Gods Own Party Can’t Get Over Same Sex Marriage

[Bob Blaylock]

Marriage is legal for gay couples.

Which is no more meaningful or valid than if a law were passed that declared that two plus two equals ten.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Claiming otherwise—even passing a law that declares otherwise—does not alter the reality of what marriage actually is, has always been, and will always be.

To abuse the force of law to enforce an immoral delusion only undermines the validity of the general rule of law.

 

[bodecea]

Marriage is legal for gay couples.

Which is no more meaningful or valid than if a law were passed that declared that two plus two equals ten.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Claiming otherwise—even passing a law that declares otherwise—does not alter the reality of what marriage actually is, has always been, and will always be.

To abuse the force of law to enforce an immoral delusion only undermines the validity of the general rule of law.

Gays can legally marry..... Our marriages are just as legal.

 

[Muhammed]

Just as they have been working to water down Roe v. Wade , with restrictions on abortion, they continue to concern themselves with another, more recent decision, Obergfelle v Hodges which made same sex marriage the law of the land.

They are obsessed with people private lives and social issues, while purporting to be the party of freedom and individual responsibility.

While the country is facing numerous threats and problems both foreign and domestic, they can’t keep their noses out of people’s bedrooms. While they are hell bent on allowing Wall Street to run amok, and letting corporations pollute the planet, women, gays and other who they disapprove of must be tightly controlled.

While they are not actively seeking to overturn Obergefell- that know that even with a conservative SCOTUS- it would be a long road to hoe. So as with Roe, they are finding ways to water down the gains that have been made with respect to choice, privacy, and equality. Consider:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-signorile-georgia-adoption_us_5a9c23e7e4b0a0ba4ad45681

Georgia is on its way to creating a law that would allow state-funded adoption agencies to turn away LGBTQ couples ― or, more specifically, to turn away any parents the agencies don’t approve of based on religious beliefs.

Make no mistake: This anti-LGBTQ adoption bill is part of a wide-reaching plan by religious conservatives ― backed by President Donald Trump and his administration ― to turn same-sex marriage into second-class marriage with a longer-term goal of overturning federal marriage rights for gays and lesbians entirely.

Adoption is only one of several fronts on which they are attacking:

By getting courts to rule that wedding-related businesses can turn away gay couples based on the business owners’ religious beliefs, by allowing governments to refuse to give the same benefits to spouses within same-sex marriages as they do to those within opposite-sex marriages, and by allowing adoption agencies to say no to LGBTQ parents.

I

t is really in those three major areas- adoption, public accommodation, and benefits- that equality is being assailed. I do not believe for a Nano second that this is about religion or religious freedom. It’s about bigotry-plain and simple. It is not about concern for the children either. It is about bigotry.

Furthermore, in the Huston Texas case where the Texas Supreme Court rules that married same sex couples on the city payroll were not necessarily entitle to employee benefits is clearly bigotry because it has nothing to do with religion and clearly is harmful to the children of those couples.

Is that what God would want? These issues, along wth the myriad of so call "bathroom bills " aimed at trans people make it clear that the GOP is hell bent on making life as difficult as possible for LGBT people in order to appease the religious right.

Why do you refer to the GOP as "God's Party"?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You're not listening. I'm beyond "civil unions" here. Although "civil unions"" COULD be legally EQUIVALENT to a "marriage".. Depends on the way the law is re-written. And obviously, here in this case, law NEEDS to be re-written. Depends not on what it's CALLED --- but it depends on the contents of that law.

I am listening. What I’m hearing is that while you may be beyond civil unions, you are not beyond the absurd notion that same sex unions should not be” marriage”. I clearly demonstrated that calling it anything other than marriage is problematic and fails to achieve the goal of equality, no matter how the law is written. Rather than get hung up on whether same sex unions are called civil unions or some other alternative moniker, the fact is that not calling it marriage is problematic

We had experience with civil unions ( or Sub. Something else) here in New Jersey. It did not go well:

Since New Jersey’s civil union law took effect in February 2007, many employers across New Jersey have refused to recognize civil unions as equal to marriage, and therefore do not grant equal health benefits to partners of employees. Employers and hospitals say that if the legislature intended for the civil union law to be the same as marriage, the legislature would have used the same name.

Because these employers and hospitals don’t recognize civil unions as they would marriage, many same-sex couples go without adequate health insurance – a horror in this economy. And because of the real-world disparity between civil unions and marriage, some hospitals do not allow civil union partners to make medical decisions for one another, or even to visit one another in the emergency room. http://www.gardenstateequality.org/issues/civilunions/

And by the way, the federal government recognizes marriage and only marriage for purposes of federal benefits and tax purposes

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

There ARE very consequential CHANGES to law and legal policy here. The 90s "Violence against women act" is just one example. Laid out changes to "domestic violence". And POLICY on "domestic violence" is very much TRADITIONALLY centered on male/female marriage. So is adoption.

OK, violence against women .I’m concerned about that too, but I fail to see the connection with the current issue. You’ll have to map that out for me. Have women somehow been put at risk, hase their protection been watered down by same sex marriage, some examples in real life please or I might conclude that this is just some sort of red herring. It seems to me that domestic violence is domestic violence anis deal with by the local authorities -or should be- regardless of the respective genders or what a particular relationship is called. If it is not it is a police training issue and not a reason to upend public policy with respect to marriage.

Adoption? What about it. Same sex couples have been adopting in some jurisdictions long before their relationship was eligible for any legal recognition. Now , they can adopt in most places. However, they may be required to be MARRIED. You keep prattling about “tradition” but fail to recognize that traditions change, society evolves. The opposite is stagnation and that is never healthy.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

There's a LOT of work to be done to get it right. You would THINK ---- the idea of what you CALL IT is far less important than how it's actually codified. But you're a radical zealot. And DEMANDING that the law ignore the fundamental consequences of how this WRECKS a lot of protective law that already exists. Leaving it to DECADES OF COURT FIGHTS to "get it right"..

The only work that needs to be done is to work at learning to get over it, move on and stop trying to fix something that is not broken. Perhaps you could dispense with the histrionics share some specific examples of how same sex marriage -in places where we have had it for over a decade such as Mass. - how this “wrecks a lot of protective law” as you say

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Acknowledge that EXISTING law is written with nods to separate men/women couplings. Give a NEW name and WRITE IT CORRECTLY to reflect a newer reality.

The current court and political battles being fought is not the fault of same sex couples, or the fact that demanded and won marriage. It is the fault of bigots who can’t accept that fact, they cannot deal with THAT new reality. Most of us have moved on, you should try it too

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Your clan is pushing the buttons on this. You need to do the work of making it right. It's NOT traditional marriage. You could end up seriously COMPROMISING DECADES of protection for women in traditional marriage for instance. Don't be callous. Do the work. Get it right.

The button has been pushed for a while now and is not popping back up. You keep prattling on about fixing it and making it right but have failed to explain what would look like other than doing an about face and not calling same sex unions marriage. You are still not explaining how the issue of what it’s called in anyway relates to the issue of protections for women. In short, you are not even close to laying out a coherent and logical argument. Rather you keep falling back on “tradition” and this women thing. The only problems that I see the name causing to your own sensibilities and the vague fears that it conjures up for you. It is you who needs to do the work. Work on your fears and hang ups.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

ust be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.

Sorry Pal, you're still not making any sense . You have not even made an attempt to explain the connection between same sex marriage, what it's called, and the VAWA. It all seems like a lot of hysterical blather to me.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

Oh looky- look at what we have here. I have been wracking by brains trying to figure out what the hell you are talking about so I googled "same sex marriage violence women"

Violence Against Women Act shines a light on same-sex abuse - CNN

Now, thanks to new LGBT-inclusive language in the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, signed into law this month, domestic violence victims like Dati will have access to many of the same abuse and trauma services as victims of heterosexual partner violence.
Ty Cobb, the senior legislative counsel at the Human Rights Campaign, said the new language explicitly includes the LGBT community in the largest Violence Against Women Act grant program, the STOP grant program.

So, the VAWA now includes LGBT folks!!

Note: Nothing here about diluting protections for women married to men. It is just more inclusive, as marriage itself now is. .

 

[flacaltenn]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

You know what's ironic with what you posted? Before gay marriage was legal, I was listening to a radio station and they were interviewing the President of the Concerned Women of America....and this president stated that if gay marriage became legal, women would divorce their husbands in droves in order to marry each other.

Yeah. Real funny.. NOW --- they will lose DECADES of special treatment in the legalities of marriage and favoritism in the eyes of the law. Good luck with OPENING UP the definition of marriage.

All in favor of gay pairings. Need to be called something else because under the law as it is NOW -- it IS something else.. I had said change one letter to Parriage. What I meant to suggest as the proper term for all the legalities is actually PAIR-RIAGE. Actually need TWO letters to change.

 

[bodecea]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

You know what's ironic with what you posted? Before gay marriage was legal, I was listening to a radio station and they were interviewing the President of the Concerned Women of America....and this president stated that if gay marriage became legal, women would divorce their husbands in droves in order to marry each other.

Yeah. Real funny.. NOW --- they will lose DECADES of special treatment in the legalities of marriage and favoritism in the eyes of the law. Good luck with OPENING UP the definition of marriage.

All in favor of gay pairings. Need to be called something else because under the law as it is NOW -- it IS something else.. I had said change one letter to Parriage. What I meant to suggest as the proper term for all the legalities is actually PAIR-RIAGE. Actually need TWO letters to change.

Gay marriage is marriage. Legal marriage.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

You know what's ironic with what you posted? Before gay marriage was legal, I was listening to a radio station and they were interviewing the President of the Concerned Women of America....and this president stated that if gay marriage became legal, women would divorce their husbands in droves in order to marry each other.

Yeah. Real funny.. NOW --- they will lose DECADES of special treatment in the legalities of marriage and favoritism in the eyes of the law. Good luck with OPENING UP the definition of marriage.

All in favor of gay pairings. Need to be called something else because under the law as it is NOW -- it IS something else.. I had said change one letter to Parriage. What I meant to suggest as the proper term for all the legalities is actually PAIR-RIAGE. Actually need TWO letters to change.

 

[flacaltenn]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

You know what's ironic with what you posted? Before gay marriage was legal, I was listening to a radio station and they were interviewing the President of the Concerned Women of America....and this president stated that if gay marriage became legal, women would divorce their husbands in droves in order to marry each other.

Yeah. Real funny.. NOW --- they will lose DECADES of special treatment in the legalities of marriage and favoritism in the eyes of the law. Good luck with OPENING UP the definition of marriage.

All in favor of gay pairings. Need to be called something else because under the law as it is NOW -- it IS something else.. I had said change one letter to Parriage. What I meant to suggest as the proper term for all the legalities is actually PAIR-RIAGE. Actually need TWO letters to change.

Gay marriage is marriage. Legal marriage.

You never answered the question. That means you're willing scuttle ALL of the priorities and special considerations given to women in marriage under current law. Yes or No...

Because that's the consequence of stuffing all these gender-free associations into the same basket..

 

[flacaltenn]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

You know what's ironic with what you posted? Before gay marriage was legal, I was listening to a radio station and they were interviewing the President of the Concerned Women of America....and this president stated that if gay marriage became legal, women would divorce their husbands in droves in order to marry each other.

Yeah. Real funny.. NOW --- they will lose DECADES of special treatment in the legalities of marriage and favoritism in the eyes of the law. Good luck with OPENING UP the definition of marriage.

All in favor of gay pairings. Need to be called something else because under the law as it is NOW -- it IS something else.. I had said change one letter to Parriage. What I meant to suggest as the proper term for all the legalities is actually PAIR-RIAGE. Actually need TWO letters to change.

you also then. Answer the question to Bode above. Yes or No...

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

You know what's ironic with what you posted? Before gay marriage was legal, I was listening to a radio station and they were interviewing the President of the Concerned Women of America....and this president stated that if gay marriage became legal, women would divorce their husbands in droves in order to marry each other.

Yeah. Real funny.. NOW --- they will lose DECADES of special treatment in the legalities of marriage and favoritism in the eyes of the law. Good luck with OPENING UP the definition of marriage.

All in favor of gay pairings. Need to be called something else because under the law as it is NOW -- it IS something else.. I had said change one letter to Parriage. What I meant to suggest as the proper term for all the legalities is actually PAIR-RIAGE. Actually need TWO letters to change.

you also then. Answer the question to Bode above. Yes or No...

OK, I'll play. I did not answer it before because it made no sense, and still makes no sense , in the context of this topic. But know, I do not want to see protections for women overturned or diminished in any way.

Now YOU answer my question. WHAT DOES SAME SEX MARRIGE AND WHAT WE CALL IT HAVE TO DO WITH THE VAWA?

 

[Pete7469]

It's comforting knowing that RegressiveParasite can not reproduce.

 

[flacaltenn]

Just be honest Bode and tell me you are FINE with overturning the key provisions of Billy Jeff's masterpiece of protection for married women.. There are ALWAYS "unintended side effects" of something this disruptive. I'm only trying to AVOID decades of court battles and law revisions by handling these side by side and not as the same.


Violence Against Women Act | Marriage.com

Benefits of VAWA
One of the major milestones achieved by VAWA is its highlights on coordinated response of the community on domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking. This has made it possible for courts; law enforcement agencies, prosecutors, victim services, and private bar associations to work jointly with each other in a coordinated fashion to assist victims as opposed to what existed before enactment at the state and local levels.
VAWA as well provides support for community-based services and organizations engaged in working towards ending domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking; especially organizations engaged in cultural and linguistic services.

Criticisms against the Act
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) initially were concerned that the Act resulted to increased rash penalties which included detention of accused persons before trial which was “repulsive” to the constitution of U.S.

The ACLU, in a 2005 letter to senate, nevertheless, supported reauthorization of VAWA on the ground that unconstitutional DNA provision is not included in the Act.

The letter stated that VAWA is one of the most efficient law enacted against domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking and has considerably enhanced the law enforcement response to violence against women.

Programs and services
The programs and services supported by the Violence Against Women laws include the following; the federal rape shield law, prevention of violence, support for evicted victims of domestic violence, provision of funds for victim assistance services such as rape services, establishment and management of crisis centers, hotlines and a lot more.

You know what's ironic with what you posted? Before gay marriage was legal, I was listening to a radio station and they were interviewing the President of the Concerned Women of America....and this president stated that if gay marriage became legal, women would divorce their husbands in droves in order to marry each other.

Yeah. Real funny.. NOW --- they will lose DECADES of special treatment in the legalities of marriage and favoritism in the eyes of the law. Good luck with OPENING UP the definition of marriage.

All in favor of gay pairings. Need to be called something else because under the law as it is NOW -- it IS something else.. I had said change one letter to Parriage. What I meant to suggest as the proper term for all the legalities is actually PAIR-RIAGE. Actually need TWO letters to change.

you also then. Answer the question to Bode above. Yes or No...

OK, I'll play. I did not answer it before because it made no sense, and still makes no sense , in the context of this topic. But know, I do not want to see protections for women overturned or diminished in any way.

Now YOU answer my question. WHAT DOES SAME SEX MARRIGE AND WHAT WE CALL IT HAVE TO DO WITH THE VAWA?

If you have to ask WHY the VAWA has EVERYTHING TO DO with stuffing gender-free associations into the current legal term marriage -- the problem isn't MINE --- it's yours. And the VAWA act is just one example of GENDER SPECIFIC laws pertaining to marriage. They will all be overturned and die unless a separate legal terminology is adopted. Only a matter of death by a thousand law suits.

 

[emilynghiem]

Just as they have been working to water down Roe v. Wade , with restrictions on abortion, they continue to concern themselves with another, more recent decision, Obergfelle v Hodges which made same sex marriage the law of the land.

They are obsessed with people private lives and social issues, while purporting to be the party of freedom and individual responsibility.

While the country is facing numerous threats and problems both foreign and domestic, they can’t keep their noses out of people’s bedrooms. While they are hell bent on allowing Wall Street to run amok, and letting corporations pollute the planet, women, gays and other who they disapprove of must be tightly controlled.

While they are not actively seeking to overturn Obergefell- that know that even with a conservative SCOTUS- it would be a long road to hoe. So as with Roe, they are finding ways to water down the gains that have been made with respect to choice, privacy, and equality. Consider:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-signorile-georgia-adoption_us_5a9c23e7e4b0a0ba4ad45681

Georgia is on its way to creating a law that would allow state-funded adoption agencies to turn away LGBTQ couples ― or, more specifically, to turn away any parents the agencies don’t approve of based on religious beliefs.

Make no mistake: This anti-LGBTQ adoption bill is part of a wide-reaching plan by religious conservatives ― backed by President Donald Trump and his administration ― to turn same-sex marriage into second-class marriage with a longer-term goal of overturning federal marriage rights for gays and lesbians entirely.

Adoption is only one of several fronts on which they are attacking:

By getting courts to rule that wedding-related businesses can turn away gay couples based on the business owners’ religious beliefs, by allowing governments to refuse to give the same benefits to spouses within same-sex marriages as they do to those within opposite-sex marriages, and by allowing adoption agencies to say no to LGBTQ parents.

I

t is really in those three major areas- adoption, public accommodation, and benefits- that equality is being assailed. I do not believe for a Nano second that this is about religion or religious freedom. It’s about bigotry-plain and simple. It is not about concern for the children either. It is about bigotry.

Furthermore, in the Huston Texas case where the Texas Supreme Court rules that married same sex couples on the city payroll were not necessarily entitle to employee benefits is clearly bigotry because it has nothing to do with religion and clearly is harmful to the children of those couples.

Is that what God would want? These issues, along wth the myriad of so call "bathroom bills " aimed at trans people make it clear that the GOP is hell bent on making life as difficult as possible for LGBT people in order to appease the religious right.

Dear TheProgressivePatriot
The Libertarians, Constitutionalists and even the Vet Party have said this right.
That marriage doesn't belong in govt hands to begin with.

Same Sex marriage merely pointed out the BIAS in marriage laws
that prove this policy involves personal beliefs and choices.

So the choices are really to
* include all marriages regardless of creed
* exclude all marriages and rewrite the laws to be neutral
so there are no objections either way but all people are represented without conflict
* separate marriage beliefs or benefits by party
so people can choose which track they want to be under

As for churches, yes, they can argue all they want about
their own church laws; and still agree to keep govt laws
either neutral, all inclusive, or offering equal choices to separate.

The govt should not be abused to dictate, favor,
establish, endorse nor prohibit exclude or discriminate
in treating any such belief about marriage one way or the other
unequally from any other belief about marriage.

The problems are hard and/or impossible
if you think you can come up with one solution for all.

The solution is simple by separating beliefs
from the state so everyone can have their own
without conflict with any other person or group or belief.

The problem is people are so afraid and fight to
defend their beliefs from infringement, they want
to keep using party or govt to enforce their beliefs over others.
So that makes the conflicts worse.

The necessary step to untangle the overlapping conflicts
is to recognize equal rights to different beliefs,
and agree not to abuse govt to favor any one side
over another. Separate them and let all people
choose to fund their own programs and benefits equally.

Then if people CAN agree on a unifying central plan,
yes, that can be implemented through govt for that
state, or for the whole nation if all states and parties agree.

If not, we'd have to keep separate solutions per state
or per party so only those members in agreement
with those beliefs are under them by free choice.

 

[emilynghiem]

Just as they have been working to water down Roe v. Wade , with restrictions on abortion, they continue to concern themselves with another, more recent decision, Obergfelle v Hodges which made same sex marriage the law of the land.

They are obsessed with people private lives and social issues, while purporting to be the party of freedom and individual responsibility.

While the country is facing numerous threats and problems both foreign and domestic, they can’t keep their noses out of people’s bedrooms. While they are hell bent on allowing Wall Street to run amok, and letting corporations pollute the planet, women, gays and other who they disapprove of must be tightly controlled.

While they are not actively seeking to overturn Obergefell- that know that even with a conservative SCOTUS- it would be a long road to hoe. So as with Roe, they are finding ways to water down the gains that have been made with respect to choice, privacy, and equality. Consider:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opinion-signorile-georgia-adoption_us_5a9c23e7e4b0a0ba4ad45681

Georgia is on its way to creating a law that would allow state-funded adoption agencies to turn away LGBTQ couples ― or, more specifically, to turn away any parents the agencies don’t approve of based on religious beliefs.

Make no mistake: This anti-LGBTQ adoption bill is part of a wide-reaching plan by religious conservatives ― backed by President Donald Trump and his administration ― to turn same-sex marriage into second-class marriage with a longer-term goal of overturning federal marriage rights for gays and lesbians entirely.

Adoption is only one of several fronts on which they are attacking:

By getting courts to rule that wedding-related businesses can turn away gay couples based on the business owners’ religious beliefs, by allowing governments to refuse to give the same benefits to spouses within same-sex marriages as they do to those within opposite-sex marriages, and by allowing adoption agencies to say no to LGBTQ parents.

I

t is really in those three major areas- adoption, public accommodation, and benefits- that equality is being assailed. I do not believe for a Nano second that this is about religion or religious freedom. It’s about bigotry-plain and simple. It is not about concern for the children either. It is about bigotry.

Furthermore, in the Huston Texas case where the Texas Supreme Court rules that married same sex couples on the city payroll were not necessarily entitle to employee benefits is clearly bigotry because it has nothing to do with religion and clearly is harmful to the children of those couples.

Is that what God would want? These issues, along wth the myriad of so call "bathroom bills " aimed at trans people make it clear that the GOP is hell bent on making life as difficult as possible for LGBT people in order to appease the religious right.

It's an abomination to the Lord

/thread

Who cares? We're not under your christian sharia.

Dear bodecea
We are all under the principle of Equal Justice Under Law.
where Jesus represents and embodies the laws of Universal Justice.

There are two paths: the scriptural laws and authority
of believers, and the natural laws and civil authority of secular gentiles.

bodecea you are still under civil Constitutional laws
that bar abuse of govt to impose faith based beliefs
and biases that abridge free exercise and choice of religion.

that's not "Christian sharia" that's Constitutional
law based on Natural Laws that all humans respond to by Conscience.

So yes, you are equally under natural laws
and Jesus as Justice fulfills this since Equal Justice,
equal protections and "consent of the governed" is the authority of CIVIL laws.