It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Let's Revoke The Rights and Protections Awarded to Heterosexual Married Couples

page: 11
29
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   
The title for this thread is trolling in nature, I really don't care if gays get the stuff married couples get or not.
But lets not be stupid, and push human rights backwards just because another group is perceived to be abused.




posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by Dizrael
 


So you don't believe in equal treatment?

It's ok for same sex couples to get shafted, but don't you dare touch my rights? Seems kind of hypocritical doesn't it?


shame on you lumping us all together. i did nothing wrong, or even immoral.


Funny, I didn't think that same sex couples had done anything wrong, or immoral either...


~Tetnh


Being equally unfair does not make it fair



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
OK but then we get to legalize automatics and silencers for organized shooting sports.

Which is just as likely to happen.


LOL. I hear ya. That's pretty much been my position on the subject as well. I'm against gay marriage, both personally and as a matter of public policy. That said, I'm willing to compromise. Although I'll never support it at a personal level, I'll stop casting votes against gay marriage on election day as soon as the political left decides to stop trying to push additional gun control measures onto responsible gun owners. Seems reasonable to me. Hell, I'm not even asking for a rollback of current restrictions. Just quit pushing more.

On the other hand, I don't even have a problem with what the OP is suggesting. Given that marriage is a private contract, government shouldn't be involved in the issue, anyway. The issue of benefits would have to be ironed out, but I suspect that could be done with minimal hassle just by allowing a person to name anyone as a beneficiary.
edit on 8-9-2012 by vor78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by david99118
 


You say that as though "family aspect" and "act of love" are not similar in any way...


wasent trying to make them that different. but i just because 2 things usually go together does not mean they always go together. there are many couples that love each other and have no intention of having children.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by david99118


well you're certainly free to believe whatever incompetent BS you like. and as always, i was never making an argument. it was a statement. i know iam right and you're wrong. no discussion, debate or argument. just sating facts.

i get so tired of being surrounded by idiots no matter where i go.


Riiiiiight. Just keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, there are states that allow gay marriage, there are countries that allow gay marriage, and our children's children won't even know that it was ever a hotly debated topic, because gay marriage will just be like any other marriage.


nice job in showing whats fundamentally wrong with zealots like you. someone says something you dont like and you attack them without actually getting to know what they actually believe. ide think you were a member of a Aryan brotherhood if this wasent a topic on gays.i wounder if giving you a "hail Hitler" would make you happy again?

all i ever stated was the whole point of legal marriage. your the one who has decided to make this simple fact major issue and started getting rude and thus making your self look quite pathetic.i am very much libertarian and couldn't care less what people do. but i also know what the whole point of marriage is. its not about legal benefits or love. its about making more drones for the government. something gays can not naturally do. but hay if you want to make it to where straight people cant get married then go for it. marriage is already clearly overrated and it could , in theory, help lessen the creation of more drones since there will be lessen incentive for people to be bonded to each other for years. reduced drone creation = negative population rate. negative population rate= fewer humans and a chance for the earth to recover from the stupid things we have done to it. iam always up for anything that may reduce the human population. too many of us fealty creatures already.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 


Hey I completely agree, I mean i'm married and if the government sent me a letter stating that my marriage was nul and void, hey that would be great i mean, amazing, no split down the middle, no legal crap divorce, maintenance and all the trauma, just sayonara.
see the thing is i dont care one way or the another on gay marriage I actualy find the whole concept and the interest in it highly amusing, but in reality the people who will win in the long run are the lawyers, as this might sound like a "really cool" idea now, marriage is however a REAL and BINDING Contract, one which when signed you might as well have signed with Satan himself.
So I'm gonna sit back and wait for the first generation of gay couples to lineup and get hitched then hit the 4-5yr mark then line up for divorce. I tell you you there will be a killing to be made as a lawyer in the next 10-15.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 
I have never had a problem with gay marriage tell now.What happen to the we love each and just want to be together? now its all about money and benifits and if we don't get what we want we will destory it for everyone.
I will still supprot gay marriage because I know enough gay people to know that you and the forum moderator that has taken up your plite are in the minorty of this kind of angree hate towards anyone who does not agree with you.It would seem your problem is with the government but you take it to the people I guess in hopes of forcing them to agree with you and if not then we will destory your life.
My point being is how do you expect to gain any or hold the support you have with this kind of attitude towards people that are not gay but support gay marriage?................somehow I doubt you care.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by vor78
 


Funny. I despise guns, I wish they didn't exist but we have the second amendment and I stand by the Constitution.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


I most definitely am not trolling and for millionth time I am not suggesting the ability to get married be revoked just the special status it grants to some and not all.

reply to post by Battleline
 


I'm not gay

I find the psychology present in this thread really interesting, many of you have interpreted me as being gay and that since I can't have my way no one should. I'm not asking for the abolition of marriage either.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by XxNightAngelusxX
 


I really appreciate your honesty.

People do not have to understand being gay - - to understand Equal Rights.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by vor78
 


Funny. I despise guns, I wish they didn't exist but we have the second amendment and I stand by the Constitution.

reply to post by Blue_Jay33
 


I most definitely am not trolling and for millionth time I am not suggesting the ability to get married be revoked just the special status it grants to some and not all.

reply to post by Battleline
 


I'm not gay

I find the psychology present in this thread really interesting, many of you have interpreted me as being gay and that since I can't have my way no one should. I'm not asking for the abolition of marriage either.





I'm not asking for the abolition of marriage either




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.





posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


"Funny, I didn't think that same sex couples had done anything wrong, or immoral either"

Well that's where you are wrong. Same sex unions are unnatural, immoral, perverse and cursed. The fact you can't see that says volumes about you.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post 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?


Sure is fair. IF you want to end the human race. When a man can get another man pregnant, or a woman get another woman pregnant, then you can dictate what is right and fair. Until that day comes sugar, you don't got a leg to stand on. You can get mad all you want, i really don't care. You can flame me all you want, i got a bucket of icewater sitting next to me, and plenty of Samuel Adams lager to go with it that says i won't give a flying crap what you think.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by vor78
I'll stop casting votes against gay marriage on election day as soon as the political left decides to stop trying to push additional gun control measures onto responsible gun owners.


Really? How asinine can you get.


The issue of benefits would have to be ironed out, but I suspect that could be done with minimal hassle just by allowing a person to name anyone as a beneficiary.


Wrong. Do you honestly believe gays haven't done that?



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Battleline
reply to post by Kali74
 
I have never had a problem with gay marriage tell now.What happen to the we love each and just want to be together?


I'm sick of this position of argument. What the hell do you think gays have been doing for centuries?

But then there's the legal side of things. Suppose you were with your partner for 50 years - - and your partner dies. You are not allowed in the hospital because you are not related. Everything you've built together is ripped away from you by your partners anti-gay family and anti-gay judges.

This is real and this happens all the time. Legal paperwork has not prevented it. Marriage would.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   

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 protections.

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.


infoplease.com



GOOD LUCK with THAT ! It will never happen in America ! Not as long as there are Heterosexuals / Heterosapiens who are maintaining the watch on all our freedoms. You're asking for special dispensations to the G/L community that they are not going to get. Sorry to disappoint you. Reality sucks sometimes.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post 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?


Sure is fair. IF you want to end the human race. When a man can get another man pregnant, or a woman get another woman pregnant, then you can dictate what is right and fair. Until that day comes sugar, you don't got a leg to stand on. You can get mad all you want, i really don't care. You can flame me all you want, i got a bucket of icewater sitting next to me, and plenty of Samuel Adams lager to go with it that says i won't give a flying crap what you think.


Again - - there are 300 million people in America alone. The procreation argument is old and tired and useless.

Intelligence and creative minds are far more important to the world today.

A stable society of family groups is more beneficial - - - then forcing those that are different to live on the fringe and create their own culture.

But - - I'm aware an ancient book does screw up the mind when it comes to the Real World.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by repeatoffender
 


How is non federally recognized marriage the same as no marriage?
All it means is that married couples receive no benefits or special status, it does mean it becomes illegal to get married.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


I agree. However, this has been part of many governments for quite a long time now. Let's see if those who are against gay marriage agree with us, that no couple need ask permission nor receive special status for deciding to marry the person they love.



Bloody outstanding ! The OP & Mod have stated their mutual agreement on the focus of this long standing emotionally charged issue. I've gained ! Of late, a very rare worthy post. Of course after the first few pages it goes South, fore then we slide into the emotional quagmire of feelings. Thank you both.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by The X
 


I'm a heterosexual woman, there is nothing for me personally to be spiteful about. I just want the Constitution that I am bound to by birth and by choice to actually mean something. I want liberty to be a driving force behind this country again.


Isn't liberty about allowing people to do whatever they want with a proviso on personal responsibility?, to get the government out of the bedroom and your life as far as possible?.
How does telling other people they can't have what they already are entitled to, in any way serve the libertarian agenda?.

Marriages are a customary practice, I don't know how much the USA goes in for "Customs", in the UK we love having our little foibles.
Marriage wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the religious ceremony that creates a marriage.
We would still be getting hand tied for a year and a day, marriage under a different name, people in the UK do still get hand tied for a year and a day, after a year and a day, if the couple is agreed that they want to be together another ceremony is held in which they agree to be karmicly bonded for eternity.
This is the basis upon which the ceremony of "Marriage" stems from.

In fact what is to stop anyone from going though a hand tying ceremony and then asking for the right for it to be recognised by the government as being legal as it is a fundamental aspect of certain types of religion.
They cannot deny you protections in law of your rights to practice religion, it is fundamentally different to a marriage but yet it is still a union of souls for eternity, and entitled in law to the same rights and protections.

Mitt romney says "derp, marriage is between a man and a women" (notice he didn't say anything about many wives some of which could still be underage) and he stated it is a religious practice stemming from a religion which believes homosexuality is wrong, and, marriages are for men and women in the customs of that religion.

well, there are other religions out there, why are they trying to get recognised as a marriage?, a union of two people under god, bearing in mind there is only one god, everything is but an aspect of the all, game the system, get married under a different aspect of god, it will still be a marriage, a union of two people under god.
And as much as i dislike lizard lips mitt, he is right in this respect, it is a "Life" contract between a man and a woman in the customary fashion of the sense and meaning of the word.
.
Yes i know it has "Lawful" implications, you are gamed by the system everyday of your life, stop being indifferent to it, and begin to game it back, this is how laws are made and destroyed.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   


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?


This made me LOL a bit but hey I had an easier idea. Since homosexuals are apparently missing some rights already instead of ruining it for everyone how about we just finish stripping them of the rest of their rights? Oh wait that wouldn't be fair would it? The problems isn't that we CAN'T meet consensus to recognize it the problem is we don't want to. I'm not a bigot I don't hate homosexuals, my brother is gay and I love him to death. However I do have a problem with people wanting special treatment because they are gay. Marriage is not a same sex union it's a union between a man and a women.

mar·riage/ˈmarij/
Noun:

The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife.


Get your own union and ask the gov. to recognize it. Don't demand we change a sacred institution between a man and a woman just for you. If you want to make some sort of same sex union go to it, I'll support you all the way. Hell I'll even vote for it but when you start talking about fair you need to step back and realize what you are asking isn't for fair treatment you are asking for exceptions to be made for you. /endrant.

P.S. I'm leaving this thread but feel free to flame all you want it will only take away form the discussion.




top topics



 
29
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join