Why do they need marriage?

DamnYankee said:
They don't. They simply want to destroy traditional society.
Click to expand...

If two gays marrying can have an effect on your marriage, your marriage isn't worth squat.

Allowing gays to have the same benefits as straight couples will not destroy society. Hate might, but gay mariage certainly won't.

The thing you keep forgetting is that there will be gay couples regardless of whether or not they are allowed to marry. So the only thing that will change is the removal of a prejudice by the gov't. You can still be as prejudiced as you like.
 
DamnYankee said:
You're assuming that my motivations are the same as yours, and I assure you that they are not.

I am disappointed that you would bottom out so quickly, using the "bigot" logical fallacy.
Click to expand...

Except using the term "bigot" applies when they are discussing gay marriage with you.

You have, over the years, repeatedly listed your reasons for not wanting gays to marry. And yet, you steadfastly refuse to hold straight couples to the same standards. That is bigotry.
 
WinterBorn said:
If two gays marrying can have an effect on your marriage, your marriage isn't worth squat.

Allowing gays to have the same benefits as straight couples will not destroy society. Hate might, but gay mariage certainly won't.

The thing you keep forgetting is that there will be gay couples regardless of whether or not they are allowed to marry. So the only thing that will change is the removal of a prejudice by the gov't. You can still be as prejudiced as you like.
Click to expand...

if allowing children to kill their unborn has an effect on your children, then your children aren't worth squat.......echoes of the 70s.......
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if allowing children to kill their unborn has an effect on your children, then your children aren't worth squat.......echoes of the 70s.......
Click to expand...

Completely bogus comparison. In the abortion argument, there is an actual life at stake. In gay marriage there is no such life at stake. In fact, other than gays gaining the benefits straights have when they marry, nothing at all would change.
 
DamnYankee said:
This is a logical fallacy, that since it doesn't affect me directly it should be OK.

You could make that same argument for bestiality.
.
Click to expand...

Except, as you know, consenting adults is the key part of what is being fought for. This "if we let gays marry, people will be wanting to marry their dog!" argument is nonsense. (care to name the logical fallacy that would cover that argument?)

After all, when we gave women the right to vote, no one fought for their dog to be able to vote. :)
 
WinterBorn said:
Completely bogus comparison. In the abortion argument, there is an actual life at stake. In gay marriage there is no such life at stake. In fact, other than gays gaining the benefits straights have when they marry, nothing at all would change.
Click to expand...

society changes....at the time of Roe v Wade people thought killing an unborn child was wrong......now generations think its meaningless tissue......we even have a president who thinks its okay to kill a child delivered accidentally during an abortion because its what the mother wants.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
society changes....at the time of Roe v Wade people thought killing an unborn child was wrong......now generations think its meaningless tissue......we even have a president who thinks its okay to kill a child delivered accidentally during an abortion because its what the mother wants.....
Click to expand...

But there is still a legitimate argument that a life is at stake. No such legitimate argument can be made concerning gay marriage. (at least not one that cannot be made concerning certain straight marriages too, and they are still allowed to marry)
 
DamnYankee said:
You can't even begin to defeat my argument so you must resort to insinuations of deviant sexual behavior. How ironic.
Click to expand...

You're right....I can't defeat the irrational.

Tell me....are you for taking civil liberties away for all biblical sins? According to God, sin is sin. In fact, I've read that if you even look at a woman with lustful thoughts, you've already committed adultery....how about them? Should they have their liberties pulled? How about the Greedy? Envious?

I mean hey....if we're going for the biblical...let's do it...God doesn't differentiate one sin from another....why should we?
 
Thithicus said:
Wow, you really are a remarkably ignorant, bigoted asshole, aren't you. Have you even met a gay person before? I used to have some bigoted beliefs, too, but once I realized that gay people only want to pursue happiness the same as anyone else, I was finally able to let go of my hate (and let's not beat around the bush, hate is exactly what it is). You should consider doing the same.
Click to expand...

He is hiding in the closet with Travolta and Cruise. He will eventually come out.
 
DamnYankee said:
Only if the two people meet certain qualifications: mental capacity, no direct family relationship, different sex...
Click to expand...

No, it's always a fundamental civil right.

Chief Justice Earl Warren's opinion in Loving v Virginia for the UNANIMOUS court held that:

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
 
Steelplate said:
You're right....I can't defeat the irrational.

Tell me....are you for taking civil liberties away for all biblical sins? According to God, sin is sin. In fact, I've read that if you even look at a woman with lustful thoughts, you've already committed adultery....how about them? Should they have their liberties pulled? How about the Greedy? Envious?

I mean hey....if we're going for the biblical...let's do it...God doesn't differentiate one sin from another....why should we?
Click to expand...
Marriage ain't a civil liberty.
 
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
No, it's always a fundamental civil right.

Chief Justice Earl Warren's opinion in Loving v Virginia for the UNANIMOUS court held that:

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
Click to expand...
That decision was for two unrelated adults of the opposite sex.
 
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
They can get power of attorney and take care of everything they need through contracts, right? [URL="http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2-texas-man-after-34-years-my-partners-sister-legally-took-our-home-because-we-werent-married/legal-issues/2013/04/29/66089"]

[url]http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2-texas-man-after-34-years-my-partners-sister-legally-took-our-home-because-we-werent-married/legal-issues/2013/04/29/66089

[/URL][/URL]A Texas man says he and his partner were together for 34 years but his partner’s sister has now forced them apart, taken their home, and his partner’s finances — and done it legally because they weren’t married. For the last six years his partner, Jim, who is older, suffered from Alzheimer’s. Jim’s estranged sister, Lon Watts writes on Facebook, was able to take their home and Jim’s finances through the courts by filing for guardianship — despite Lon having power of attorney.


“She put him in a Nursing Home and had criminal trespass orders against me to keep me away from him,” Lon Watts writes:

I’LL NEVER BE ABLE TO SEE HIM AGAIN! She got his bank account from Social Security Disability and sold his house out from under me. I had 2 weeks to vacate uur home of 12 years. [sic]

If we were EQUAL in the eyes of the law we would be together till the end. But as it stands in Texas, a money hungry greedy relative was able to steal our life and toss me out as trash to pad her pocketbook. I pray God has mercy on her soul for her evil deeds. I am content knowing the world is coming around to acknowledge that ALL HUMANS ARE CREATED EQUAL and SHOULD HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS.

Lon’s story has been shared almost 3000 times on Facebook and has more than 3000 likes. Sadly, Lon and Jim’s story, and others like it, are the exact reason why marriage must be extended to all same-sex couples across the entire nation.

Anyone who claims needs and rights of same-sex couples can be protected through some legal forms is not only mistaken, but wholly wrong and spreading false information.

One Facebook commenter notes:

Power of attorney is only for medical decisions. In the state of Texas all of the following must be obtained :

Cohabitation/Property Agreements
Name Changes
Second Parent Adoptions
Medical Record Releases
Wills
Trusts
Guardianships
Living Wills
Powers of Attorney
Probate

Power of Attorney in not enough!

When it comes to inheritance, distribution of property and personal effects, medical, financial, and burial decisions, no one who is not your legal spouse or blood relative has any rights to act on your behalf. Gay marriages and civil unions are not currently recognized in Texas. Therefore, it is essential for the Texas LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community to have comprehensive and thorough planning that is tailored to protect themselves and their families.

While another writes:

No that is incorrect! POA does NOT cover medical decisions in Texas!! You must have a medical power of attorney to handle medical issues. Please consult with an attorney before assuming what each document does. I handle these matters for the LGBT community and it is so important to have the right things in place. You must be sure to express each need to your legal practitioner and then make sure you understand what each document you have covers and what protection it provides for you.

All of which merely expose the fact that not only does each state handle LGBT issues differently, there’s a great deal of confusion even within the LGBT community.

Even then, same-sex couples have to fight with hospitals and courts to make certain our wishes are followed — when we are at our most vulnerable, sick or unable to do so for ourselves.

Opposite-sex couples don’t have to worry about any of this — they just get married and get over 1100 rights, automatically.

We’ve reached out to Lon, who shared his story with the excellent Gay Marriage USA Facebook page, to see how we can help.

If there’s anyone who can offer legal advice or assistance please contact Lon directly through his Facebook page.[URL="http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2-texas-man-after-34-years-my-partners-sister-legally-took-our-home-because-we-werent-married/legal-issues/2013/04/29/66089"][/URL]
Click to expand...

I knew fags were deviant but I didn't know they were stupid. POA does not cover disposition of assets. Stupid queers deserve it
 
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar said:
So? You don't follow well. It is a fundamental civil right. Whether the government can place limits on that right is a separate question.
Click to expand...

If it is a fundamental civil right why dd it take the cock sucking AIDS infested dirtbags this long to scream for it?

It isn't our fault queers can't manage their legal affairs properly. Maybe if the aforementioned homos had spent less time dreaming up perverted uses for gerbils and more time thinking about their legal affairs this wouldn't have happened. They were asking for it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top