Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Minnesota Becomes the Twelfth State to Sanction Same-Sex Marriage

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+1 more 
posted on May, 19 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Minnesota latest state to recognize same-sex marriage


Since November, Minnesota went from defeating constitutional amendment that would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman to becoming the third state in 2013 to enact same-sex marriage laws.
...
Minnesota's law, effective Aug. 1, specifies marriage is a civil contract between "two people" rather than "a man and woman" -- language that had been on the books since 1977. It removes same sex-marriage from a list of "prohibited marriages, and allows Minnesota to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. It also provides protections to clergy and other religious organizations that don't want to solemnize same-sex marriage.
...
"Letting same-sex couples marry saves money for governments -- low income same-sex couples need less help from the state, and the state gets a boost in tax revenue when gay people spend money on their weddings," Badgett said about what recognizing gay marriage could mean for a state's bottom line. "In Minnesota, for example, we predicted that the state would see $42 million in new business spending, and that would generate $3 million in tax revenue for state and local governments."


Twelve states and DC...
Unfortunately, 30 states ban same-sex marriage by their Constitutions or propositions, but I think we will see new amendments in the future in those states.

I was happy to see that the law includes protections for religious organizations to opt out of marrying these couples.




posted on May, 19 2013 @ 03:53 PM
link   
That's great. a win for humans....its really just people loving each other.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 




Minnesota Becomes the Twelfth State to Sanction Same-Sex Marriage


This proves my longstanding point that, if left to the states to decide, some will approve gay marriage and some will not.

That's the way it should be because that's the way the nation was designed to operate. No one ideal ior concept can hogtie the entire country.

Cheers



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Yep, as long as there is no infringement on religious beliefs it's all fine, and dandy in my books.
I'm not religious at all, just don't think it's right to take some ones rights to obtain a right for another. (it was always a right as what's good for one is good for another)

Now all of us can gain weight, and smoke together while wondering why we got married in the first place...
edit on 19-5-2013 by terriblyvexed because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I was happy to see that the law includes protections for religious organizations to opt out of marrying these couples.


I agree with the principle of this inclusion; yet, I believe it was unnecessary legislation. As it stands, religious institutions are free to "discriminate" against those they do not see fit to be married....gay or straight...and are protected to do so via the constitution. Really, this inclusion was nothing more than unnecessary pandering to religious sects, which I despise.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by billdadobbie
normally countrys cannot agree on the simplist things and take years to agree on anything but this seems to be a world wide thing what next sex with children
sickos


LOGIC DISCONNECT



So you are equating the legalization of marriage between two same sex consenting adults to somehow being a gateway to pedophilia? Please indulge me and connect the dots from one to the other.


Typical ignorant garbage from another homophobe.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by billdadobbie
 


I take it you're against gay marriage. I won't argue to change your mind, nor tell you your wrong, it's never been a debate that I cared about, but comparing consenting adults with sex with children, that's a bit overly dramatic don't you think?



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 


Beat me to it!



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 



Originally posted by LeatherNLace
As it stands, religious institutions are free to "discriminate" against those they do not see fit to be married....gay or straight...and are protected to do so via the constitution.


I agree completely. But a lot of the "weight" that religious groups wield to keep same-sex marriage illegal is by scaring the people, by claiming, "They're going to force us to marry these people in our churches"!!!! So, this legislation is saying, "and you churches can no longer claim that we're going to force you to marry gay people".



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by billdadobbie
 


1. No one is being pushed to marry gay people. You can still marry whom you choose.
2. 58% of the population in the US supports gay marriage, not 2%.
edit on 5/19/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by billdadobbie
i find it strange that around the world this is getting pushed on people when only 2 % of the population are batting for the other side .

normally countrys cannot agree on the simplist things and take years to agree on anything but this seems to be a world wide thing what next sex with children
sickos


?

Homosexual behavior is common in many mammalian species. The legalization of marriage between two consenting adults of the same sex is not remotely comparable to the legalization of sex with children.

Think a little before you type.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 



Originally posted by LeatherNLace
As it stands, religious institutions are free to "discriminate" against those they do not see fit to be married....gay or straight...and are protected to do so via the constitution.


I agree completely. But a lot of the "weight" that religious groups wield to keep same-sex marriage illegal is by scaring the people, by claiming, "They're going to force us to marry these people in our churches"!!!! So, this legislation is saying, "and you churches can no longer claim that we're going to force you to marry gay people".


Oh, absolutely, I understand and agree. However, this portion of the law basically reaffirms already constitutionally protected rights. Should the constitution somehow be interpreted differently by future generations and churches were forced to marry same sex couples, then this law would be void. So, either way, it was a pointless, pandering inclusion.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by LeatherNLace
 


if you dig around the politicians in the uk some of them are championing just that i believe it was harriet harrmon i just stated how it was strange this is getting pushed world wide



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by billdadobbie
 


1. No one is being pushed to marry gay people. You can still marry whom you choose.
2. 58% of the population in the US supports gay marriage, not 2%.
edit on 5/19/2013 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)
the 2 % was the figure i read that were gay



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by billdadobbie
 


But MANY straight people (like me) support equal treatment of gay people under the law. There's somewhere around 5-10% gay people in any population. But they aren't the only ones who support equality. The most recent numbers are actually 53% who support legalizing same-sex marriage.

In a Few Years, the Debate will be Over



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


i do not give a dam either way if someone is straight or gay as long as they do not bother me but i find it weird that at the same time world wide that this is getting pushed through the law and question what next ??



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   
Just my opinion, I agree with the earlier poster who said leave it to the states to decide. As long as folks don't push their beliefs on me, I will reciprocate. Gubmint needs to leave things alone, and allow the will of the people to rule. Simple, just get out of our bedrooms and perform the duties they were elected to do. Too much time has been wasted on this issue, as well as abortion. It's a personal decision, and none of my or anyone else's business.

It's time to move on and focus on much more important things.



posted on May, 19 2013 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by billdadobbie
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


i do not give a dam either way if someone is straight or gay as long as they do not bother me but i find it weird that at the same time world wide that this is getting pushed through the law and question what next ??


Yeah this crazy world and basic civil rights. Whats next giving women the right to vote?



posted on May, 22 2013 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


i think they are trying that in the middle east also letting the girls outside is another one on the agenda over there





new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join