I'm sick of this. Do you want gay people to be supported in monogamy or not?

[nightjumps 1]

BIG WORD TRANSLATOR:

Yo buss dis. De choices be "too spread." Responses be fucked. De results be screwed. De bottom low be; we be doggin the hydrant.

[freeflybella 0]

What up, yo? Freakin' it, Philly-style?



I was thinking more like:
"You tricked us into thinking, meanie!"

Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

[livendive 8]

Quote

What about this one and it applies to straight or gay. A gay couple or a straight married couple have 401K programs at work. If either the gay couple wants to leave theirs to the surviving partner or someone else or either one of the straight couple want's to leave theirs to one of their children or someone else who is not ones spouse the IRS takes a 10% cut upfront. Goes for a single person to. Talk about unfair.

I hadn't realized that. So a spouse gets 100% of the decedents 401K but anyone else gets only 90%?

Quote

Also for employees of the federal government or many state governments, any hope of achieving equality in the form of domestic partnership benefits for the gay couple would be out the window if a constitutional amendment would be ratified defining marriage. Hospital visitation rights, health insurance benefits, benefits for adopted children and the list goes on and on.

A lot of private Fortune 500 companies already provide these benefits to their gay employees because they feel "it's the right thing to do" .

Al this would be in jeopardy if a constitutional amendment is ratified.

I personally feel we can provide equality for all without destroying the institution of marriage or getting religion involved.

Yeah, the company I work added some domestic partner benefits. An interesting side-effect is that I can now carry my girlfriend on my health insurance without having to be married, and it doesn't cost me a dime because I'm already paying for a family plan (to cover my daughter). Not a bad deal considering my insurance is substantially better than what her employer offers. Anyhow, I can't think of any good reason why straight couples (married or unmarried) should get any benefits that gay couples don't, whether it be a tax break or survivor benefits from social security. Most of the arguments against allowing gay marriage come from the religious perspective. Why is it ok for my girlfriend and I (both atheists) to marry, but not gays? If/when we take that step, it won't be a commitment "before god", but rather a legal promise to stick with each other that includes financial security benefits.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[narcimund 0]

Quote

but rather a legal promise to stick with each other that includes financial security benefits.

These people are mortally offended that gay people should make promises to stick together.

And also that they should get financial security benefits.

That's the crux of the matter.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[lummy 4]

I don't want gay people to be anything other than theirselves, period.

It's a personal decision on whether to be monogamous or promiscuous, not a trait of a sexual orientation (IMHO)

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[Emma 0]

Quote

The false choice comes from the assumption that not supporting a contractual obligation is connected to wanting gays to be promiscuous. I think these are, as you put it, unrelated issues.

Totally agree. Are all non-married people promiscuous?

Equally...are all married people non-promiscuous?

I see that the poll has been phrased so as to open discussion...and has been effective. Personally I think the better route would be to ban marriage for everyone. Until such point as it actually comes to mean something. It's like a 'Life' sentence, which, as we all know, does not actually mean life.

[jlmiracle 7]

Quote

Personally I think the better route would be to ban marriage for everyone. Until such point as it actually comes to mean something. It's like a 'Life' sentence, which, as we all know, does not actually mean life.

That is a perfect idea and so true. The best one yet. The only reason I got legally married (again) was advice from our accountant. We have made a commitment to each other, to spend the rest of our life together prior to that piece of paper.

Judy

Be kinder than necessary because everyone you meet is fighting some kind of battle.

[narcimund 0]

This conversation was directly relevant to the conversations going on in the other gay marriage threads.

My summary:
Marriage advances mature, mutually supportive family values which promote a stable society.

Non-married relationships encourage promiscuity, AIDS, broken homes, one-parent children, and dependency on government support.

Therefore gay marriage is the path to fidelity and stability. Banning gay marriage establishes a constitutional mandate for loose morals, societal instability, and death by disease.

Go figure.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Muenkel 0]

Quote

Banning gay marriage establishes a constitutional mandate for loose morals, societal instability, and death by disease.

So what you're saying here is that homosexuals have no self control and they need the government to protect them from that. You don't make a very good liberal.

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[narcimund 0]

Quote

You don't make a very good liberal.

You simultaneously declare me a liberal then criticize me for not being good at it?

I hereby declare you a martian although since you are shaped just like a human being I want you to know that you're a TERRIBLE martian. So there.

Jeez... some people want it to be all personal and can't even do that well.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Muenkel 0]

Interesting, you don't address my first sentence which is really what the post is about.

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[narcimund 0]

Edit: No personal attacks. You know better.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Muenkel 0]

Hmm, we seem to have two different definitions of stupid.

Why don't we end this conversation here and agree to disagree?

Chris

_________________________________________
Chris

[Zenister 0]

fortunately there are more options available to everyone than 'monogamous' or 'promiscuous'

but legally i dont see the benefit for anyone in prohibiting it, except for those religious organizations that stubbornly insist society reflect their beliefs and their beliefs only.

honestly i think it should be possible to expand the idea of 'family' and the property thereof if all parties involved agree. Legal guidelines on how to do this only helps to provide structure to the shape society assumes as it sheds obsolete mores.

____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

[Deuce 1]

Quote

Edit: No personal attacks. You know better.

Oh Yeah! You undercook your poached salmon!

Bwah!


C'mon Narci, haven't you gotten a marriage time on the SF websight yet?

Or get married in Holland. They have hash there.

• Quote

[StevePhelps 0]

yeah, marriage is a guarantee of monogamy! Give me a break!

[CrazyThomas 0]

Quote

This conversation was directly relevant to the conversations going on in the other gay marriage threads.

My summary:
Marriage advances mature, mutually supportive family values which promote a stable society.

Non-married relationships encourage promiscuity, AIDS, broken homes, one-parent children, and dependency on government support.

Sweet. A gay man ripping on one-parent children. And single parents.

Quote

Therefore gay marriage is the path to fidelity and stability. Banning gay marriage establishes a constitutional mandate for loose morals, societal instability, and death by disease.

Go figure.

So without the "legally binding contract", there is no fidelity or stability? I thought before you said that you already had that for FIVE years.
Or were you just being sarcastic again.


Thomas

[sdgregory 0]

So I'm asking, overall, society-wide, does everyone agree with the Christians that gay people should get it on all day long?


Wow, all Chritstians who are against gay marriage are condoning promiscuity amongst gay society? You actually need help from people outside your relationship to maintain monogamy? What? You have no character to maintain a committed relationship without the "support of society"?

Guess if I call myself Christian in your eyes I want you to be promiscous.

Here's a statement equally as asinine. All gay men want to have sex with underage boys. Sounds stupid, doesn't it? Why? I am sure you know why. And it probably pisses you off. Yet, haven't you just done the same thing?