Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 90 of 172 1 2 88 89 90 91 92 171 172
Re: Holy crap
#53499 09/14/04 05:26 PM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 342
devotee
Offline
devotee
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 342
Craig - I thought that I had clarified it, but that reference was not meant for you exclusively...rather it was more to MichaelA who had referenced 'destroying the religious institution. You have been very clear that you are speaking only of government's involvement. It was prior to my morning Mountain Dew when I typed that and I guess I forgot to clarify. Sorry about that.

Now...to your counter-arguments:
1. Domestic Violence - I think that domestic-violence laws are on the books not to clarify the penalties, etc. If that were the only purpose, then simple assault and battery charges would apply. Without having read the laws, I would assume that the laws deal with the different ramifications of one person that is married and living with their spouse when the incident happens.

2. Child Support - Your argument does not cover adopted children, which is applicable in this situation. Say two gay people are 'unofficially' married and the primary financial provider walks out the door...there are no protections in the law to force that person to take responsibility for the well-being of that adopted child.

3. Student Loan Responsiblities - If I'm not mistaken, the law holds spouses liable for the loans incurred by their spouses. Present laws do not protect the government's ability to recoupe those costs in the situation of two gay people married.

4. Social Security - I agree that reforms would provide more money per person. However, the present system provides benefits to spouses, which are denied to gay couples.

5. Bankruptcy - Yes, both can file. However, the bankruptcy laws take into consideration the income of spouses. One could argue (devil's advocate) that this will allow for abuses by gays because their incomes do not reflect those of their spouses. However, hetero couples cannot shield that income when attempting to file for bankruptcy.

6. Welfare - Same argument as above. If you are allowed to shield the income of your spouse, then you are opening the door for abuse.

7. Divorce/Alimony - I agree with your statement, however I am assuming that there are laws on the books defining those responsibilities....laws which help to guide the courts during divorces. These standards presently do not exist for gay couples. So, considering the fact that the average person might not proactively draw up contracts prior to goign into these relationships, you have standards/rules/laws set out there that apply only to a segment of society.

8. Inheritance - You covered the tax part, however that does not cover inheritance rights, etc. Right now, states dictate how much each party has rights to when dividing up assets....or who is at fault. Gay couples do not have these protections, so it's not hard to see situations where "posession is 9/10ths of the law" will preside, even in cases of adultery.

9. Political Candidacy - There was a law listed there concerning the threatening and protection of candidate spouses (obscure ). A gay man can run for office, but his spouse is not provided the same protections (secret service, etc) as the spouse of a hetero candidate.

FYI...I am not a lawyer, so my above interpretations are quite possibly lacking in some detail or insight. However, they do help to demonstrate what I'm trying to argue here. Marital status is threaded in and out of the laws in this country. We have three options here:

1. modify all of these laws to remove this confusion
2. grant homosexuals the same rights of marriage/union as heteros
3. continue to discriminate against them

I understand that your position is to target the first option and I can see your point to some degree. However, that is a massive undertaking, which could take many decades. My assertion is that the first step is to right the wrongs that are being endured by gays and then focus on cleaning up the laws. My fear, however, is that option #3 will remain the path of our government as long as it's so politically charged an issue.


Re: Holy crap
#53500 09/14/04 05:45 PM
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,021
Likes: 1
C
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
C
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,021
Likes: 1
Turbo, You are still not listing any "rights" here. In fact, Gays would LOSE a lot more than they gain under what you just typed.

Here is another "hot topic" in the country... reproductive rights.... The laws regarding child support are SO skewed as anti-male that most people do not believe it. I live with this from a child born in 1985. The woman told me she was on the "pill", and could not get pregnent.

Of course, she did. I had NO interest in the child. She wanted to keep the child. Had she wanted to abort, that is her right, but she decided it was HER time to have a baby.

What was MY choice ? I had none... So...

She sues me, and the court, under State Law, decides I have to pay EVERY expense for this child until she is 18 years old. I am given ZERO visitation rights, and will have paid over $200,000 during this time...

The money does not even go to the kid... it goes to the mother, who can do as she pleases.

So... In America Today...

A man's reproductive choice ENDS at conception.

A woman's ends at birth.

Now... Before someone gets all worked up about choice... If we are going to have choice, a man should be allowed to sign off, saying he is NOT going to be the parent here. I am not saying we should be allowed to kill the fetus, just that we can opt out.

A LOT more men get discriminated against with this than with any gay rights lack...



Re: Holy crap
#53501 09/14/04 06:02 PM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 342
devotee
Offline
devotee
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 342
Yikes!...that's another can of worms. I'm going to leave that alone for now.

However, I will agree that gays will lose rights/freedoms in the situation that I described. They are making a choice to pursue this equal footing, so I am assuming that they know what they will be getting and losing. In writing my response, I began to realize that some of those protections are not necessarily to protect them, rather to protect the government.

In the end, it still comes back to the core reason that I am in the middle of this dialog. Gay couples are asking to be treated the same as hetero couples. They are asking to take on all the pros and cons of government-recognized marital agreements. I am arguing on their behalf solely because I believe that our government has no right to discriminate on individual societal groups, because it is here to protect and serve all of equally.

Re: Holy crap
#53502 09/14/04 06:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,021
Likes: 1
C
connoisseur
Offline
connoisseur
C
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,021
Likes: 1
And I am saying that there a 100's of examples where people are discriminated against... and I disagree with them ALL... and want ALL people treated fairly... not just one group.

Off to golf !

Re: Holy crap
#53503 09/14/04 06:21 PM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 438
devotee
Offline
devotee
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 438
In reply to:

It means I'm going back the that resturaunt again!




BAH-DUM-BUM!

Good one, Spiffy! That got a laugh from all of the folks in the office!

Mark


"Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff"
Re: Holy crap
#53504 09/14/04 06:22 PM
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 438
devotee
Offline
devotee
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 438
In reply to:

Everyone always thinks I'm straight. I have zero fashion sense, I'm overweight, I don't dance, I like Ozzy, I enjoy fishing, working on cars...




And then they find out you like Prince!

Mark


"Shoot, a fella could have a pretty good weekend in Vegas with all that stuff"
Re: Holy crap
#53505 09/14/04 06:54 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 625
aficionado
Offline
aficionado
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 625
mark, i'm with you there.
dan

Re: Holy crap
#53506 09/14/04 06:58 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236
axiomite
Offline
axiomite
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236
Hey! Who doesn't like Prince?



Re: Holy crap
#53507 09/14/04 10:00 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
shareholder in the making
Offline
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
Hypothetical question, and this is directed to everyone.

Who do you think bin Laden wants to win the election in November?

This may seem like an irrelevant question, but you have to believe he has an opinion on the matter. Knowing who he wants to win in not a good enough reason to vote for the other guy, but it's interesting to ponder from the his perspective, nonetheless.

Re: Holy crap
#53508 09/14/04 10:37 PM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236
axiomite
Offline
axiomite
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,236
I'd say he'd rather George won. The more tear assing around the world George does, the more people he pisses off and the more recruits the terrorists get.

btw...semi-OT... Who has seen this?



Page 90 of 172 1 2 88 89 90 91 92 171 172

Moderated by  alan, Amie, Andrew, axiomadmin, Brent, Debbie, Ian, Jc 

Link Copied to Clipboard

Need Help Graphic

Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics24,940
Posts442,457
Members15,616
Most Online2,082
Jan 22nd, 2020
Top Posters
Ken.C 18,044
pmbuko 16,441
SirQuack 13,840
CV 12,077
MarkSJohnson 11,458
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 136 guests, and 1 robot.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newsletter Signup
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.4