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.
Just so it stays on track with the real issue.
Why is it that gays are not allowed to have the same legal/financial benefits that are inherent in what the state calls marriage with out jumping through a bunch of hoops. There is a disconnect in here for a lot of people.
You've answered your own question. The state calls it marriage. The state defines what that is. The state has an interest in doing so because certain unions tend to produce better citizens than other unions. And we don't live in a vacuum here but have a legacy of historical record from the so-called Judeo-Christian tradition, which defines marriage as one man, one woman.
And for those saying the state has no business defining marriage, does the state have business assigning inheritance? Does it have business assigning child custody? Does it have business administering bankruptcy? Does it have business defining and enforcing property rights? Because all of those are tied up in marriage in one way or another.
In one breath you say no one is stopping them from marrying and in the next breath you say this??? You're all over the road.
You've answered your own question. The state calls it marriage. The state defines what that is. The state has an interest in doing so because certain unions tend to produce better citizens than other unions. And we don't live in a vacuum here but have a legacy of historical record from the so-called Judeo-Christian tradition, which defines marriage as one man, one woman.
And for those saying the state has no business defining marriage, does the state have business assigning inheritance? Does it have business assigning child custody? Does it have business administering bankruptcy? Does it have business defining and enforcing property rights? Because all of those are tied up in marriage in one way or another.
In one breath you say no one is stopping them from marrying and in the next breath you say this??? You're all over the road.
OK, so to you marriage depends on a piece of paper from the state. If the state doesn't bless a marriage, then it doesn't exist.
Fortunately not everyone thinks like you.
In one breath you say no one is stopping them from marrying and in the next breath you say this??? You're all over the road.
OK, so to you marriage depends on a piece of paper from the state. If the state doesn't bless a marriage, then it doesn't exist.
Fortunately not everyone thinks like you.
The state doesn't bless marriages, all the state does is confirm and record the legal status of the marriage contract.
And yes marriage does depend on a piece of paper from the state. Without said piece of paper, there is no legally recognized marriage contract.
OK, so to you marriage depends on a piece of paper from the state. If the state doesn't bless a marriage, then it doesn't exist.
Fortunately not everyone thinks like you.
The state doesn't bless marriages, all the state does is confirm and record the legal status of the marriage contract.
And yes marriage does depend on a piece of paper from the state. Without said piece of paper, there is no legally recognized marriage contract.
The key phrase is "legally recognized." People can be married all they want. Want gays want is legal recognition and more the benefits that recognition entails. Why should they have it? They already have all the legal rights everyone else does.
I'm down with gay marriage as long as I can say gay marriage is wrong, not rent, sell, associate with, or be forced to condone in any way. They say their rights are being violated but my right of association and speech are endangered by the PC police in this country. You are free to call me a bigot but my religious beliefs tell me that is wrong and that is decided by God and not by the Obama/state PC relilgion that seeks to impose its utopia on me.
The state doesn't bless marriages, all the state does is confirm and record the legal status of the marriage contract.
And yes marriage does depend on a piece of paper from the state. Without said piece of paper, there is no legally recognized marriage contract.
The key phrase is "legally recognized." People can be married all they want. Want gays want is legal recognition and more the benefits that recognition entails. Why should they have it? They already have all the legal rights everyone else does.
Then your marriage should not be recognized by the state. because then you would have one more legally recognized right than someone else.
The key phrase is "legally recognized." People can be married all they want. Want gays want is legal recognition and more the benefits that recognition entails. Why should they have it? They already have all the legal rights everyone else does.
Then your marriage should not be recognized by the state. because then you would have one more legally recognized right than someone else.
Only because I am a formerly single man married to a woman. Anybody else can do the same thing and have the same benefit.
I'm down with gay marriage as long as I can say gay marriage is wrong, not rent, sell, associate with, or be forced to condone in any way. They say their rights are being violated but my right of association and speech are endangered by the PC police in this country. You are free to call me a bigot but my religious beliefs tell me that is wrong and that is decided by God and not by the Obama/state PC relilgion that seeks to impose its utopia on me.
So you would rent to a single gay guy with a roommate just not two gay guys with a piece of paper that says they are married?
I'm down with gay marriage as long as I can say gay marriage is wrong, not rent, sell, associate with, or be forced to condone in any way. They say their rights are being violated but my right of association and speech are endangered by the PC police in this country. You are free to call me a bigot but my religious beliefs tell me that is wrong and that is decided by God and not by the Obama/state PC relilgion that seeks to impose its utopia on me.
So you would rent to a single gay guy with a roommate just not two gay guys with a piece of paper that says they are married?
I probably would in either case but I was arguing that anyone else shouldn't be forced to be a part of something that they find deeply immoral for whatever reason. You can go and be what you want but you can't force everyone else to accept that if they don't agree with it..
It use to be that hotel owners wouldn't rent rooms to ummarried couples. It sucked for them but the owner had a right not to participate in something he/she found immoral. Another hotel owner could if he did not object to it. Its a choice that someone has over how they want to interact with others in society.
You are free to call me a bigot...
any two adults should be able to enter into a legal contract, regardless of sex.
"Marriage" is also a statutory status.
The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children -- Pawelski et al. 118 (1): 349 -- PediatricsDEFINITIONS
It is important to note at the outset the distinction in the types of marriages that exist in the United States and throughout the world, namely civil marriage and religious marriage. In addition, there are significant legal distinctions among civil marriage, civil union, and domestic partnership, although these terms are often incorrectly used interchangeably.
Civil Marriage and Religious Marriage
Civil marriage is a legal status established through a license issued by a state government. Such status grants legal rights to, and imposes legal obligations on, the 2 married partners.
Depending on the faith, religious marriage is considered to be a liturgical rite, a sacrament, or a solemnization of the uniting of 2 persons and is recognized by the hierarchy and adherents of that religious group. The hierarchy, clergy, and in some cases members of religious organizations, establish their own criteria and rules for who may marry within their assemblies. They are not bound by statutory definitions of marriage. Civil government entities in the United States have no authority over a religious organization's autonomy.
In the United States, couples may choose to marry in a civil ceremony, a religious ceremony, or both. In the United States, state governments grant priests, rabbis, clerics, ministers, and other clergy presiding over a religious marriage the authority of the state to endorse the marriage license and establish a civil marriage. Certain public officials in the United States, such as judges, justices of the peace, and others, also have the authority to establish civil marriage.
By contrast, in many European countries and elsewhere in the world, religious officials have no authority to establish civil marriages. If couples in these countries wish to participate in the marriage ceremony of a faith tradition, religious ceremonies are often held once a civil ceremony has taken place. However, a marriage is considered legal only by means of issuance and endorsement of a marriage license by civil authorities.
Because clergy in the United States are vested with the authority of the government for purposes of civil marriage, many people are not aware of the distinction between civil and religious marriage and assume that the 2 are inextricably linked. However, the following analysis presumes this distinction. It addresses issues related to civil marriage, leaving issues of religious marriage to religious organizations and individuals.
Civil Union
A civil union is a legal mechanism, sanctioned by civil authority, intended to grant same-gender couples legal status somewhat similar to civil marriage. In the United States, civil unions have been established only in Vermont and Connecticut. In these states, same-gender couples are granted the same state-level rights, benefits, and protections as those granted to heterosexual married couples. No other states recognize civil unions. As such, same-gender couples considered to be legally united in either of those states are treated as single individuals when they cross into other states.
Unlike the national governments of some foreign countries, the US federal government does not recognize civil unions. As a result, >1000 federal rights, benefits, and protections are not made available to same-gender couples joined by civil union in the United States.
Domestic Partnership
A domestic partnership is a relationship between 2 individuals, often but not necessarily of the same gender, who live together and mutually support one another as spouses but who are not legally joined in a civil marriage or a civil union. Some same-gender couples enter into domestic partnership agreements to create legally enforceable contracts involving property, finances, inheritance, and/or health care. Domestic partnerships do not reach the same legal threshold as civil unions or civil marriages and, accordingly, do not afford couples the rights, benefits, and protections of civil marriage.
Then your marriage should not be recognized by the state. because then you would have one more legally recognized right than someone else.
Only because I am a formerly single man married to a woman. Anybody else can do the same thing and have the same benefit.
except gay people
There is no test for heterosexuality to issue a marriage license.
In the United States, couples may choose to marry in a civil ceremony, a religious ceremony, or both. In the United States, state governments grant priests, rabbis, clerics, ministers, and other clergy presiding over a religious marriage the authority of the state to endorse the marriage license and establish a civil marriage. Certain public officials in the United States, such as judges, justices of the peace, and others, also have the authority to establish civil marriage.
Marriage is and forever should be a religious institution, numbnuts of usmessageboard.com
It is a shame no one realizes this.
Why shouldn't same-sex straight "couples", no mater their sexual proclivities, who love one another, be allowed to marry?
Carry on........