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.
Arent couples in Civil Unions hit with gigantic estate taxes when the other dies (as opposed to 0% if you're married)? They arent equal, so unless youre out there in Washington trying to amend some aspects you should probably just quit worrying about the whole thing and get on with your own business.
You dont have to like gay marriage, you dont have to support it, you dont have to teach your kids that its an OK option thats your prerogative. But when it comes to the lives of other people, why do you have to stick your nose in their business?
,
Gays are grasping little things, too. The bottom line is that they are after government benefits designed to protect women and children,
No, they are after equality. If two gay adults commit their entire life together (like a man/woman), and one dies, is asking for the same tax rules as the straight couple "after government benefits designed to protect women and children"?
.
Gays aren't happy unless they are flouting their perversions and pressing to have them accepted as the norm. They are a snippy, agressive lot more self-righteous than fundametalist preachers.
Where did you park your time machine? I'm sure you're sorely missed in the 1930's.
As I am equally sure you belong on the set of The Hunger Games. Decadence isn't progress.
Lets put the issue on the national ballot let both sides make there case and have the people vote on it.
Gays aren't happy unless they are flouting their perversions and pressing to have them accepted as the norm. They are a snippy, agressive lot more self-righteous than fundametalist preachers.
Gays just want the law to recognize their unions in the same way the law recognizes straight unions.
They are not trying to become the "norm", and they are not trying to force you out of your own personal heterosexual relationship.
Why do you care so much about what gay people do in the privacy of their own home?
.
Not all gays for sure, but the activist gays wouldn't be satisfied with civil unions even if they had the EXACT same rights as marriages. The reason of course isn't about gay rights, but about rubbing it in the faces of the evangelicals. Childish really.
I'm tired of all this civil union's ain't good enough and semantical bullshit, they can amend some aspects of civil unions to give equal legl rights to gays but leave marriage alone.
Well, the DOMA kind of prevents that. I agree that the answer to the problem is to let straights keep the "marriage" name and give "Civil Unions" every right and privilege legally, that married couples have.
So separate but equal is your answer? I somehow doubt that such a decision will be forthcoming from the SC, but given some of its current members it would not suprise me. Would the right next go after interacial or interfaith marriage? Would you support making the bond between a Christian Bride and her Athiest Husband a Civil Union?
Gays are grasping little things, too. The bottom line is that they are after government benefits designed to protect women and children,
No, they are after equality. If two gay adults commit their entire life together (like a man/woman), and one dies, is asking for the same tax rules as the straight couple "after government benefits designed to protect women and children"?
.
If two gay adults commit their entire lives together, it's nobody's business but theirs. Why should the government lose revenue sanctioning it?
Marriage is and always has been an institution for the protection of women and children.
Why are you pretending otherwise?
Why can't negroes who want to marry white women accept civil unions and just be done with it? Marriage is reserved for two people of the same race!
Who says that?
A: No one.
Why not just eliminate marriage from the law entirely and call them all civil unions.
Of course gay marriage won't affect heterosexual marriages.
Who would even think such a thing?
I take that as a no to my suggestion then. So my next question would be.... if it wouldn't be good enough for you why should it be good enough for them?
Gays just want the law to recognize their unions in the same way the law recognizes straight unions.
They are not trying to become the "norm", and they are not trying to force you out of your own personal heterosexual relationship.
Why do you care so much about what gay people do in the privacy of their own home?
.
Not all gays for sure, but the activist gays wouldn't be satisfied with civil unions even if they had the EXACT same rights as marriages. The reason of course isn't about gay rights, but about rubbing it in the faces of the evangelicals. Childish really.
Strawman.
Federal law discriminates against gays in literally a thousand ways. Gay marriages can't file a married tax return. A gay woman is right now before the Supreme Court because she is haveing to pay estate taxes on an inheritance left to her by her wife that a heterosexual survivor would not have to pay. Surviving gay spouses cannot collect Social Security survivor benefits even though they pay into SS. Gay spouses of federal employees are not eligible for medical insurance benefits of their spouse.
The list goes on and on and on and on.
Making this about the word "marriage" and inventing strawmen is what is childish. It is a massive smokescreen to conceal the real issues at stake. It is a red herring to distract from the fact that gays are being taxed extra just for being gay.
Well, the DOMA kind of prevents that. I agree that the answer to the problem is to let straights keep the "marriage" name and give "Civil Unions" every right and privilege legally, that married couples have.
So separate but equal is your answer? I somehow doubt that such a decision will be forthcoming from the SC, but given some of its current members it would not suprise me. Would the right next go after interacial or interfaith marriage? Would you support making the bond between a Christian Bride and her Athiest Husband a Civil Union?
Yes, separate but equal. That's fair. Gay's are separate, that is what they want, but they also want to be equal, and I believe they should be.
The reason of course isn't about gay rights, but about rubbing it in the faces of the evangelicals. Childish really.
Why can't negroes who want to marry white women accept civil unions and just be done with it? Marriage is reserved for two people of the same race!
The reason of course isn't about gay rights, but about rubbing it in the faces of the evangelicals. Childish really.
Pred- You're very wrong on this account, I'm afraid. When it comes to the gay people I know (including my sister-in-law), it's not about 'childish' revenge (I mean, come on man). The only time they care about the evangelicals is when they're dumping millions of dollars into preventing them from getting married. Besides that, they really want nothing to do with them.
Her partner goes to work, and she stays home and takes care of the daughter. They go on vacations, celebrate Christmas, and intend to grow old together just like anyone else. So if (God forbid) one of them passes away, why is it such a big deal if they get the same waive on estate tax? What's the big deal if they file joint taxes?
What's the big deal if we call that a marriage?
.
The reason of course isn't about gay rights, but about rubbing it in the faces of the evangelicals. Childish really.
Pred- You're very wrong on this account, I'm afraid. When it comes to the gay people I know (including my sister-in-law), it's not about 'childish' revenge (I mean, come on man). The only time they care about the evangelicals is when they're dumping millions of dollars into preventing them from getting married. Besides that, they really want nothing to do with them.
Her partner goes to work, and she stays home and takes care of the daughter. They go on vacations, celebrate Christmas, and intend to grow old together just like anyone else. So if (God forbid) one of them passes away, why is it such a big deal if they get the same waive on estate tax? What's the big deal if they file joint taxes?
What's the big deal if we call that a marriage?
.
I disagree as in my personal life I know two gay couples, one male, one female. Both couples delight in walking while holding hands on Sunday mornings and every week they talk about kissing outside one christian church in town or another.
That is "rubbing it in the face of the christians", and for no other reason than to do so.
The reason of course isn't about gay rights, but about rubbing it in the faces of the evangelicals. Childish really.
Pred- You're very wrong on this account, I'm afraid. When it comes to the gay people I know (including my sister-in-law), it's not about 'childish' revenge (I mean, come on man). The only time they care about the evangelicals is when they're dumping millions of dollars into preventing them from getting married. Besides that, they really want nothing to do with them.
Her partner goes to work, and she stays home and takes care of the daughter. They go on vacations, celebrate Christmas, and intend to grow old together just like anyone else. So if (God forbid) one of them passes away, why is it such a big deal if they get the same waive on estate tax? What's the big deal if they file joint taxes?
What's the big deal if we call that a marriage?
.
I disagree as in my personal life I know two gay couples, one male, one female. Both couples delight in walking while holding hands on Sunday mornings and every week they talk about kissing outside one christian church in town or another.
That is "rubbing it in the face of the christians", and for no other reason than to do so.
Where did you park your time machine? I'm sure you're sorely missed in the 1930's.
As I am equally sure you belong on the set of The Hunger Games. Decadence isn't progress.
We can sit here all day defining what we consider "progress", but RDD is right; your view on gays is more similar to views held in the 1930's vs 2013.
I mean, they were pretty progressive back then, right? Just try not to pay attention to the black and white drinking fountains.
.
Pred- You're very wrong on this account, I'm afraid. When it comes to the gay people I know (including my sister-in-law), it's not about 'childish' revenge (I mean, come on man). The only time they care about the evangelicals is when they're dumping millions of dollars into preventing them from getting married. Besides that, they really want nothing to do with them.
Her partner goes to work, and she stays home and takes care of the daughter. They go on vacations, celebrate Christmas, and intend to grow old together just like anyone else. So if (God forbid) one of them passes away, why is it such a big deal if they get the same waive on estate tax? What's the big deal if they file joint taxes?
What's the big deal if we call that a marriage?
.
I disagree as in my personal life I know two gay couples, one male, one female. Both couples delight in walking while holding hands on Sunday mornings and every week they talk about kissing outside one christian church in town or another.
That is "rubbing it in the face of the christians", and for no other reason than to do so.
That is no different than wearing a flag pin to tell the terrorists they have not won. Gay people kissing in front of a church is their way of telling the haters they have not won.
It's about freedom.
As I am equally sure you belong on the set of The Hunger Games. Decadence isn't progress.
We can sit here all day defining what we consider "progress", but RDD is right; your view on gays is more similar to views held in the 1930's vs 2013.
I mean, they were pretty progressive back then, right? Just try not to pay attention to the black and white drinking fountains.
.
RDD is an idiot much like you, evidently. There is no sound reason the federal government should sanction same-sex marriages. The federal government had nothing to say about marriage for over 200 years, and now gays suddenly discover a constitutional right for them to marry.
That tired saw comparing gays to blacks just doesn't cut it. It demans black people and their struggles. Next they'll be prancing about singing Swing Low. Sweet Chariot.
Pred- You're very wrong on this account, I'm afraid. When it comes to the gay people I know (including my sister-in-law), it's not about 'childish' revenge (I mean, come on man). The only time they care about the evangelicals is when they're dumping millions of dollars into preventing them from getting married. Besides that, they really want nothing to do with them.
Her partner goes to work, and she stays home and takes care of the daughter. They go on vacations, celebrate Christmas, and intend to grow old together just like anyone else. So if (God forbid) one of them passes away, why is it such a big deal if they get the same waive on estate tax? What's the big deal if they file joint taxes?
What's the big deal if we call that a marriage?
.
I disagree as in my personal life I know two gay couples, one male, one female. Both couples delight in walking while holding hands on Sunday mornings and every week they talk about kissing outside one christian church in town or another.
That is "rubbing it in the face of the christians", and for no other reason than to do so.
Sure, there's going to be examples of both. But at the same token, the Christians do a pretty f***ing good job at marginalizing gay people, including making homosexual teenagers feel like there's something horribly wrong with them. Have you ever checked out the suicide rates of gay teens? How many derogatory terms do you know for gay people (vs how many do you know for Christians)?
Anyways, that's beside the point...
The way I see it, I'll still be able to be married to my wife, raise my kids based on MY OWN values, send them to a school of my choosing, ect if gay people are allowed to marry. So who the heck am I to stop them?
Why do you care so much, and what do you gain from preventing gay marriage?
.
