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

page: 25
29
<< 22  23  24   >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by Annee

Equality is Equal to things as they are.

Not how you think they should be.


Are you dense or intentionally obtuse?

What part of the Federal government shouldn't be involved in marriage is unequal? I don't want them involved in my marriage and don't see any need for their involvement in anybody else's marriage.

There is nothing inside the government regulation of marriage that could not be better served with a standard contract between two consenting adults.


Educate yourself on all the benefits you, as a married heterosexual, have access to from the federal government. Regardless of whether or not you want to take advantage of all these benefits, there are many, many more couples who rather enjoy them -- and they won't want to give them up.

www.nolo.com...




posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee

I say heterosexual couples will fight "tooth and nail" to keep LEGAL government marriage and the "rights and protections" it affords them.

There is no compromise in EQUAL.



The gay community is fighting to have those same rights, they don't want compromise either. Speaking of rights, you would give up your right to 'free speach' to compromise with another group?



posted on Sep, 18 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaesDaemar

Originally posted by Annee

I say heterosexual couples will fight "tooth and nail" to keep LEGAL government marriage and the "rights and protections" it affords them.

There is no compromise in EQUAL.



The gay community is fighting to have those same rights, they don't want compromise either. Speaking of rights, you would give up your right to 'free speach' to compromise with another group?


Do you just "reach" out and grab whatever?



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I am against gay marriage, or really, homosexual relationships period, for two reasons. One, I am a Christian, and I fully believe the bible is the written word of God and that Jesus was a real factual person who was the son of God and died on the cross for our sins and rose again 3 days later. I fully believe in the resurrection. Two, even if I wasn't a Christian and looked at it from a scientific perspective, than I would still have to state that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, because, as a species and evolution point of view, the species goes as the way to prolong it, homosexual relationships cannot in anyway further the human species and therefore, even by science standards, is not the natural way of things. It could be an argument for the species to regulate itself and not over produce, but thats a whole other discussion involving the argument against medical practices.

All that being said: I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU.


I fully agree that the federal government should have no say at all in schools, property, money from our own jobs, food, housing, healthcare, or religion, nor relationships. The only thing the Federal Government was every suppose to do was regulate taxes for the country (not individuals or individual states) and the mail system. The federal reserve is unconstitutional, and likewise the federal bank, the taxes are unconstitutional, property laws, business laws and also any licensing laws...think about it... you need a license to fish (to feed yourself) you need a license to hunt (to feed yourself) they are trying to pass a law that requires you to have a license to have a garden (to feed yourself) a licence to practice business, a license to travel, drive,, all these are in fact unconstitutional. .. and the main point of this discussion...Marriage.

Marriage, yes, is in the bible and I fully believe in it, but not what our government has contrived. But, its just a way for them to make money. And you don't even realize it, but so is the fight for gay marriage.



posted on Mar, 26 2013 @ 09:34 PM
link   
so, when did marriage become a right as opposed to another contractual law?



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by david99118
 


Actually, it was a right first. I mean think about it.... I have the right to say " I want to be in a committed relationship with this one person for the rest of my life" I have the right to have a companion, who is my "mate" for lack of a better term, as my one and only for as long as we choose. To me, it's a right first, and then made into a "law"

Look, it's simple, the fact is, even as a Christian, I fully believe, we are all simply just another animal species. A humanoid animal species, and much like our Human cousins (apes, gorillas, etc) we stay in families and have mates, and make babies, those characteristics are "rights" no one can, nor should be able to govern those rights and characteristics.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nkinga
reply to post by david99118
 


Actually, it was a right first. I mean think about it.... I have the right to say " I want to be in a committed relationship with this one person for the rest of my life" I have the right to have a companion, who is my "mate" for lack of a better term, as my one and only for as long as we choose. To me, it's a right first, and then made into a "law"

Look, it's simple, the fact is, even as a Christian, I fully believe, we are all simply just another animal species. A humanoid animal species, and much like our Human cousins (apes, gorillas, etc) we stay in families and have mates, and make babies, those characteristics are "rights" no one can, nor should be able to govern those rights and characteristics.


If you truly believe as a Christian we are only another animal species, then you are failing yourself as a Christian. As far as marriage goes, mariage is a privilege, not a right. Though it doesn't matter even if I explained myself fully to you because you would completely look over what I said, since it goes against everything you say. Many of us don't have the right to be wrong. Therefore, me expressing this opinion to many is wrong and I don't have the right to do so.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nkinga
I am against gay marriage, or really, homosexual relationships period, for two reasons. One, I am a Christian, and I fully believe the bible is the written word of God and that Jesus was a real factual person who was the son of God and died on the cross for our sins and rose again 3 days later. I fully believe in the resurrection. Two, even if I wasn't a Christian and looked at it from a scientific perspective, than I would still have to state that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, because, as a species and evolution point of view, the species goes as the way to prolong it, homosexual relationships cannot in anyway further the human species and therefore, even by science standards, is not the natural way of things. It could be an argument for the species to regulate itself and not over produce, but thats a whole other discussion involving the argument against medical practices.

All that being said: I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU.


I fully agree that the federal government should have no say at all in schools, property, money from our own jobs, food, housing, healthcare, or religion, nor relationships. The only thing the Federal Government was every suppose to do was regulate taxes for the country (not individuals or individual states) and the mail system. The federal reserve is unconstitutional, and likewise the federal bank, the taxes are unconstitutional, property laws, business laws and also any licensing laws...think about it... you need a license to fish (to feed yourself) you need a license to hunt (to feed yourself) they are trying to pass a law that requires you to have a license to have a garden (to feed yourself) a licence to practice business, a license to travel, drive,, all these are in fact unconstitutional. .. and the main point of this discussion...Marriage.

Marriage, yes, is in the bible and I fully believe in it, but not what our government has contrived. But, its just a way for them to make money. And you don't even realize it, but so is the fight for gay marriage.


The argument is the separation of church and state, no 'Holy Laws' can dictate the laws of the country, so even if religions are against us getting married it has no precedence over any vote, and should not be the deciding factor.

if a religious institution does not want to marry a couple it has that freedom as an 'Religious Institution' but that doesn't mean we should not get the equal opportunities for the benefits that come with the privilege of marriage.

we are Human as you are Human, just because i am 'Homosexual' doesn't make me less of a Human, therefor i should be allowed the opportunities that every other human has, it's quite simple, it should never be an issue,



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Just what the hell do you think this whole gay marriage agenda is about? It isn't about allowing gays to marry it is about doing away with marriage in general.

Further more if you are a senior citizen that is married you actually lose some of your social security benefits

My mother got remarried about seven years ago At the time she owned her own house that she bought and paid for on her own took her thirty years to do. The man she married also had his own home that he bought and paid for. They were both at retirement age and had worked their whole lives for the benefits that they receive.

Well it turns out that their benefits decreased because they were married. If they choose to stay married then they would have to sell one of the prosperities. It was a lose lose situation.

Even though they still love each other they had to divorce to keep the property that they worked for. To say that married people get more benefits is just cock n bull



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:22 PM
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


I Would agree with that. Make any marriage contract a civil contract and take the state out of it entirely. Do away with our bloated and corrupt income tax system and do a VAT tax or a flat tax and do away with all exemptions, loopholes, and income levels and you have a completely fair system.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Diisenchanted
Just what the hell do you think this whole gay marriage agenda is about? It isn't about allowing gays to marry it is about doing away with marriage in general.



that is horribly misguided, have you talked to multiple gay people about it? ask me about it, i can tell you that is not the 'Agenda' if any, the Agenda is to be considered equal, as Human as you.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darth_Prime

Originally posted by Nkinga
I am against gay marriage, or really, homosexual relationships period, for two reasons. One, I am a Christian, and I fully believe the bible is the written word of God and that Jesus was a real factual person who was the son of God and died on the cross for our sins and rose again 3 days later. I fully believe in the resurrection. Two, even if I wasn't a Christian and looked at it from a scientific perspective, than I would still have to state that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, because, as a species and evolution point of view, the species goes as the way to prolong it, homosexual relationships cannot in anyway further the human species and therefore, even by science standards, is not the natural way of things. It could be an argument for the species to regulate itself and not over produce, but thats a whole other discussion involving the argument against medical practices.

All that being said: I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU.


I fully agree that the federal government should have no say at all in schools, property, money from our own jobs, food, housing, healthcare, or religion, nor relationships. The only thing the Federal Government was every suppose to do was regulate taxes for the country (not individuals or individual states) and the mail system. The federal reserve is unconstitutional, and likewise the federal bank, the taxes are unconstitutional, property laws, business laws and also any licensing laws...think about it... you need a license to fish (to feed yourself) you need a license to hunt (to feed yourself) they are trying to pass a law that requires you to have a license to have a garden (to feed yourself) a licence to practice business, a license to travel, drive,, all these are in fact unconstitutional. .. and the main point of this discussion...Marriage.

Marriage, yes, is in the bible and I fully believe in it, but not what our government has contrived. But, its just a way for them to make money. And you don't even realize it, but so is the fight for gay marriage.


The argument is the separation of church and state, no 'Holy Laws' can dictate the laws of the country, so even if religions are against us getting married it has no precedence over any vote, and should not be the deciding factor.

if a religious institution does not want to marry a couple it has that freedom as an 'Religious Institution' but that doesn't mean we should not get the equal opportunities for the benefits that come with the privilege of marriage.

we are Human as you are Human, just because i am 'Homosexual' doesn't make me less of a Human, therefor i should be allowed the opportunities that every other human has, it's quite simple, it should never be an issue,


You can have all of those benefits right now. Just go to a lawyer and draw up a contract.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Darth_Prime

Originally posted by Nkinga
I am against gay marriage, or really, homosexual relationships period, for two reasons. One, I am a Christian, and I fully believe the bible is the written word of God and that Jesus was a real factual person who was the son of God and died on the cross for our sins and rose again 3 days later. I fully believe in the resurrection. Two, even if I wasn't a Christian and looked at it from a scientific perspective, than I would still have to state that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, because, as a species and evolution point of view, the species goes as the way to prolong it, homosexual relationships cannot in anyway further the human species and therefore, even by science standards, is not the natural way of things. It could be an argument for the species to regulate itself and not over produce, but thats a whole other discussion involving the argument against medical practices.

All that being said: I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU.


I fully agree that the federal government should have no say at all in schools, property, money from our own jobs, food, housing, healthcare, or religion, nor relationships. The only thing the Federal Government was every suppose to do was regulate taxes for the country (not individuals or individual states) and the mail system. The federal reserve is unconstitutional, and likewise the federal bank, the taxes are unconstitutional, property laws, business laws and also any licensing laws...think about it... you need a license to fish (to feed yourself) you need a license to hunt (to feed yourself) they are trying to pass a law that requires you to have a license to have a garden (to feed yourself) a licence to practice business, a license to travel, drive,, all these are in fact unconstitutional. .. and the main point of this discussion...Marriage.

Marriage, yes, is in the bible and I fully believe in it, but not what our government has contrived. But, its just a way for them to make money. And you don't even realize it, but so is the fight for gay marriage.


The argument is the separation of church and state, no 'Holy Laws' can dictate the laws of the country, so even if religions are against us getting married it has no precedence over any vote, and should not be the deciding factor.

if a religious institution does not want to marry a couple it has that freedom as an 'Religious Institution' but that doesn't mean we should not get the equal opportunities for the benefits that come with the privilege of marriage.

we are Human as you are Human, just because i am 'Homosexual' doesn't make me less of a Human, therefor i should be allowed the opportunities that every other human has, it's quite simple, it should never be an issue,


You can have all of those benefits right now. Just go to a lawyer and draw up a contract.


beyond all that, it's about the point, we are as Human as you, we don't want to be categorized and not allowed what other Humans are allowed based on sexuality



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darth_Prime

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Darth_Prime

Originally posted by Nkinga
I am against gay marriage, or really, homosexual relationships period, for two reasons. One, I am a Christian, and I fully believe the bible is the written word of God and that Jesus was a real factual person who was the son of God and died on the cross for our sins and rose again 3 days later. I fully believe in the resurrection. Two, even if I wasn't a Christian and looked at it from a scientific perspective, than I would still have to state that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, because, as a species and evolution point of view, the species goes as the way to prolong it, homosexual relationships cannot in anyway further the human species and therefore, even by science standards, is not the natural way of things. It could be an argument for the species to regulate itself and not over produce, but thats a whole other discussion involving the argument against medical practices.

All that being said: I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU.


I fully agree that the federal government should have no say at all in schools, property, money from our own jobs, food, housing, healthcare, or religion, nor relationships. The only thing the Federal Government was every suppose to do was regulate taxes for the country (not individuals or individual states) and the mail system. The federal reserve is unconstitutional, and likewise the federal bank, the taxes are unconstitutional, property laws, business laws and also any licensing laws...think about it... you need a license to fish (to feed yourself) you need a license to hunt (to feed yourself) they are trying to pass a law that requires you to have a license to have a garden (to feed yourself) a licence to practice business, a license to travel, drive,, all these are in fact unconstitutional. .. and the main point of this discussion...Marriage.

Marriage, yes, is in the bible and I fully believe in it, but not what our government has contrived. But, its just a way for them to make money. And you don't even realize it, but so is the fight for gay marriage.


The argument is the separation of church and state, no 'Holy Laws' can dictate the laws of the country, so even if religions are against us getting married it has no precedence over any vote, and should not be the deciding factor.

if a religious institution does not want to marry a couple it has that freedom as an 'Religious Institution' but that doesn't mean we should not get the equal opportunities for the benefits that come with the privilege of marriage.

we are Human as you are Human, just because i am 'Homosexual' doesn't make me less of a Human, therefor i should be allowed the opportunities that every other human has, it's quite simple, it should never be an issue,


You can have all of those benefits right now. Just go to a lawyer and draw up a contract.


beyond all that, it's about the point, we are as Human as you, we don't want to be categorized and not allowed what other Humans are allowed based on sexuality


In which case, we need to get the state out of marriage altogether and make any and all relationships a matter of civil contract law- regardless the sexual orientation.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Darth_Prime

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Darth_Prime

Originally posted by Nkinga
I am against gay marriage, or really, homosexual relationships period, for two reasons. One, I am a Christian, and I fully believe the bible is the written word of God and that Jesus was a real factual person who was the son of God and died on the cross for our sins and rose again 3 days later. I fully believe in the resurrection. Two, even if I wasn't a Christian and looked at it from a scientific perspective, than I would still have to state that the homosexual lifestyle is wrong, because, as a species and evolution point of view, the species goes as the way to prolong it, homosexual relationships cannot in anyway further the human species and therefore, even by science standards, is not the natural way of things. It could be an argument for the species to regulate itself and not over produce, but thats a whole other discussion involving the argument against medical practices.

All that being said: I FULLY AGREE WITH YOU.


I fully agree that the federal government should have no say at all in schools, property, money from our own jobs, food, housing, healthcare, or religion, nor relationships. The only thing the Federal Government was every suppose to do was regulate taxes for the country (not individuals or individual states) and the mail system. The federal reserve is unconstitutional, and likewise the federal bank, the taxes are unconstitutional, property laws, business laws and also any licensing laws...think about it... you need a license to fish (to feed yourself) you need a license to hunt (to feed yourself) they are trying to pass a law that requires you to have a license to have a garden (to feed yourself) a licence to practice business, a license to travel, drive,, all these are in fact unconstitutional. .. and the main point of this discussion...Marriage.

Marriage, yes, is in the bible and I fully believe in it, but not what our government has contrived. But, its just a way for them to make money. And you don't even realize it, but so is the fight for gay marriage.


The argument is the separation of church and state, no 'Holy Laws' can dictate the laws of the country, so even if religions are against us getting married it has no precedence over any vote, and should not be the deciding factor.

if a religious institution does not want to marry a couple it has that freedom as an 'Religious Institution' but that doesn't mean we should not get the equal opportunities for the benefits that come with the privilege of marriage.

we are Human as you are Human, just because i am 'Homosexual' doesn't make me less of a Human, therefor i should be allowed the opportunities that every other human has, it's quite simple, it should never be an issue,


You can have all of those benefits right now. Just go to a lawyer and draw up a contract.


beyond all that, it's about the point, we are as Human as you, we don't want to be categorized and not allowed what other Humans are allowed based on sexuality


In which case, we need to get the state out of marriage altogether and make any and all relationships a matter of civil contract law- regardless the sexual orientation.


Indeed, the main point is equality, if you can get married so can i, we should both get the same rights benefits or privileges

i don't plan on getting married, i don't believe a piece of paper, government or someone saying 'by the power vested in me' is going to make my relationship any more 'committed', countless of marriages are broken up due to 'adultery',

the point is, just because i am homosexual doesn't mean i deserve less anything than any other human



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


Why assume I am heterosexual?

Currently you have the same rights as anyone else...you can marry somone of the opposite sex.

The answer that give equitable treatment under the law is not another expansion of the powers of the state, but removing this issue out of the hands of the state for everyone and making it a matter if civil contracts.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 08:37 PM
link   
See, everyone on here proved my point. The majority of the people who answered after I did and before, carry the ideals of the LBGT or are sympathetic towards LBGT ideals. Therefore, my way of thinking don't matter because I am the minority as well as the rest of those who feel the way I do. The only thing I don't understand when it comes to the LBGT community is, Why do any of them have to have ceremonial rights (This was always a religious practice)? To be fair, benefits hetrosexual married couples enjoy is for a reason. They are the honeybees of America. They MAKE babies NATURALLY and help to continue the growth of the American population, instead of adopting kids, or doing some inhumane scientific practice that allows MALES to have babies like WOMEN or vice versa (scientific practices that allow women to act as men and impregnate another woman). Though AGAIN, I am the minority and don't have the right to express a wrong view.



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
Because there are many Homosexuals that are religious too, you can't assume just because one is 'Homosexual' that they have no religion or faith,

so you are against Heterosexuals who artificially inseminate? there are many Heterosexual couples who can't have children and resort to artificial insemination or in vitro insemination



posted on Jun, 4 2013 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darth_Prime
Because there are many Homosexuals that are religious too, you can't assume just because one is 'Homosexual' that they have no religion or faith,

so you are against Heterosexuals who artificially inseminate? there are many Heterosexual couples who can't have children and resort to artificial insemination or in vitro insemination


As far as religion goes.. Being religious while gay is an oxymoron. Secondly, I actually am against the artificial insemination by Heterosexual couples who cannot have children. I know it may be a difficult stand to believe the things I do, but I will not deny it. In some senses fixing infertility is okay with me, in some others.. It is a no-go for me.





new topics
top topics
 
29
<< 22  23  24   >>

log in

join