Is anti-gay unconstitutional

[Schweddy]

income tax isn't an individual freedom...but thats and entirely different subject...but do you see where im getting at with that?

Your right, there is no freedom from income taxes. But I am not sure what you mean. Please elaborate.

 

[Squawker]

Yeah, how dare they want equality! It's just like the black people wanting slavery to end or women wanting the vote. Why can't they just wait until the majority of people in power are ok with that?

I know this is the standard answer to anyone who objects, but it isn’t the same at all. You are not hurt because you cannot get legally married.

Seriously, why are two people getting married a "ridiculous demand".

You are asking that the definition of a word be changed to support your stance. Marriage is (The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.) If you have the option of Civil Union, why isn’t that good enough for you?

It doesn't affect you at all.

It doesn’t? Do you have any idea how much the paperwork alone will cost the Taxpayers?

Stopping gays from getting married doesn't make them go away either. They're going to be around whether they can get married or not.

So?

Some states have proposed legislation that would ban civil unions (amusingly, including civil unions between straight people too).

You are talking about common law “marriage”? I don’t agree with those either.

And since when has equality been a demand that's so unreasonable?

Equality has nothing to do with it. A gay couple will never be a man and a woman, no matter how you spin it.

I just don't understand your stance against it.

I don’t understand why you want it. It isn’t going to make people like you or accept you. It isn’t going to be easier for you. People will have more reason to resent you, not less. I don’t care what you do in the privacy of your home, but I am sick and tired of special interest groups making demands, and insisting that we all just accept it and live with it.

 

[IndependentTexan]

You are talking about common law “marriage”? I don’t agree with those either. Equality has nothing to do with it. A gay couple will never be a man and a woman, no matter how you spin it. I don’t understand why you want it. It isn’t going to make people like you or accept you. It isn’t going to be easier for you. People will have more reason to resent you, not less. I don’t care what you do in the privacy of your home, but I am sick and tired of special interest groups making demands, and insisting that we all just accept it and live with it.

Even though the country has periodically struggled with the question of marriage, the last law prohibiting people of different races from marrying was overturned only 35 years ago. We have never taken the step of amending the Constitution to define marriage. Now is not the time to begin to use the Constitution as a tool for discrimination. It isn't about being accepted, it is about being equal in the eyes of the government.

 

[shuamort]

I know this is the standard answer to anyone who objects, but it isn’t the same at all. You are not hurt because you cannot get legally married.

Same thing, you'll need to prove that the discrimination is different. There are medical benefits, financial help, etc that have been shown to you that are hand in hand with marriage, denial to those benefits prove damage. And are you hurt if gays could legally get married? No. It doesn't affect your life one iota. It doesn't affect my life one iota either.

You are asking that the definition of a word be changed to support your stance. Marriage is (The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.) If you have the option of Civil Union, why isn’t that good enough for you?

Why do you assume that the definition of a word changes? Even so, words change all the time and so this is a lame point.

It doesn’t? Do you have any idea how much the paperwork alone will cost the Taxpayers? So?.

Wait, are you OK with civil unions that would offer the same benefits or not? I'm confused because if you're saying that civil unions are OK with you, the financial burden would be the EXACT same.

You are talking about common law “marriage”? I don’t agree with those either. Equality has nothing to do with it. A gay couple will never be a man and a woman, no matter how you spin it. I don’t understand why you want it. It isn’t going to make people like you or accept you. It isn’t going to be easier for you. People will have more reason to resent you, not less. I don’t care what you do in the privacy of your home, but I am sick and tired of special interest groups making demands, and insisting that we all just accept it and live with it.

Why should what gays do in the privacy of their homes affect you at all? Which would include marriage. You would think that they were performing the wedding on your front lawn and consummated it in your bed and then sending you the bill.

Wouldn't it make more sense if you're so protective of the sanctity of marriage to stop legal divorces? That seems to be what's causing the majority of problems in marriage today, and not the increase of legality of people of the same or opposite sex getting married. I'm still not able to wade through your logic except that this is an emotional and not a logical issue for you.

 

[Squawker]

Why should what gays do in the privacy of their homes affect you at all? Which would include marriage. You would think that they were performing the wedding on your front lawn and consummated it in your bed and then sending you the bill.

I said I don't care. I don't want to see gays kissing in public, if that is what you mean.

Wouldn't it make more sense if you're so protective of the sanctity of marriage to stop legal divorces? That seems to be what's causing the majority of problems in marriage today, and not the increase of legality of people of the same or opposite sex getting married. I'm still not able to wade through your logic except that this is an emotional and not a logical issue for you.

Every step down this road destroys the family. We shouldn't be encouraging or making it easy for men and women to "choose" homosexuality. You present gays as well adjusted committed members of society who would have all their problems solved, if they could only get married. The reality is far different.

 

[shuamort]

Every step down this road destroys the family. We shouldn't be encouraging or making it easy for men and women to "choose" homosexuality. You present gays as well adjusted committed members of society who would have all their problems solved, if they could only get married. The reality is far different.

You do realize that I'm gay, that I was in a committed monogamous relationship for 11 years before my partner passed away from cancer. That a lot of issues that could have been easily resolved from us being married became very complicated because there were some legal things we hadn't thought about when he was alive. I'm beginning to see your opinions not as rationales but more as prejudices. I wish you well and hope that someday you'll be comfortable in your skin while others are comfortable in theirs and that's ok. There's no agenda to take over the world.

I don't like to make a big deal out of me being gay. I don't mention often online because it's not who I am, it's part of what I am tho. It's as big a deal as me being left handed. Or at least it should be. But when my rights to a lot of things that could easily be afforded to me by marriage are denied, I get really uppity.

 

[Squawker]

You do realize that I'm gay, that I was in a committed monogamous relationship for 11 years before my partner passed away from cancer. That a lot of issues that could have been easily resolved from us being married became very complicated because there were some legal things we hadn't thought about when he was alive.

You have my sympathy. That doesn’t change the fact that the traditional family is the glue to our society, and deviant sexual practices undermine it.

I'm beginning to see your opinions not as rationales but more as prejudices. I wish you well and hope that someday you'll be comfortable in your skin while others are comfortable in theirs and that's ok. There's no agenda to take over the world.

I said before, I don’t care what you do in your home. All I ask is you don’t force your lifestyle on me, or ask me to pay for it.

I don't like to make a big deal out of me being gay. I don't mention often online because it's not who I am, it's part of what I am tho. It's as big a deal as me being left handed. Or at least it should be. But when my rights to a lot of things that could easily be afforded to me by marriage are denied, I get really uppity.

You can get married to a woman anytime you want. You have the same right that we all do.

 

[IndependentTexan]

You are typing things that are discriminating my friend.

I am personally not gay, but I think they should have a right to get married. Now for you against gay marriage let me ask this. Where in our constitution does it define marriage to just a man and women? The United States Constitution does not define marriage. We have never taken the step of amending the Constitution to define marriage. Now is not the time to begin to use the Constitution as a tool for discrimination.

Those of you who are for putting an amendment may or may not realize it but this is discriminating against gays.

 

[shuamort]

You have my sympathy. That doesn’t change the fact that the traditional family is the glue to our society, and deviant sexual practices undermine it.

Well, with that standing, I'm assuming that you've:

1. Never had sex outside of a marriage
2. You've only been married once
3. You've only done it in the missionary position
4. You've only done it one with that one person
5. MOST IMPORTANTLY, the only reason you've had sex is to procreate and NEVER for pleasure.

Otherwise, of course, you are having deviant sex and being a huge hypocrite.

I said before, I don’t care what you do in your home. All I ask is you don’t force your lifestyle on me, or ask me to pay for it.
You can get married to a woman anytime you want. You have the same right that we all do.

Interesting, you feel it's fine to force your "lifestyle" on me by insisting that I marry a woman, but for some reason, me living my own life is foisting my lifestyle on you. Time for you to take a long look in the mirror and find out whose pushing a lifestyle on whom. Seriously.

 

[Schweddy]

Interesting, you feel it's fine to force your "lifestyle" on me by insisting that I marry a woman, but for some reason, me living my own life is foisting my lifestyle on you.

I still do not see how it is "discrimination". How is requiring a man and a woman getting married "forcing" anything on two people of the same sex? If states allow civil marriage is that not good enough? The gay person is NOT the victim.

How is it harmful to the gay person for them NOT to marry?

 

[anomaly]

I still do not see how it is "discrimination". How is requiring a man and a woman getting married "forcing" anything on two people of the same sex? If states allow civil marriage is that not good enough? The gay person is NOT the victim.

How is it harmful to the gay person for them NOT to marry?

Vauge, do you support a national amendment against gay marriage, without a vote from every state?

 

[Schweddy]

Yes. But, I would be satisfied with a vote from every state as well.

 

[anomaly]

Yes. But, I would be satisfied with a vote from every state as well.

We cannot simply allow a conservative president like Bush to use his power against the people's will. We should leave the issue to be decided democratically by each state, since you know as well as I that the people of Texas are profoundly different in thinking than the people of Massachusetts.

 

[Schweddy]

I will say it again...

Say Mass passes and Texas does not - should Texas be required to honor it?

That would be the next step. When the gay groups go to the Supreme Court to sue Texas and it could become law that all states would have to recognize the others. Thus, it would make the states vote irrelivant on gay marriage.

There is no guarantee that my vote would even count. So, while I would support a state by state vote, it would almost be worthless.

 

[anomaly]

I will say it again...


There is no guarantee that my vote would even count. So, while I would support a state by state vote, it would almost be worthless.

First, why would a gay couple want to go to Texas? And you could vote to have your state not recognize it. I don't think a gay couple living in MA really cares if, while vacationing in Florida, they are not legally married. If Texas outlaws gay marriage and civil unions, the gay couples will go somewhere its legal. Why would they ever come back anyway lol?

 

[Schweddy]

First, why would a gay couple want to go to Texas?

The gay community in Dallas is much larger than San Fran.

I don't think a gay couple living in MA really cares if, while vacationing in Florida, they are not legally married.

Of course the would. What if one was in an accident and one of them couldn't go to the hospitol like they could in MA? Supreme court time claiming discrimination.

 

[anomaly]

The gay community in Dallas is much larger than San Fran.


Of course the would. What if one was in an accident and one of them couldn't go to the hospitol like they could in MA? Supreme court time claiming discrimination.

Why wouldn't they be able to go to the hospital? For that matter, why are you personally such a homophobe? You seem quite frightened by the gay community, either that or you simply hate them.

 

[Schweddy]

Why wouldn't they be able to go to the hospital? For that matter, why are you personally such a homophobe? You seem quite frightened by the gay community, either that or you simply hate them.

Hospitol reference; if one is in a severe accident only family may see them in hospitols. If a state did not recognize the marriage, then that party would not be considered family. Therefore they could not see the other.

Homophobe; read other posts from me in this thread. I have mentioned my past several times.

Hate; I don't HATE anyone. There is a big difference between hating someone and disagreeing with thier lifestyle. I think that lifestyle should not be in public. I respect everyone's opinion and I even repect gays that keep it to themselves. I do not respect demands. I feel that a large portion (not all) are demanding what they believe is 'equality'. To me, this issue has nothing to do with equality.

 

[shuamort]

I said before, I don’t care what you do in your home. All I ask is you don’t force your lifestyle on me, or ask me to pay for it.
You can get married to a woman anytime you want. You have the same right that we all do.

Interesting, you feel it's fine to force your "lifestyle" on me by insisting that I marry a woman, but for some reason, me living my own life is foisting my lifestyle on you.

I still do not see how it is "discrimination". How is requiring a man and a woman getting married "forcing" anything on two people of the same sex? If states allow civil marriage is that not good enough? The gay person is NOT the victim.

How is it harmful to the gay person for them NOT to marry?

Sorry if this looks messy, this was the easist way to keep on track.

Squawker said that gays still can go ahead and get married to people of the opposite sex, this was after he said that allowing gay people to marry would be forcing the gay lifestly down his throat.

My reply to Squawker was that saying that gays can go ahead and do that, which would be in adherance to the straight lifestyle would be forcing that lifestyle down the gays throats.

If the states were to allow civil marriage for gays, that would be great! That's what is wanted. If you're amenable to that, we're on the same page.

As for "how is it harmful"...? I hate using anecdotal evidence to support my claim, but here we go. When my partner and I were together, he was the bigger bread winner, and when we bought a house, it was in his name. His cancer worsened and two years prior to his death, he was no longer able to work, putting the financial burden for the mortgage on to me. The big problem was that even though we were together at 9 years and for intents and purposes, a "married couple", we couldn't get legally married. As such, when his health insurance stopped after the year of Cobra, he was uninsured for health. If we would have been able to be married, he could have been carried under my health insurance. The financial burden of his doctors bills and prescriptions caused us to take out a mortgage on the house to keep up.

He soon passed peacefully. The hospital was a good one and knew our relationship and gave me spousal visitation rights. They legally could have easily said no to me. I was also thankful that during his illness, I didn't have to make any medical decision on his behalf. Because I couldn't, however if we were married, that possibility would have been afforded me.

He had set up a will prior to his death that gave me pretty much everything. Including the house. However, due to the fact that we couldn't get married, the estate taxes were so high that I had to sell the house. (even with the mortgage on the house, we still had a lot of equity in the house).

So how is it harmful to gays that they can't get married? I can think of at least 1049 reasons.

 

[shuamort]

Homophobe; read other posts from me in this thread. I have mentioned my past several times.

Vauge, what happened to you was horrible, BUT, let's say the crime was done by a black person. Would that mean that ALL black people were like that, or just that one?

 

[Squawker]

I hate using anecdotal evidence to support my claim, but here we go.

What you describe isn't any different than thousands of heterosexual married or unmarried couples go through, Shuamort. Maine has a large population of gays, and believe me when I say they are not all upstanding citizens who would never bother anyone not interested, or stay with the same partner for more than a few years. They are a huge drain on the taxpayers for medical and other assistance. You see it only from your perspective.

 

[shuamort]

What you describe isn't any different than thousands of heterosexual married or unmarried couples go through, Shuamort. Maine has a large population of gays, and believe me when I say they are not all upstanding citizens who would never bother anyone not interested, or stay with the same partner for more than a few years. They are a huge drain on the taxpayers for medical and other assistance. You see it only from your perspective.

Squawker, yes it is different. If I would've been legally married would I or any heterosexual married couple had to have paid the exorbinant taxes from inheriting a house from a deceased partner? NO
Please prove your claim that it is different.

Have you ever seen the show "Cheaters". About how couples have their partner tracked to determine if they're cheating? I've watched it a lot and have yet to see a gay couple on the show. HOWEVER, I've seen a lot of straight people. Maybe we shouldn't let them marry. Your arguments are complete b.s. and you know it. Have you found that mirror yet, Squawker?

 

[Schweddy]

Shuamort, I am sincerely sorry about your loss.

The same type of event happens to unmarried heterosexual couples as well. Less the "common law" marriage states.

Do we need fix that issue as well?

As far as what happened to me, that is a tough burden to overcome. I think race is irrelevant, but I understand where you are going.

 

[shuamort]

Shuamort, I am sincerely sorry about your loss.

The same type of event happens to unmarried heterosexual couples as well. Less the "common law" marriage states.

Do we need fix that issue as well?

Why should we, they have the option to get married anytime should they choose and have the volition to do so. Therein lies the difference.

 

[Squawker]

If I would've been legally married would I or any heterosexual married couple had to have paid the exorbinant taxes from inheriting a house from a deceased partner? NO
Please prove your claim that it is different.

There is the estate tax, the death tax and the inheritance tax, take your pick. The property could have easily been transferred to yourself had your partner chosen to do it. Don’t get angry with society because your partner failed to get the legal documents.

One of the oldest and most common forms of taxation is the taxation of property held by an individual at the time of their death. Such a tax can take the form, among others, of estate tax (a tax levied on the estate before any transfers). An estate tax is a charge upon the decedent's entire estate, regardless of how it is disbursed. An alternative form of death tax is an inheritance tax (a tax levied on individuals receiving property from the estate). Taxes imposed upon death provide incentive to transfer assets before death.

Source