If gay marriage is legal...let's get rid of ALL legal marriage....

[The Rabbi]

While agree with you on states rights, as long as the government is involved with "Marriage" then you will have to deal with gay "Marriage". That is the far left plan when they hijacked the cause, although the far left did this to get into the churches and their money..

I dont have to deal with it at all. I live in a state that passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man one woman by over 80%. It is one of the few states that has never registered a gay marriage. Remind me why some judge somewhere in Ohio can overturn the decision of 80% of the voters? And dont play the Civil Rights card. That's already maxxed out.

Yes we know the far left loves to legislate form the bench. Although it is not a true civil rights issue, it will always be an issue that the far left can use. So they can play all the other cards.

So either you have to get the government out of the business of "Marriage" or you have to get the far left out of politics..

Just terrible, the day someone ask for equality in the USA.....

Equality does not exist in nature, so why ask for something that truly does not exist except in a political religious cult talking point?

Man has created his own nature, outside of the law of nature....

Can I quote you on that?

 

[Moonglow]

I dont have to deal with it at all. I live in a state that passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man one woman by over 80%. It is one of the few states that has never registered a gay marriage. Remind me why some judge somewhere in Ohio can overturn the decision of 80% of the voters? And dont play the Civil Rights card. That's already maxxed out.

Yes we know the far left loves to legislate form the bench. Although it is not a true civil rights issue, it will always be an issue that the far left can use. So they can play all the other cards.

So either you have to get the government out of the business of "Marriage" or you have to get the far left out of politics..

Just terrible, the day someone ask for equality in the USA.....

Equality does not exist in nature, so why ask for something that truly does not exist except in a political religious cult talking point?

Man has created his own nature, outside of the law of nature....

Can I quote you on that?

Why not...

 

[Kosh]

While agree with you on states rights, as long as the government is involved with "Marriage" then you will have to deal with gay "Marriage". That is the far left plan when they hijacked the cause, although the far left did this to get into the churches and their money..

I dont have to deal with it at all. I live in a state that passed a constitutional amendment defining marriage as one man one woman by over 80%. It is one of the few states that has never registered a gay marriage. Remind me why some judge somewhere in Ohio can overturn the decision of 80% of the voters? And dont play the Civil Rights card. That's already maxxed out.

Yes we know the far left loves to legislate form the bench. Although it is not a true civil rights issue, it will always be an issue that the far left can use. So they can play all the other cards.

So either you have to get the government out of the business of "Marriage" or you have to get the far left out of politics..

Just terrible, the day someone ask for equality in the USA.....

Equality does not exist in nature, so why ask for something that truly does not exist except in a political religious cult talking point?

Man has created his own nature, outside of the law of nature....

Thus proving that it is against nature..

Way to go and shoot down another far left talking point!

Congrats as you go for top posting drone of the month..

 

[Seawytch]

Getting government out of marriage is a bumper sticker slogan for the narco-libertarian crowd.

And some rabid anti gay bigots...the "fill the pool so the black kids can't swim" faction.

 

[Seawytch]

As long as government is involved with marriage then you will have to accept gay "Marriage". Can you accept that?

I'm 100% against the government telling someone they have to marry anyone - whether they be straight or gay.


>>>>

Oh so you want to change the tax code as well and make it fair for everyone right?

It is fair for everyone. Want benefits? Marry someone of the opposite sex. Anyone can do that. Just like anyone can qualify for farm benefits by being a farmer. Or qualify for tax credits by installing some solar shit or other in their homes.
If you object to the tax code being used for social engineering, fine. But that's how things are.

But gays aren't attracted to and do not wish to marry someone of the same sex...luckily for them they can marry the consenting adult partner of their choice in 36 out of 50 states.

 

[Kosh]

Getting government out of marriage is a bumper sticker slogan for the narco-libertarian crowd.

And some rabid anti gay bigots...the "fill the pool so the black kids can't swim" faction.

Oh look the racist/bigoted far left drones are checking in.

They believe that being "gay" is a race..

 

[deltex1]

Gay Marriage Scares Oklahoma Rep So Much He Proposes Banning All Marriages

If this isn't the most petulant thing I've read from the Right wing today........

Take away the benefits also...that would leave all the gays regardless of gender with their imagined and real dicks in their hand.

 

[Seawytch]

Gay Marriage Scares Oklahoma Rep So Much He Proposes Banning All Marriages

If this isn't the most petulant thing I've read from the Right wing today........

Take away the benefits also...that would leave all the gays regardless of gender with their imagined and real dicks in their hand.

Go ahead, take away the benefits...gays and straights will still want to civilly marry...but you won't ever pry the benefits away from the straights.

 

[Kosh]

Gay Marriage Scares Oklahoma Rep So Much He Proposes Banning All Marriages

If this isn't the most petulant thing I've read from the Right wing today........

Take away the benefits also...that would leave all the gays regardless of gender with their imagined and real dicks in their hand.

Go ahead, take away the benefits...gays and straights will still want to civilly marry...but you won't ever pry the benefits away from the straights.

It is funny to see the far left post their propaganda on "benefits".. They really believe that they do not have any because of the far left propaganda..

 

[WorldWatcher]

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Well that right there is wrong. Social Security retirement money goes to the individual worker. If the worker dies it goes to their legal spouse. There are certain provisions were checks will be gut to surviving minor children until age of maturity or for surviving parents if those parents qualify as dependents of the worker (the worker would have had to have provided at least 50% of their support).

There are no provisions that an person can "will" anything to anyone as it pertains to SS, continued payments after death are defined in the law.


>>>>

 

[Jarhead]

Gay Marriage Scares Oklahoma Rep So Much He Proposes Banning All Marriages

If this isn't the most petulant thing I've read from the Right wing today........

the author of the article did not do justice to the truth. It spun it so far to the left, and I find it ironic that you did not see right through it. And to be frank, I am surprised you would not support the idea. From my understanding, he wants to rid marriage as a "law"....he wants to take government out of marriage. He wants marriage to remain a rite that can exist between any two people who want to marry, but not one that is governed by the state.
Reading left wing and right wing articles skews the reality of motivations of our politicians and it does not allow for honest debate.

 

[Kosh]

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Well that right there is wrong. Social Security retirement money goes to the individual worker. If the worker dies it goes to their legal spouse. There are certain provisions were checks will be gut to surviving minor children until age of maturity or for surviving parents if those parents qualify as dependents of the worker (the worker would have had to have provided at least 50% of their support).

There are no provisions that an person can "will" anything to anyone as it pertains to SS, continued payments after death are defined in the law.


>>>>

Yet they can do so...

 

[Roadrunner]

Gay Marriage Scares Oklahoma Rep So Much He Proposes Banning All Marriages

If this isn't the most petulant thing I've read from the Right wing today........

Really? Why not? The Government may reject any support for "legal families". moreover social programs for these families are senseless. I am interested What would you say about Christian wedding ceremony as a religious tradition??

Government should license civil unions to any combination of consenting adults asking for them.

Marriage should be a religious ceremony performed by churches for those who want a marriage under the terms the church agrees to.

 

[WorldWatcher]

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Well that right there is wrong. Social Security retirement money goes to the individual worker. If the worker dies it goes to their legal spouse. There are certain provisions were checks will be gut to surviving minor children until age of maturity or for surviving parents if those parents qualify as dependents of the worker (the worker would have had to have provided at least 50% of their support).

There are no provisions that an person can "will" anything to anyone as it pertains to SS, continued payments after death are defined in the law.


>>>>

Yet they can do so...

OK, prove it.

This (and the other pages at the SSA) define how survivor benefits are determined -->> EN-05-10084.pdf


>>>>>

 

[Jarhead]

**** the lawyers, that's what.

You'd replace it with "domestic partnerships" which would be offshoots of business law. Any people could register as domestic partners but there wouldnt be many benefits. Remove all benefits of marriage as well as marriage.
**** the gays.

No, no, **** lawyers.

That is the main reason this will never work, lawyers are the task masters. They make the laws, interpret the laws, and defend/prosecute people regarding the laws. Why on earth would the do something like get out of the marriage business when there is all that money to be made?

If you can propose a society with no laws I'd be happy to listen.

Am I proposing a society without laws? No. I'm proposing taking laws away regarding marriage.

So you answer the question, why should we have the state involved in marriage?

I'm still awaiting an answer, any answer really.

I appreciate your desire to get government out of marriage. What have you actively done to make that happen?

If you admire his desire to get government out of marriage, then why did you start this thread criticizing a politician who wants to do exactly that?
I know the answer...because the author of the article injected his own theory as to what the representatives motives are.

 

[Jarhead]

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Well that right there is wrong. Social Security retirement money goes to the individual worker. If the worker dies it goes to their legal spouse. There are certain provisions were checks will be gut to surviving minor children until age of maturity or for surviving parents if those parents qualify as dependents of the worker (the worker would have had to have provided at least 50% of their support).

There are no provisions that an person can "will" anything to anyone as it pertains to SS, continued payments after death are defined in the law.


>>>>

It goes beyond that. It MAY go to the surviving spouse, but only if the surviving spouse forgoes his/her social security. The surviving spouse has the option to take the larger of the two.
But the surviving spouse does not come out better....it is not a true benefit of being married.

 

[Jarhead]

As long as government is involved with marriage then you will have to accept gay "Marriage". Can you accept that?

I'm 100% against the government telling someone they have to marry anyone - whether they be straight or gay.


>>>>

Oh so you want to change the tax code as well and make it fair for everyone right?

It is fair for everyone. Want benefits? Marry someone of the opposite sex. Anyone can do that. Just like anyone can qualify for farm benefits by being a farmer. Or qualify for tax credits by installing some solar shit or other in their homes.
If you object to the tax code being used for social engineering, fine. But that's how things are.

Well actually the tax code allows for two people living together to get the same benefits.

Two non married people (even one man and one woman) can adopt children for the tax benefits.

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Why have government involved in "Marriage" when all those things that so many believe are automatic, no longer exist?

Your will can NOT specify who gets your social security money. Where did you hear that one?

 

[Kosh]

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Well that right there is wrong. Social Security retirement money goes to the individual worker. If the worker dies it goes to their legal spouse. There are certain provisions were checks will be gut to surviving minor children until age of maturity or for surviving parents if those parents qualify as dependents of the worker (the worker would have had to have provided at least 50% of their support).

There are no provisions that an person can "will" anything to anyone as it pertains to SS, continued payments after death are defined in the law.


>>>>

Yet they can do so...

OK, prove it.

This (and the other pages at the SSA) define how survivor benefits are determined -->> EN-05-10084.pdf


>>>>>

Show me one far left judge that would deny a same sex couple (not married) this?

Next you will be telling me that the far left judges will adhere to the law instead of legislating form the bench.

And yes it is your money that you can give to anyone. Determination by the government or the will of the person in question?

 

[Kosh]

As long as government is involved with marriage then you will have to accept gay "Marriage". Can you accept that?

I'm 100% against the government telling someone they have to marry anyone - whether they be straight or gay.


>>>>

Oh so you want to change the tax code as well and make it fair for everyone right?

It is fair for everyone. Want benefits? Marry someone of the opposite sex. Anyone can do that. Just like anyone can qualify for farm benefits by being a farmer. Or qualify for tax credits by installing some solar shit or other in their homes.
If you object to the tax code being used for social engineering, fine. But that's how things are.

Well actually the tax code allows for two people living together to get the same benefits.

Two non married people (even one man and one woman) can adopt children for the tax benefits.

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Why have government involved in "Marriage" when all those things that so many believe are automatic, no longer exist?

Your will can NOT specify who gets your social security money. Where did you hear that one?

Yes you can!

 

[Kosh]

In your will you can specify who gets your social security money.

Well that right there is wrong. Social Security retirement money goes to the individual worker. If the worker dies it goes to their legal spouse. There are certain provisions were checks will be gut to surviving minor children until age of maturity or for surviving parents if those parents qualify as dependents of the worker (the worker would have had to have provided at least 50% of their support).

There are no provisions that an person can "will" anything to anyone as it pertains to SS, continued payments after death are defined in the law.


>>>>

It goes beyond that. It MAY go to the surviving spouse, but only if the surviving spouse forgoes his/her social security. The surviving spouse has the option to take the larger of the two.
But the surviving spouse does not come out better....it is not a true benefit of being married.

Oh my! Not a true benefit of "Marriage"?