Attempts to Roll Back Marriage Equality since the Trump Election.

[Markle]

What's funny is homos are so stupid they didn't know they could basically sign contracts similar to marriage contracts without the Obergefel ruling. .

Are you stupid, ignorant or lying? Or all three.

There never existed any alternative to marriage that conferred all the benefits of marriage.

And bigots like you worked hard to ensure that.

A simple contract would confer all the benefits of marriage.

 

[Syriusly]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

Yeah, just imagine...but it is a Christian nation. Yep, there are some radical Christians. .

My point being- for all of the 'angst' about the imagined persecution of Christians by gays- the reality is that Christians did actually persecute- and prosecute gays. Not the other way around.

 

[Syriusly]

What's funny is homos are so stupid they didn't know they could basically sign contracts similar to marriage contracts without the Obergefel ruling. .

Are you stupid, ignorant or lying? Or all three.

There never existed any alternative to marriage that conferred all the benefits of marriage.

And bigots like you worked hard to ensure that.

A simple contract would confer all the benefits of marriage.

Really?

If I die tomorrow my wife will get social security survivors benefits. And if our estate is high enough to hit estate taxes, she would be exempt from estate taxes.

What contract would confer those benefits?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Most posters who obsess about hating gays are really compensating for their tiny dicks.

And their inability to have anything to sink in.

In a lesbian "marriage" which one provides the vital father role model for boy children involved? In a gay male "marriage" who provides the vital mother role model for girl children involved?

It's time to face facts that your cult's critics have valid points...

It time for you to face facts. It's no longer 1950. People are not hung up on gender rolls anymore . Men and women do what they do and fulfill rolls based on their interests and abilities. In heterosexual households , tasks are not divided according who is male and female either. It follows that children learn that they are not restricted to being certain things or doing certain things according to their gender and that is healthy. Children do get male and female roll modeling - to the extent necessary-from people who are not the parents. I have posted several peer reviewed studies that clearly shows this but you have either been to lazy to read them or too obtuse to understand them.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

What's funny is homos are so stupid they didn't know they could basically sign contracts similar to marriage contracts without the Obergefel ruling. .

Are you stupid, ignorant or lying? Or all three.

There never existed any alternative to marriage that conferred all the benefits of marriage.

And bigots like you worked hard to ensure that.

A simple contract would confer all the benefits of marriage.

Really? Think about that. Would you be satisfied with a simple contract when you discover that the government does not recognize a simple contract as a marriage and you get screwed out of all of the benefits and security of legal marriage?

 

[Unkotare]

Most posters who obsess about hating gays are really compensating for their tiny dicks.

And their inability to have anything to sink in.

In a lesbian "marriage" which one provides the vital father role model for boy children involved? In a gay male "marriage" who provides the vital mother role model for girl children involved?

It's time to face facts that your cult's critics have valid points...

It time for you to face facts. It's no longer 1950. People are not hung up on gender rolls anymore . Men and women do what they do and fulfill rolls based on their interests and abilities. In heterosexual households , tasks are not divided according who is male and female either. It follows that children learn that they are not restricted to being certain things or doing certain things according to their gender and that is healthy. Children do get male and female roll modeling - to the extent necessary-from people who are not the parents. I have posted several peer reviewed studies that clearly shows this but you have either been to lazy to read them or too obtuse to understand them.

Ugh, another cocoon liberal who thinks the whole world is a mirror of leftist enclaves on the coasts.

 

[Pop23]

What's funny is homos are so stupid they didn't know they could basically sign contracts similar to marriage contracts without the Obergefel ruling. .

Are you stupid, ignorant or lying? Or all three.

There never existed any alternative to marriage that conferred all the benefits of marriage.

And bigots like you worked hard to ensure that.

A simple contract would confer all the benefits of marriage.

Really?

If I die tomorrow my wife will get social security survivors benefits. And if our estate is high enough to hit estate taxes, she would be exempt from estate taxes.

What contract would confer those benefits?

And so no couple, or group of individuals should be denied the same.

I would disagree with these relationships being granted legal standing, but I can't see a reasonable legal argument against the granting of the status.

There is no reasoning contained in Windsor to deny this or anything that comes close to the Compelling State Interest to deny the status to these individuals.

The argument that Syriusly will make is some odd moral test, even though no law exists that says a marriage must be based on love or sexual contact.

 

[Pop23]

What's funny is homos are so stupid they didn't know they could basically sign contracts similar to marriage contracts without the Obergefel ruling. .

Are you stupid, ignorant or lying? Or all three.

There never existed any alternative to marriage that conferred all the benefits of marriage.

And bigots like you worked hard to ensure that.

A simple contract would confer all the benefits of marriage.

Really? Think about that. Would you be satisfied with a simple contract when you discover that the government does not recognize a simple contract as a marriage and you get screwed out of all of the benefits and security of legal marriage?

It's done in each and every will.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Most posters who obsess about hating gays are really compensating for their tiny dicks.

And their inability to have anything to sink in.

In a lesbian "marriage" which one provides the vital father role model for boy children involved? In a gay male "marriage" who provides the vital mother role model for girl children involved?

It's time to face facts that your cult's critics have valid points...

It time for you to face facts. It's no longer 1950. People are not hung up on gender rolls anymore . Men and women do what they do and fulfill rolls based on their interests and abilities. In heterosexual households , tasks are not divided according who is male and female either. It follows that children learn that they are not restricted to being certain things or doing certain things according to their gender and that is healthy. Children do get male and female roll modeling - to the extent necessary-from people who are not the parents. I have posted several peer reviewed studies that clearly shows this but you have either been to lazy to read them or too obtuse to understand them.

Ugh, another cocoon liberal who thinks the whole world is a mirror of leftist enclaves on the coasts.

And not having a "mom and a dad" or not adhering to traditional gender rolls will not result in the kids being gay, transgender, non binary gender fluid or anything else that freaks you out so much.. Just anticipating the next stupid comment.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

Yeah, just imagine...but it is a Christian nation. Yep, there are some radical Christians. .

My point being- for all of the 'angst' about the imagined persecution of Christians by gays- the reality is that Christians did actually persecute- and prosecute gays. Not the other way around.

We should still be doing those things in my opinion. They are detrimental to society.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Homosexual "marriage".......... lol

Another leftist contrivance...

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Homosexual "marriage".......... lol

Another leftist contrivance...

Just fucking brilliant! It's real. It's legal. It's not fake news. Deal with it.

Do you think that all gay people and supporters of gay marriage are leftists? What alt-reality do you reside in?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Homosexual "marriage".......... lol

Another leftist contrivance...

Just fucking brilliant! It's real. It's legal. It's not fake news. Deal with it.

Do you think that all gay people and supporters of gay marriage are leftists? What alt-reality do you reside in?

It's a government created fiction.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Just fucking brilliant! It's real. It's legal. It's not fake news. Deal with it.

Do you think that all gay people and supporters of gay marriage are leftists? What alt-reality do you reside in?

The Emperors new clothes are REAL? And any who don't see them are fools?

How very wise you are, Comrade....

 

[Silhouette]

Homosexual "marriage".......... lol

Another leftist contrivance...

Just fucking brilliant! It's real. It's legal. It's not fake news. Deal with it.

Not to children who used to derive the prime benefit of the marriage contract of having BOTH a vital mother and father... For them it is an illegal bastardization of a contract benefit they used to enjoy and need, but was ripped away from them.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The solution is to let gays marry as they will but not impose that marriage on any unwilling person.

 

[Silhouette]

The solution is to let gays marry as they will but not impose that marriage on any unwilling person.

You mean like children in general who now face the bastardization of their original vital benefit of both mother and father from the 1,000s year old marriage contract? If you think gays are "born that way" their numbers should remain fixed and this might not be as much of a threat to society as time goes on. But if you understand as I do, that deviant sex addictions are learned and passed on in widening circles, this is a direct threat to the very fabric of all we've known as a human society. It's what happened in Sodom...gay became chic via the stamp of approval. It became so whack over time + monkey see, monkey do, that God finally had to step in and destroy the entire culture. Read Jude 1 & Romans 1 for details.

So "live and let live" and "it's all good" is a very naive solution to a problem whose enormity we have yet to conceive of.....four generations of all male families who've never known a mother or grandmother? This isn't a slippery slope argument. It's merely a prediction of fact using logic and deduction.

The states were/are unwilling, most of them (even flaky fruit & nut California), to embrace this degradation of their social future. Yet it was imposed upon them as they were unwilling. So, you're against Obergefell. Thanks for saying that.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The solution is to let gays marry as they will but not impose that marriage on any unwilling person.

Yup, Those children would be so much better off in foster care, a group home, a shelter or just having one legal parent instead of the security of having two who are both their guardians.

What do you propose doing about those 2M + kids currently with a gay parent or parents?? Snatch them away and find a good Christian hetero family for them?

How would you propose preventing gay people from having more kids.?? You do know that Lesbians can carry and give birth to a child? That gay men have sperm?? Ah forced sterilization sound good!! Don't you agree?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The solution is to let gays marry as they will but not impose that marriage on any unwilling person.

You mean like children in general who now face the bastardization of their original vital benefit of both mother and father from the 1,000s year old marriage contract? If you think gays are "born that way" their numbers should remain fixed and this might not be as much of a threat to society as time goes on. But if you understand as I do, that deviant sex addictions are learned and passed on in widening circles, this is a direct threat to the very fabric of all we've known as a human society. It's what happened in Sodom...gay became chic via the stamp of approval. It became so whack over time + monkey see, monkey do, that God finally had to step in and destroy the entire culture. Read Jude 1 & Romans 1 for details.

So "live and let live" and "it's all good" is a very naive solution to a problem whose enormity we have yet to conceive of.....four generations of all male families who've never known a mother or grandmother? This isn't a slippery slope argument. It's merely a prediction of fact using logic and deduction.

The states were/are unwilling, most of them (even flaky fruit & nut California), to embrace this degradation of their social future. Yet it was imposed upon them as they were unwilling. So, you're against Obergefell. Thanks for saying that.

Yup, not allowing gays to marry will curb the spread of the gay plague . Gotch!! Then all we would have to do is to figure out a way to stop the hetero couples from having gay kids. Any ideas??

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

South Carolina's birth certificate policy for same-sex parents ruled unconstitutional - Metro Weekly

A federal court in South Carolina has ruled that the state’s policy of refusing to list both same-sex parents on their children’s birth certificates is unconstitutional.

Casy and Jacqueline Carson, a married lesbian couple, were married in April 2014 in Washington, D.C., prior to the legalization of same-sex marriage in the Palmetto State. After they were married, Jacquie gave birth to twins, but the couple was issued birth certificates listing Jacquie as the mother and “No Father Listed” in the space designated for the other parent’s name.

South Carolina’s Department of Health and Environmental Control previously insisted that it would only issue birth certificates listing both same-sex spouses if the couples in question obtained a second-parent adoption or a court order — something not required of different-sex spouses. But the Carsons couldn’t afford the fees for a second-parent adoption. Without accurate birth certificates, the Carsons had trouble accessing Casy’s Veterans Administration and Social Security benefits, which she earned during her time as an active-duty member of the National Guard. The Carsons also worried about whether Casy would be able to make medical decisions for the twins in the case of an accident.