Obama, Cheney, Bush and Powell in New Pro Gay Marriage Ad

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 



What would you do -- follow a gay couple around 24/7 to make sure they don't tell anyone they are "married"? How ridiculous.


That is ridiculous….but YOU said that, not me!


What do you call the piece of paper you get when you marry?

What box do you check when you fill out a W4?

The WORD “marriage” is on many legal documents.




What do you care what it says on their license? It's not like they are going to pull it out and show everybody


You don’t get it because you don’t value the sanctity of marriage as currently defined in our culture.

If words don’t matter then call it a civil union and move on!




posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by seabag



It absolutely has a religious foundation….as did our country when founded. I don’t understand why we can’t have civil unions with ALL of the so-called “perks” of marriage from a legal standpoint without the title “marriage”? The “marriage” part is what’s dividing everyone and creating the rift IMO.

Why can’t you call it something else?

Do what you want but don't call it “marriage.”




Actually, from a historic standpoint, "marriage" was more about the ownership of property (the term property extending to the wife, in many cases) and was codified to secure the legal rights of the owner of said property upon conjoinment.


As a result, all those "perks" gained by marriage are currently codified as being solely conferable under the aegis of a legally recognized "marriage"; and are not availaable to those in "civil unions", unless specifically stated by (additional) law.


In short, the problem lies in the fact that to give same sex couples the same rights, the same "perks", as married heterosexual couples currently enjoy, automatically, by virtual of their "married" status, you would have to amend each and every law, at both Federal and State levels, that referenced martital status as a qualification, to include civil unions.

A daunting, and expensive, task.


It is/would be a far simpler task to merely extend the legal definition of the term "marriage" to All couples, hetero- and same-sex, thus automaticaly making the laws requiring "marriage as a qualification, applicable to all.


In the Law, Words DO matter.
edit on 21-2-2013 by Bhadhidar because: Update



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 



Originally posted by Signals
Why do gay couples need to be legally married?


Why do people need to own semi-automatic weapons? Why do people need 30 round clips?

Stupid questions, huh? Yeah. Freedom is freedom and equality is equality. No one has to justify their marriage to you.



Don't they receive the same legal protections through a legal union or partnership?


NO! Not by a LONG shot! Now, do you have anything to say?



IS NOTHING SACRED ANYMORE IN THIS COUNTRY ?


That's the dumbest argument of all (well, aside from the apocalyptic 2-gay-people-left scenario
)

You mean sacred marriages like:
Britney Spears
Kim Kardashian
Pamela Anderson and Kid Rock
Drew Barrymore and Tom Green
Zsa-Zsa Gabor
Elizabeth Taylor and and and...
Lisa Marie and Nicolas Cage

Oh, yes... Sacred.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



Originally posted by seabag
I don’t understand why we can’t have civil unions with ALL of the so-called “perks” of marriage from a legal standpoint without the title “marriage”?


You, yourself said, "What do you call the piece of paper you get when you marry? What box do you check when you fill out a W4? The WORD “marriage” is on many legal documents."

Exactly! So why add "or civil union" to all those documents? If it's the same thing, then call it the same thing. Otherwise it's "separate but equal" and we know how well that's worked in the past.


We care about the sanctity of marriage between one MAN and one WOMAN.


After all the crappy things conservatives have done and said to gay people, they're supposed to be considerate and care about of what's important to you??? Seriously???



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 



You, yourself said, "What do you call the piece of paper you get when you marry? What box do you check when you fill out a W4? The WORD “marriage” is on many legal documents."

Exactly! So why add "or civil union" to all those documents? If it's the same thing, then call it the same thing.


It’s not the same thing to the people who oppose it. That's the point I tried to make.

What wrong with “separate but equal”?

If it's all about freedom, benefits, equality, etc then why not call it a union and get what you want??



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



Originally posted by seabag
It’s not the same thing to the people who oppose it. That's the point I tried to make.


How does it affect you, your religion, your marriage or your life in ANY way if a gay couple is married? Real question.

It's OK if you oppose gay people getting married. You are allowed to keep your opinions on it.



What wrong with “separate but equal”?


It justifies segregation and is no better than FORCED integration. How long do you think it would be before some conservatives would make laws that benefited "married people" but not people joined in "'civil unions"? Separate is inherently NOT equal.



If it's all about freedom, benefits, equality, etc then why not call it a union and get what you want??


Because they DON'T get what they want. They DON'T get equal benefits, etc. Separate but equal is NOT equal.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:03 PM
link   


Respect for Marriage Coalition


Libs always name thier subversive groups in such a way that they look mainstream.

Sure. Lets all "respect" marriage by changing it at it's very core and turning it into something that it was never meant to be.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


The 2nd Amendment doesn't compare in any way to gay marriage rights...

This thread isn't about guns anyway.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 


Actually, right are rights.

Furthermore, I would posit that the Right to be treated Equally Under the Law, which is the core argument in support of "Same-sex Marriage", is even more important, and more fundamental, than the right to keep and bear arms.

Consider:


If All are Not equal under the Law, then it could be (successfully) argued that only Some have the right to kepp and bear arms.


And you and I might not be amoung those "some"!



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   
oops.. double iPhone post
edit on 21-2-2013 by Signals because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 



Originally posted by Signals
This thread isn't about guns anyway.


I know. I'm not saying it is. I'm comparing your question (Why do they need to get married?) to those who ask: "Why do you need to own a gun, anyway"?

Wouldn't you agree that your reasons for owning a gun are none of anyone's business? So, too, gay people's reasons for getting married are none of anyone's business.


And Bhadhidar said it best. Equal treatment under the law.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
I can see why gWB might be pro gay marriage
he is after all a self professed christian of some kind


Gannon/Guckert was a conservative reporter for a marginal news outfit who obtained a daily pass to the White House press office and who also apparently was seeking customers as a gay, military-oriented prostitute. Serious questions do remain as to why and how the Bush White House's press operation granted access to Gannon/Guckert, a correspondent for the Talon News. Should a fellow with a fake identity--and a questionable background--be allowed into presidential press conferences? Talon News was connected to GOPUSA, an organization run by Texas-based Republican activist Bobby Eberle, and Gannon/Guckert routinely asked softball questions of Bush's press secretaries during their daily White House briefings
www.cbsnews.com...

theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com...
here is a pile of gwb kissing men pics



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Obama, Cheney, Bush and Powell in New Pro Gay Marriage Ad

They have been in bed together for years so this really should not surprise anyone. LOL



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
What do you call the piece of paper you get when you marry?

What box do you check when you fill out a W4?

The WORD “marriage” is on many legal documents.


Do you really care that much what someone else puts on their legal forms? Really??? Unless you work for the IRS, how many gay couples' W4's are you gonna be looking at?




You don’t get it because you don’t value the sanctity of marriage as currently defined in our culture.

If words don’t matter then call it a civil union and move on!



It matters to the people living it. It shouldn't matter to anyone else. I personally don't care what you or anyone else calls their union. I care about my own union, which I call a marriage. I want every other consenting adult to call their union a marriage if they want to, since it is THEIR union. It's not my or your right to tell them what they can or can't call it.

The government is not a church. What they hand out is not a religious license, so sanctity doesn't play into it at all. Sanctity is a personal issue between each couple.

I personally wouldn't have a problem with changing the legal license to civil union for everyone, regardless of sexual orientation. But everyone is going to call it a marriage anyway, so really, what's the point?



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 



IS NOTHING SACRED ANYMORE IN THIS COUNTRY ?


I should hope not

And Signals, I understand what you mean - but these are things that are meaningful to you. It's not right to expect all the things you deem sacred to stand as law for everyone

If anything should be cherished - by all of us equally - it would be equality, freedom - human rights

For everyone
edit on 2/21/2013 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


So good to see - I seriously love this stuff :-)

Who would have thunk it just a few short years ago?

S&F Flyers

Also - about Ms. Bush withdrawing - I'm sure she has her reasons - I would be so interested to hear her explain why she wants out...but she went on the record and signed off on that clip - if they obtained the clip legally - I don't see how she can protest now



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 



What wrong with “separate but equal”?


It's not equal

A marriage is a marriage is a marriage - two people committing to each other.

It's all about the union - not the genders



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Pagan clergy marries gay couples ALL the time.

So if you want to yell it has a religious foundation, that's fine with me, because my religion is fine with it.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by hadriana
Pagan clergy marries gay couples ALL the time.

So if you want to yell it has a religious foundation, that's fine with me, because my religion is fine with it.


And don't forget that atheists get marriage licenses all the time as well. No churches or religion involved at all.



posted on Feb, 21 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Right- it's about equal protection under the law.

You don't have to LIKE other people or other religions, but you have to RESPECT that they have rights too.

The law should not favor any one religion.





top topics
 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join