Jillian has dificulty wrapping her head around the directions on a package of toilet paper.You really are thick. It appears you can not wrap your head around what Im saying.
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.
Jillian has dificulty wrapping her head around the directions on a package of toilet paper.You really are thick. It appears you can not wrap your head around what Im saying.
Translation? FED belongs in this because Tick Duck doesn't recognize the 9th and Tenth Amendments...much less the rest of the Constitution.
Translation, if you form a legal union partnership in one state, another state doesn't have to recognize it. That seems pretty stupid. But now you want the FED to enforce conflicts between states? Isn't that a problem, given the 11th Amendment?
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
Keep government out of 'marriage' except in the places where government belongs.. taxation, power of attorney for emergencies, inheritance, contracts, etc... Deem any union of 2 consenting adults (and subsequent families) as family units and treat everyone the same...
But do not force acceptance of others or by others in terms of choices that are made... people have the right to be with anyone they choose, love anyone they choose (consenting adults, not brother and sister and all that jazz)... but just as you have the freedom to do that, you also have the freedom to discriminate against the choices of others.. you have the right to discriminate (not accept) punks, criminals, and others who do not fit in to your realm of acceptable behavior.. and whether i agree of disagree, that choice in who to accept is personal... you have the freedom to be accepting just as you have the freedom to be bigoted or prejudiced... it may not be proper, it may not be nice, but such is the spectrum within a free society
Liberty^^^ Living your life and not forcing your beliefs on anyone through the power of government.
you do realize the irony of that post, tommy, don't you? you know, given you think it's ok for YOUR beliefs to be imposed through the power of government.
hypocrite.
Translation, if you form a legal union partnership in one state, another state doesn't have to recognize it. That seems pretty stupid. But now you want the FED to enforce conflicts between states? Isn't that a problem, given the 11th Amendment?
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
So you piss on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and thing that Loving v Virginia is a bad decision? Might as well be fighting the 13th Amendment, and allowing states to decide if slavery should be brought back.
Man, you are one shallow dude.
Marriage has ALWAYS been defined as between a man and a woman. It is centuries of tradition. A civil union can be created to give all the same perks as traditional marriage so what's the big fucking deal? Is this just a ploy to diminish the traditional values of most Americans or just a political weapon to divide the people? Cause it sure seems so since there is an alternative that achieves the same goal, civil union legislation.
I mean this is considered an "alternative" lifestyle so why the push for a traditional label that has long been honored by everyone?
Many of you claim some of us are against equal treatment but you're wrong. You can have equal treatment but you don't need to trash traditional values to achieve it.
Translation, if you form a legal union partnership in one state, another state doesn't have to recognize it. That seems pretty stupid. But now you want the FED to enforce conflicts between states? Isn't that a problem, given the 11th Amendment?
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
So you piss on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and thing that Loving v Virginia is a bad decision? Might as well be fighting the 13th Amendment, and allowing states to decide if slavery should be brought back.
Man, you are one shallow dude.
Loving v Virginia:Translation, if you form a legal union partnership in one state, another state doesn't have to recognize it. That seems pretty stupid. But now you want the FED to enforce conflicts between states? Isn't that a problem, given the 11th Amendment?
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
So you piss on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and thing that Loving v Virginia is a bad decision? Might as well be fighting the 13th Amendment, and allowing states to decide if slavery should be brought back.
Man, you are one shallow dude.
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival....
The government should have absolutely no role in marriage. No perks or set backs, no "license', which is essentially outlawing marriage unless authorization is granted by the "authorities" to do so.
This issue would be a complete no-issue if it weren't the always intrusive, state that wants to usurp the social elements of society for dictation.
Keep government out of 'marriage' except in the places where government belongs.. taxation, power of attorney for emergencies, inheritance, contracts, etc... Deem any union of 2 consenting adults (and subsequent families) as family units and treat everyone the same...
But do not force acceptance of others or by others in terms of choices that are made... people have the right to be with anyone they choose, love anyone they choose (consenting adults, not brother and sister and all that jazz)... but just as you have the freedom to do that, you also have the freedom to discriminate against the choices of others.. you have the right to discriminate (not accept) punks, criminals, and others who do not fit in to your realm of acceptable behavior.. and whether i agree of disagree, that choice in who to accept is personal... you have the freedom to be accepting just as you have the freedom to be bigoted or prejudiced... it may not be proper, it may not be nice, but such is the spectrum within a free society
Liberty^^^ Living your life and not forcing your beliefs on anyone through the power of government.
you do realize the irony of that post, tommy, don't you? you know, given you think it's ok for YOUR beliefs to be imposed through the power of government.
hypocrite.
Marriage has ALWAYS been defined as between a man and a woman. It is centuries of tradition. A civil union can be created to give all the same perks as traditional marriage so what's the big fucking deal? Is this just a ploy to diminish the traditional values of most Americans or just a political weapon to divide the people? Cause it sure seems so since there is an alternative that achieves the same goal, civil union legislation.
I mean this is considered an "alternative" lifestyle so why the push for a traditional label that has long been honored by everyone?
Many of you claim some of us are against equal treatment but you're wrong. You can have equal treatment but you don't need to trash traditional values to achieve it.
WTF is wrong with marriage that 50% end in divorce? Is that trashing "traditional values"?
How does gay marriage harm your marriage?
Translation? FED belongs in this because Tick Duck doesn't recognize the 9th and Tenth Amendments...much less the rest of the Constitution.
Translation, if you form a legal union partnership in one state, another state doesn't have to recognize it. That seems pretty stupid. But now you want the FED to enforce conflicts between states? Isn't that a problem, given the 11th Amendment?
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
While true I wish civil unions would be embraced so we could put this issue behind us. It's damaging to both parties and fosters gridlock.
You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?
No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.
It's all about power and tearing down what conservatives value.
Since history shows marriage is a man and a woman, the liberals want to tear that down and rewrite history.
They want to stick it some married couples face that Bob and Bill are like Bob and Jill with their kids at the mall.
Liberals are led by evil people and the dumb ones follow.
Marriage has ALWAYS been defined as between a man and a woman. It is centuries of tradition. A civil union can be created to give all the same perks as traditional marriage so what's the big fucking deal? Is this just a ploy to diminish the traditional values of most Americans or just a political weapon to divide the people? Cause it sure seems so since there is an alternative that achieves the same goal, civil union legislation.
I mean this is considered an "alternative" lifestyle so why the push for a traditional label that has long been honored by everyone?
Many of you claim some of us are against equal treatment but you're wrong. You can have equal treatment but you don't need to trash traditional values to achieve it.
They arent. Presently, the Fed Gvmnt does not recognize same-sex couples as married.Translation, if you form a legal union partnership in one state, another state doesn't have to recognize it. That seems pretty stupid. But now you want the FED to enforce conflicts between states? Isn't that a problem, given the 11th Amendment?
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
Okay, picture this scenario.......................
A couple marries in a state that recognizes gay marriage, and they are also entitle to federal tax breaks because they are married.
You want gay people to do what you want them to do so you can move on with life?
No I want gays to achieve their goals without trashing the values of others so people like you will stfu about it.
How is my marriage trashing your values? Explain please.
Translation, if you form a legal union partnership in one state, another state doesn't have to recognize it. That seems pretty stupid. But now you want the FED to enforce conflicts between states? Isn't that a problem, given the 11th Amendment?
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
Okay, picture this scenario.......................
A couple marries in a state that recognizes gay marriage, and they are also entitle to federal tax breaks because they are married.
The breadwinner's job tells them that they are going to have to transfer to another district, because their expertise is needed over in another city.
That city also happens to be in a state that doesn't recognize gay marriage.
So, should the gay couple who was LEGALLY married end up taking a tax liability in the sense that they'd have to each file single (and at a higher tax bracket) than what they had before in filing jointly as married?
Sorry, but if the federal government is going to give tax breaks, they should apply equally.
Ah, there you have it. Discrimination against law abiding tax paying fellow citizens.I think the issue is probably that giving a different label to what is supposed to be the exact same thing smacks of separate but equal. If the idea is that homosexuals should have the same legal, secular rights and privileges to marriage as heterosexuals, but people are unwilling to use the same label, then clearly they are NOT thought of as being the same.
Civil unions for gays is certainly much closer to equality, but the need to give it a different name than straights use sounds too much like an unwillingness to really allow gays to have the same privileges. Having the legal unions all be labelled civil unions rather than marriage would be a better solution IMO. I don't think heterosexuals would be willing to give up the marriage label, though. Of course, removing government from marriage entirely would also work, but that's not happening any time soon.
Nonsense, their relationship IS different. Thus the need to define it differently. The end result is the same while understanding marriage as a traditional term.
Buit MANY would like to. It's NONE of thier business.They arent. Presently, the Fed Gvmnt does not recognize same-sex couples as married.So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
Okay, picture this scenario.......................
A couple marries in a state that recognizes gay marriage, and they are also entitle to federal tax breaks because they are married.
They arent. Presently, the Fed Gvmnt does not recognize same-sex couples as married.So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
Okay, picture this scenario.......................
A couple marries in a state that recognizes gay marriage, and they are also entitle to federal tax breaks because they are married.
So DON'T move to the State that doesn't recognize your agreement...
IDIOT.
So you piss on the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment, and thing that Loving v Virginia is a bad decision? Might as well be fighting the 13th Amendment, and allowing states to decide if slavery should be brought back.
Man, you are one shallow dude.
what? 14th wasn't about GAYS you myophic oaf.