "killing" the homosexual union business. Won't happen, dummy.

This is an incredible thread fail.

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater, or the rice as it were.

 

[TheOldSchool]

OK. You go make all those changes all across the country...

It's not up to me, it's up to the States. Alabama has already tried to pass a measure... actually, did pass it, but needed a super-majority because of some stupid rule regarding the governor's agenda. It will eventually be passed because it had enormous support. The same thing is happening in states across the country where same-sex marriage had been banned. This won't take long to develop once it starts.

There is not one word in the Constitution which requires States to recognize marriage. I think this is something Constitutional Conservatives, Social Conservatives and Libertarian Conservatives can all support.

So your solution is that states stop marrying anybody and instead calls it a union or something like that? I think that's fair. And if a gay or straight couple wants to call themselves married, they just have to find a church that will do it.

Brilliant! More discrimination. Substitute sexual orientation discrimination for religious discrimination. Only the religious and those willing to submit to religious rituals can then be "married"

Who cares? Most religious beliefs are a crock anyways. If you want to call yourself married as a Protestant, or Pastafarian, or Jedi, well who cares? Or even as an atheist call yourself married. It's all the same anyways. If the government only hands out civil unions so what?

 

[Boss]

What our incredibly long winded OP is saying...is that in his plan, nobody will be married. Two people who love each other will just draw up a series of contracts because the state government will no longer sanction a thing called "marriage".

Since a gay couple and a straight couple can both avail themselves of the exact same series of contracts, there will be no problem, dumb shit. That will be known as equality.

The OP likely thinks that some states......especially his backwater home....will make some or all of these contracts void if both parties are of the same sex....thereby "killing" the homosexual union business. Won't happen, dummy.

This is an incredible thread fail.

Make contracts void if parties are of the same sex? What the hell do you mean? How would anyone do that?

Thread fail or not, this is what you can expect to see happening across America in the coming years. The SCOTUS ruling didn't settle this issue for society... sorry... just didn't.

You think when all is said and done.....homosexual couples and heterosexual couples will be treated exactly the same by the state? Is that it?

Just as much as they are now or ever have been.

Are you OK?

You've basically suggested that gay people be treated the same as straight people. That makes you one of the people pushing the gay agenda. Welcome to the right side of history, dumb shit.

To my knowledge, gay people have never been NOT treated equally. No marriage license ever required disclosure of your sexuality or restricted it in any way. I would think that any law which specifically singled out gays to discriminate against them would be unconstitutional because of the 14th Amendment and probably a few others. So from a legal standpoint, I don't see where gays have been discriminated against.

If my solution resolves the inequity problem you perceive, then what is the big deal? Sounds like I've come up with a plan you can support. No more government sanctioned marriages for anyone.

Welcome to the 21st Century!