posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 03:53 PM
Originally posted by Kali74
In the interest of equality and respect to religious beliefs, I think we should level the playing field. If in 'the Land of the Free' we cannot meet
consensus to federally recognize Gay Marriage or Same Sex Unions then we should strike the balance with NO federally recognized marriages or unions.
That is fair, right?
What's the Difference?
The most significant difference between marriage and civil unions (or domestic partnerships) is that only marriage offers federal benefits and
According to the federal government's General Accounting Office (GAO), more than 1,100 rights and protections are conferred to U.S. citizens upon
marriage. Areas affected include Social Security benefits, veterans' benefits, health insurance, Medicaid, hospital visitation, estate taxes,
retirement savings, pensions, family leave, and immigration law.
Because same-sex marriages in Massachusetts and California, civil unions, and domestic partnerships are not federally recognized, any benefits
available at the state or local level are subject to federal taxation. For example, a woman whose health insurance covers her female partner must pay
federal taxes on the total employer cost for that insurance.
i find this ignorant and offensive.
you say we "cannot meet consensus to federally recognize Gay Marriage or Same Sex Unions"...
im legally married (heterosexually) to my wife, but because OTHER people, not me, "cannot meet consensus to federally recognize Gay Marriage or Same
Sex Unions". you want to take that from me and my wife, and by extention my kids.
shame on you lumping us all together. i did nothing wrong, or even immoral.
and what about, say, a couple fresh high school graduates, 18 years old, just got married, NEVER voted, not even given the chance to "meet consensus
to federally recognize Gay Marriage or Same Sex Unions", and you want to take that from them?
just because we as a country cant decide, dont think for a second we should ALL be punished.
free will at its best.