Four simple questions gay marriage supporters can't answer

[EastCoastLiberal]

Screw your 4 questions. Here's one simple question. Why can't you mind your own fucking business?

 

[rightwinger]

As bad as it is, many states have legalized SSM due to court decision. A lot of people claim to support same-sex marriage because it's a matter of civil rights...allegedly. I remain unconvinced. I have four questions that I want same-sex marriage supporters to answer to convince me. Just four simple, easy questions:

1. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could two heterosexual men or two heterosexual women obtain a marriage license as spouses?

2. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could a homosexual man and a homosexual woman obtain a marriage license as spouses?

3. Name a protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married.

4. If you believe it is a civil right, is it strange to have some states legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote and others legalize it through the judicial process? Why or why not?

Bonus question: which amendment(s) guarantee a right to same-sex marriage? Explain your answer.

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

Which is to say that human beings are not deviants as long as they do not deviate from the established standard.

So... Yeah.

They are what they are and they are entitled to the life they want, not the life you want for them

 

[rightwinger]

As bad as it is, many states have legalized SSM due to court decision. A lot of people claim to support same-sex marriage because it's a matter of civil rights...allegedly. I remain unconvinced. I have four questions that I want same-sex marriage supporters to answer to convince me. Just four simple, easy questions:

1. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could two heterosexual men or two heterosexual women obtain a marriage license as spouses?

2. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could a homosexual man and a homosexual woman obtain a marriage license as spouses?

3. Name a protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married.

4. If you believe it is a civil right, is it strange to have some states legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote and others legalize it through the judicial process? Why or why not?

Bonus question: which amendment(s) guarantee a right to same-sex marriage? Explain your answer.

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

 

[bripat9643]

As bad as it is, many states have legalized SSM due to court decision. A lot of people claim to support same-sex marriage because it's a matter of civil rights...allegedly. I remain unconvinced. I have four questions that I want same-sex marriage supporters to answer to convince me. Just four simple, easy questions:

1. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could two heterosexual men or two heterosexual women obtain a marriage license as spouses?

2. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could a homosexual man and a homosexual woman obtain a marriage license as spouses?

3. Name a protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married.

4. If you believe it is a civil right, is it strange to have some states legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote and others legalize it through the judicial process? Why or why not?

Bonus question: which amendment(s) guarantee a right to same-sex marriage? Explain your answer.

1. Yes (no one asks to see you consumate things. 'Marriages of convenience' used to be very popular when homosexuality was illegal.)

2. Yes (see above)

3. Hospital visitation right.

4. Marriage is a civil contract. Wouldn't say getting married is a right. It's just a legal contract as far as the government is concerned.

14th Amendment. If the government can define what a marriage is (insofar as it, the government is concerned, and what rights and benefits it'll grant because you get married) then it must make marriage available to everyone. Not just men-women.

Who isn't included in the category "men and women?"

 

[bripat9643]

As bad as it is, many states have legalized SSM due to court decision. A lot of people claim to support same-sex marriage because it's a matter of civil rights...allegedly. I remain unconvinced. I have four questions that I want same-sex marriage supporters to answer to convince me. Just four simple, easy questions:

1. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could two heterosexual men or two heterosexual women obtain a marriage license as spouses?

2. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could a homosexual man and a homosexual woman obtain a marriage license as spouses?

3. Name a protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married.

4. If you believe it is a civil right, is it strange to have some states legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote and others legalize it through the judicial process? Why or why not?

Bonus question: which amendment(s) guarantee a right to same-sex marriage? Explain your answer.

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

Which is to say that human beings are not deviants as long as they do not deviate from the established standard.

So... Yeah.

They are what they are and they are entitled to the life they want, not the life you want for them

They aren't entitled to force me to provide it to them.

 

[bripat9643]

As bad as it is, many states have legalized SSM due to court decision. A lot of people claim to support same-sex marriage because it's a matter of civil rights...allegedly. I remain unconvinced. I have four questions that I want same-sex marriage supporters to answer to convince me. Just four simple, easy questions:

1. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could two heterosexual men or two heterosexual women obtain a marriage license as spouses?

2. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could a homosexual man and a homosexual woman obtain a marriage license as spouses?

3. Name a protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married.

4. If you believe it is a civil right, is it strange to have some states legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote and others legalize it through the judicial process? Why or why not?

Bonus question: which amendment(s) guarantee a right to same-sex marriage? Explain your answer.

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

So are polygamists and guys who want to marry their sisters.

 

[rightwinger]

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

Which is to say that human beings are not deviants as long as they do not deviate from the established standard.

So... Yeah.

They are what they are and they are entitled to the life they want, not the life you want for them

They aren't entitled to force me to provide it to them.

That's good.....because you are not providing anything

 

[rightwinger]

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

So are polygamists and guys who want to marry their sisters.

Homosexuality is not against the law

Polygamy and incest are

 

[bodecea]

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

Which is to say that human beings are not deviants as long as they do not deviate from the established standard.

So... Yeah.

They are what they are and they are entitled to the life they want, not the life you want for them

They aren't entitled to force me to provide it to them.

Don't be involved in the wedding business then.

 

[bripat9643]

As bad as it is, many states have legalized SSM due to court decision. A lot of people claim to support same-sex marriage because it's a matter of civil rights...allegedly. I remain unconvinced. I have four questions that I want same-sex marriage supporters to answer to convince me. Just four simple, easy questions:

1. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could two heterosexual men or two heterosexual women obtain a marriage license as spouses?

2. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could a homosexual man and a homosexual woman obtain a marriage license as spouses?

3. Name a protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married.

4. If you believe it is a civil right, is it strange to have some states legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote and others legalize it through the judicial process? Why or why not?

Bonus question: which amendment(s) guarantee a right to same-sex marriage? Explain your answer.

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

You can repeat that 10,000 times, but that will never make it true. Marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman. Any other claims are sheer nonsense.

 

[bripat9643]

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

Which is to say that human beings are not deviants as long as they do not deviate from the established standard.

So... Yeah.

They are what they are and they are entitled to the life they want, not the life you want for them

They aren't entitled to force me to provide it to them.

Don't be involved in the wedding business then.

You never fail to post the fascist solution to any issue. Being in the marriage business doesn't entitle you or any other queer to force any business to serve you.

 

[bripat9643]

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

Which is to say that human beings are not deviants as long as they do not deviate from the established standard.

So... Yeah.

They are what they are and they are entitled to the life they want, not the life you want for them

They aren't entitled to force me to provide it to them.

That's good.....because you are not providing anything

Do you imagine your idiocies are persuading anyone of anything?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Screw your 4 questions. Here's one simple question. Why can't you mind your own fucking business?

FIVE!

We now have Five of our in-house fascists who've come to profess their 'feelings' that Sexual deviancy should stand superior to the means of Christians exercise their rights.

 

[rightwinger]

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

You can repeat that 10,000 times, but that will never make it true. Marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman. Any other claims are sheer nonsense.

Times change

You used to be allowed to marry a 12 year old
You couldn't marry someone of another race
Marriages used to be arranged

 

[bripat9643]

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

You can repeat that 10,000 times, but that will never make it true. Marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman. Any other claims are sheer nonsense.

Times change

You used to be allowed to marry a 12 year old
You couldn't marry someone of another race
Marriages used to be arranged

Here's a fact that never changes: you put a plug into a socket, but you can't put a plug into another plug.

 

[rightwinger]

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

You can repeat that 10,000 times, but that will never make it true. Marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman. Any other claims are sheer nonsense.

Times change

You used to be allowed to marry a 12 year old
You couldn't marry someone of another race
Marriages used to be arranged

Here's a fact that never changes: you put a plug into a socket, but you can't put a plug into another plug.

Marriage is not about sex, it is about love

 

[bripat9643]

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

You can repeat that 10,000 times, but that will never make it true. Marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman. Any other claims are sheer nonsense.

Times change

You used to be allowed to marry a 12 year old
You couldn't marry someone of another race
Marriages used to be arranged

Here's a fact that never changes: you put a plug into a socket, but you can't put a plug into another plug.

Marriage is not about sex, it is about love

How does that explain arranged marriages?

 

[Politico]

it's also about legal rights , just like marriage...

It has never been about legal rights. They have that now. It is about forcing everyone to agree with them.

 

[Qball]

Screw your 4 questions. Here's one simple question. Why can't you mind your own fucking business?

Because laws we pass are my business as a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen. Somehow I doubt you'd ask this if I said I supported SSM.

 

[Qball]

As bad as it is, many states have legalized SSM due to court decision. A lot of people claim to support same-sex marriage because it's a matter of civil rights...allegedly. I remain unconvinced. I have four questions that I want same-sex marriage supporters to answer to convince me. Just four simple, easy questions:

1. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could two heterosexual men or two heterosexual women obtain a marriage license as spouses?

2. In a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage, could a homosexual man and a homosexual woman obtain a marriage license as spouses?

3. Name a protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married.

4. If you believe it is a civil right, is it strange to have some states legalize same-sex marriage through a legislative vote and others legalize it through the judicial process? Why or why not?

Bonus question: which amendment(s) guarantee a right to same-sex marriage? Explain your answer.

1. No, because, as you stated, that state does not recognize same-sex marriage.
2. Yes, and probably have in the past.
3. Overview of Federal Benefits Granted to Married Couples Resources Human Rights Campaign (and these are only Federal rights...each state would have more)
4. It's not a question of adding, it's a question of subtracting....getting rid of laws PREVENTING it.

So based on your answers to #1 and 2, it's safe to say a state not allowing same-sex marriage isn't actually discriminating on the basis of sex or sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not banned from marrying in the way allowed under the law, and heterosexuals are not allowed to marry in a way proscribed by the law.

Please don't throw a link at me and say "it's in there". Name one protection granted to persons based on their status of being legally married. If you have a link, it shouldn't be that difficult.

I used neither the term "adding" or "subtracting". I said "legalizing" because that's what has happened either by the courts or legislature in most states.

I love the game you guys play...

Homosexuals are not discriminated against as long as they act straight

It's not a game. Words have meanings. It's hard to cry "discrimination" when you can't show how people are being demonstrably treated differently under the law.

They are being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry the partner they love

Your....Gays can always be straight, so they are not really discriminated against is laughable

Like I said:

“Can I marry a woman in Georgia, then legally marry another woman in Alabama? No. Can I marry someone under the legal "marriageable" age? No. Can I marry a close relative? For the most part, no. Can I marry two, three, twelve women at once? No. But what if I'm "in love" and want to "make a commitment"? The answer is still no.”

What's love got to do with it?