[Regarding a bill proposed, and shelved, in Connecticut.]
If I understand this right the gays want the state and federal government to recognize domestic partnerships. I think where the real anger with them lies is they want the state and federal government to equate the domestic partnerships with marriage between and a man and a women. The gays already have the legal right to have a domestic partnership so, the question is what are they actually wanting. Is it that they say want the benefits and privileges that come with marriage, is that the real issue? Tax purpose wise marriage doesn't have any benefit, as a matter of fact the tax burden on married people is greater than that of those single or living together. There are some employee benefits such carrying a spouse on group insurance plan, health and life. In the states where homosexuals unions have been made legal, do they declare at the time of the union which is the acting male figure and female figure on the license so the judge knows who to assign alimony payments in case of divorce? No I think the main reason for the push for the change in a 220 year old law is to desecrate the marriage institution because it is ordained by God, just as every other God honoring thing is under attack in America today.
Offenses are sure to come but woe unto those who they come by.
39 comments
You dont know the first fucking thing your talking about you bigoted piece of shit.
http://www.equalitymatters.org/
#0945: Medical Decisions
During a medical crisis, LGBT couples have no legal authority to make critical treatment decisions for their loved one.
#0221: Hospital Visitation
LGBT couples have no legal right to visit a spouse in the hospital and can be barred from entering the room by medical personnel.
#0904: Social Security
LGBT are not eligible to receive a spouse's Social Security pension or many other government benefits.
And finally another right that has jack shit to do with religion but you and your bigoted churches keep fighting anyway:
#0544: Job Security
In a majority of states, employees can be fired just for being gay, which can put a huge burden on any family's financial security.
When the fuck are we gonna stop treating these assholes with respect? Why are they 'defending their beliefs' but Christian Identity is just abunch of racist assholes?
Marriage has got fuck all to do with imaginary beings you simpleton. You know nothing except for what you've been told by other simpletons and lunatics. People were marrying long before Christianity was around you simple cretin. You and your fundamentalist morons seem determined to remain ignorant and force your utter stupidity on to others. God is a simpleton, or he would be if he existed.
yes, the gays only want to get married because it insults you...
fucking dipshit, has it ever occurred to anyone that some gays are actually, you know, Christian?
that they might actually want to get "married", as in an actual official marriage. and that a "civil union" wont cut it.
telling gay people they can't get married but a civil suit should be good enough strikes me as along the same lines of telling women "well, you can't be "people" per say, but you can be something almost as good."
"telling gay people they can't get married but a civil suit should be good enough"
I've tried afew times to ask people whining about how civil unions are equal *a load of horsehit, even if they where close to equal they're only allowed in 9 states* why we cant just give interracial couples civil unions. After all they're equal, the only reason they'd want the word marriage is to piss on Christian identity's beliefs. They never respond.
"which is the acting male figure and female figure"
They just can't disentangle their brains from this hierarchy-of-power model of sexual/gender relations.
"the main reason for the push for the change in a 220 year old law is to desecrate the marriage institution because it is ordained by God"
Yes, yes, everything is about you and your religion! You're the center the universe! Yes, you is, isn't you? My cute wittle center of the univewse! (pats head)
the question is what are they actually wanting
Is it that they say want the benefits and privileges that come with marriage, is that the real issue?
Well, lookie there, you answered your own question.
Tax purpose wise marriage doesn't have any benefit, as a matter of fact the tax burden on married people is greater than that of those single or living together
This is absolute bullshit. Just like this morons brain
What someone else's marriage is, be it gay, straight, long-lasting, frivolous, etc. doesn't effect YOUR marriage, so STFU about it.
It's not about taxes or hating god or whatever the fuck you fools think. It's about being treated as equals. Civil Unions, Domestic Partnerships, it doesn't matter if you give them the exact same benefits of marriage. They want to be MARRIED like EVERYONE ELSE. Until they can be married exactly like a straight couple, there's no equality. You and your god can suck my chode.
While you live in a bubble of fundy paranoia and are obsessed with finding a Biblical or religious angle in everything you see and hear, believe it or not, the rest of the world sees this and many other issues solely in light of law and civil/human rights. There is no secret plot by the rest of society to ferret out and desecrate those things you see as "ordained by God". If you were talking about, say, the CIA, with this same level of paranoia, they'd have you on Lithium, you know.
Oh, and, we know you're lying about the tax benefits, too.
I've only been doing taxes on the side for this one tax season so far, but I'm here to tell you that you have no clue what you're talking about. The tax laws are HIGHLY skewed towards married folk. Just look at all the penalties for folks who file married filing separately. Congress (the ones who write the tax laws) wants everyone married, and they write the laws that way. Unfortunately, the rest of your of rant is equally ignorant.
I get so angry at the idea that a same-sex relationship must have a "male figure" and a "female figure." Hell, as a bi woman who loves her straight friends, I get upset at the idea of a "male figure" and a "female figure" in cross-sex relationships, because that means forcing people into hierarchies and roles.
I am also angry at the apparent notion that when my wife and I put on our pretty dresses and carried our roses and exchanged our rings--both of us, as we are both "the woman" in our relationship--we vowed to "desecrate the marriage institution" rather than to honor and care for each other.
If it's not as special to you because it includes us, that's your fucking problem, not ours.
"Tax purpose wise marriage doesn't have any benefit, as a matter of fact the tax burden on married people is greater than that of those single or living together."
No... Just, no... If taxes seem greater on a married couple, wouldn't it be because there are two people to tax instead of one?
"just as every other God honoring thing is under attack in America today. "
Oh, too bad, guess that mean you can't be a bigot to those who think differently than you do anymore.
"Offenses are sure to come but woe unto those who they come by."
Is that... Is that a threat? Are you seriously pulling the old , "We need to do this or God will punish us," argument?
What they want is a revoking of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (passed, surprisingly enough, under Clinton) that forbids the granting of marital benefits and privileges to domestic partnerships under Federal law. There are numerous Federal laws, such as Social Security, ERISA and Medicaid, which don't protect domestic partners.
If I understand correctly, alimony (and child support) doesn't have to do with a person's sex or gender, but with who makes enough money to pay it and who doesn't, so I'm not sure why you think that's any sort of argument/insult/whateveritisyouthinkitis.
So, they want to desecrate an institution by being a part of it?
Everything has to revolve around you and your God, right? What a self centered twat.
Here is another one....
When selling Real Estate single people must pay capital gains taxes on any gains over $250,000, married people are exempt through $500,000.
"do they declare at the time of the union which is the acting male figure and female figure on the license so the judge knows who to assign alimony payments in case of divorce?"
I know very little about how divorce works in this country, but I'm pretty sure that gender doesn't enter into the whole alimony thing. Doesn't alimony automatically go to the plaintiff, regardless of gender?
"No I think the main reason for the push for the change in a 220 year old law"
Actually, the original laws on the books never specifically mentioned that marriage was between a man and a woman. Granted, this may be because the idea of homosexual marriage never occurred to them, but I assure you, the clauses in state laws specifying that marriage is between a man and a woman are fairly recent.
Yeah yeah, whenever something doesn't float your boat it's an attack aganist God.
Hey, that means you guys have God complex!
Actually, I suspect if you got civil unions in the US similar to those seen in most of Europe (at least the countries where it's not out and out marriage) - with ALL the associated rights of marriage, at a federal as well as state level, then people could be happy with that. BUT only if you can get it to the level that, for example, the UK has, where it's not seen as any different just a question of legal semantics. Everyone calls it marriage (and divorce), everyone talks about their spouse or having their wedding or any of the hundred other things. That and only that is the point where using the term civil union/partnership should be accepted (and the vast majority of people believe that give it a few years legislation will be quietly passed to tidy the issue up and just call it marriage - as I believe they are just doing in one of the Scandinavian countries).
Of course this actually involves recognising gay relationships and legitimate, can have rights and can not be discriminated against. As really, that's what you fundies are arguing for, the right to discriminate - it's nothing to do with the term marriage or you would be all for pushing fully equal and federal level civil unions just to shut people up.
Could someone actually tell me what exactly this alimony is? I don't live in America (I was born and live in New Zealand) and we don't have anything like what I've heard about it.
On another note, Christianity does not hold the monopoly on marriage.
In Sweden we have domestic partnership laws, which includes both gays and straight couples.
What you bring into the partnership is your personal property, what you procure for joint use is jointly owned.
The one who seems in most need of the house or apartment gets the house or apartment if the partners separate, on condition that it was procured for joint living.
The partners do not inherit each other, they have to make a will.
Any children will get the woman's last name, if nothing else is said.
What does it matter who's "the acting male figure and female figure"? A lesbian partnership consists of two female figures, there is no male there. That is kind of the whole thing.
Isn't alimony paid by the richer partner to the poorer partner? Or by the one who made money while the other took care of the home and the children.
In Sweden it's the one not living with the kids that pays alimony to the one who lives with the kids, regardless of gender or "figure".
In all other aspects, you split all your assets in two, each partner gets one piece, and that's the end of it.
In the states where homosexuals unions have been made legal, do they declare at the time of the union which is the acting male figure and female figure on the license so the judge knows who to assign alimony payments in case of divorce?
Divorce does not work that way. Alimony is payed to the spouse whose occupation provides them with less financial security. Not necessarily the woman.
Basic law, bitch.
Yes, it's not that people want rights, it's all about your shitty religion. Seriously, the arrogance of these fundies is really irritating.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.