Vermont legalizes gay marriage

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>This is nothing like the civil rights movement.

Dude - it IS a civil rights movement. By definition. And we are hearing all the same arguments against it that we heard back in the 1950's.

You're right...I forgot all those years of slavery, human trafficking, segregation in schools, buses, public places, water fountains, and, oh...a civil war killing more Americans than any other conflict. Sorry Bill, gay rights issues will never amount to anything like the Civil Rights cause, and you diminish both by trying to say so.

Gay rights over the past 15 years have advanced leaps and bounds. Many large corporations in fact provide quite a bit of distinguished benefits to same sex couples that are not provided to domestic hetro couples. Organizations like GLOBE have a firm footing in the professional realm...the likes of which NAACP took decades to achieve.

A homosexual can stay in the closet. Racial matters can't hide themselves in such a way. Think racial issues don't still exist? Take a trip through Atlanta or Washington, DC and compare that to walking through Haight/Ashbury in San Francisco or West Hollywood. Apples and oranges. There is little harmonization of these cultures outside of the "hot beds"...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

There is more to that definition than what you cite

Yes, there is. One thing is that marriage has mostly involved the woman basically becoming the property of the man, but that has changed in recent times (in our culture anyway).

Quote

Add in the religious considerations over the past several thousand years in some cultures...

If it's about religion, then atheists such as myself should not be allowed to get married.

Also, if it's about having children, then people who can't or don't want to have children shouldn't be allowed to get married.

But I don't think it's all about either of those things.

It seems to me that marriage is a legal thing in this country. It may have religious meaning for _some_ married couples, but it has a legal meaning for _all_ married couples. So I think we need to either extend legal marriage to all people (consenting adults, of course), or we need to make marriage a strictly religious thing with no legal rights/benefits associated with it.

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

Many large corporations in fact provide quite a bit of distinguished benefits to same sex couples that are not provided to domestic hetro couples.

What kind of benefits?

[billvon 2,416]

>You're right...I forgot all those years of slavery, human trafficking,
>segregation in schools, buses, public places, water fountains, and, oh...a
>civil war killing more Americans than any other conflict. Sorry Bill, gay
>rights issues will never amount to anything like the Civil Rights cause,
>and you diminish both by trying to say so.

Dude, the reason we have rights for minorities here IS the Civil Rights (with a capital C) cause. You'd be laughed at if you claimed that since the Chinese were not subject to years of slavery, human trafficking, segregation in schools, buses, and public places that therefore they don't have the same civil rights as any other minorities. One of the things that the long climb of blacks out of slavery has taught us is that the government doesn't have the right to discriminate against ANYONE - gay, chinese, muslim, disabled, female - based purely on their physical, sexual or religious type.

Claiming that "well, yeah, all those other groups should have rights - BUT NOT GAYS!" sort of misses the point of what that movement tried to accomplish, and is still accomplishing today.

>Gay rights over the past 15 years have advanced leaps and bounds.

Agreed. Gays are finally starting to get the same rights as heterosexuals, and that's great.

>Many large corporations in fact provide quite a bit of distinguished
> benefits to same sex couples that are not provided to domestic hetro
>couples.

Name one benefit that corporations afford to same sex couples that is not afforded to married couples. Just one.

>A homosexual can stay in the closet. Racial matters can't
>hide themselves in such a way.

Right. And by that logic, a Muslim could pretend he's a Christian; therefore, there is no need to grant Muslims the same rights as Christians.

Fortunately we abandoned that sort of thinking a long time ago.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

You're right...I forgot all those years of slavery, human trafficking, segregation in schools, buses, public places, water fountains, and, oh...a civil war killing more Americans than any other conflict. Sorry Bill, gay rights issues will never amount to anything like the Civil Rights cause, and you diminish both by trying to say so.

Rights is rights. It's a bit funny that the 50's ruling said that we all have to right to marry another person. It didn't say person of the opposite sex. And sometime in the next 20 years, that's what the law of the USA will be.

Gays are still beaten and occasionally killed in our country. And they cannot marry, and enjoy any of the legal benefits the Feds give for marriage. State based civil unions and company policy means access to group health care and a few other items, but far short, and exclude necessary rights for a couple.

The solution is either elevating civil unions to the same legal status, or marriage. A smaller segment of the gay population wants marriage, and mind you, some Christian churches will conduct gay marriages.

[lummy 4]

Quote

State based civil unions and company policy means access to group health care and a few other items, but far short, and exclude necessary rights for a couple.

Just to add to this, group health care for a domestic partner is considered taxable income whereas health care for a spouse is not.

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

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Many large corporations in fact provide quite a bit of distinguished benefits to same sex couples that are not provided to domestic hetro couples.

What kind of benefits?

In my personal observation, health benefit eligibility for same sex partners through normal enrollment. There were a couple of other items too, but it's been over five years since I was at this particular company (in the Fortune top 20). At the time, one of the organizations that was gaining some visibility in New York (where they are HQ'd) was called GLOBE, but I think it was an umbrella to other organizations.

About 9 years ago, elements of the company I worked for were up in arms about how certain benefits were being extended in that manner, but were denied to others (I guess one could consider it poetic justice). It involved health, life and other items that were in effect, under control of the company as whole, not due to any particular law, etc.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>Many large corporations in fact provide quite a bit of distinguished
> benefits to same sex couples that are not provided to domestic hetro
>couples.

Name one benefit that corporations afford to same sex couples that is not afforded to married couples. Just one.

Unmarried same-sex partners were afforded health benefits as dependents under one of my former employers health plans, whereas unmarried hetero-partners were not. That's as close to apples to apples I can get. The list wasn't long, but there was more.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

Marriage is not just a legal issue, it's also a religious issue.

I think we'd all be better off if it was _only_ a religious (or personal, if you prefer) issue.

Why in the heck do we need the government to give us it's permission to marry? Why is this not simply a private affair between private individuals?

Getting the government out of the marriage business would solve this whole issue.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[billvon 2,416]

>Unmarried same-sex partners were afforded health benefits as
>dependents under one of my former employers health plans, whereas
>unmarried hetero-partners were not.

I asked for a benefit that corporations afford to same sex couples that is not afforded to married couples. Got any?

If all you have are examples of marriage benefits that companies extend to gays in states where they are legally discriminated against, then I applaud those companies; they are doing their best to give them the same rights that other employees have.

[TomAiello 25]

Quote

Quote

Many large corporations in fact provide quite a bit of distinguished benefits to same sex couples that are not provided to domestic hetro couples.

What kind of benefits?

Many large corporations have official policies that civil unions and domestic partners get the same benefits recognition that traditional spouses do. It applies to same-sex as well as heterosexual couples (of which there are actually some who choose not to "marry" in the governments log books).

I don't have any actual numbers with me at the moment, but if memory serves, most of the silicon valley corporations have such policies (Google, Apple, etc). Not sure about more traditional businesses (anyone know if John Deere does?).

It's a good example of the private sector just going ahead and solving a problem while politicians are still bickering over it.

-- Tom Aiello

[email protected]
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Shotgun 1]

Quote

In my personal observation, health benefit eligibility for same sex partners through normal enrollment.

I assume a heterosexual couple would get the same benefits if they were married, but since the same-sex couples can't get married, it makes sense to extend the benefits to them in this way. And I suspect that any companies that do this will change their policies once same-sex marriage is legal.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>Unmarried same-sex partners were afforded health benefits as
>dependents under one of my former employers health plans, whereas
>unmarried hetero-partners were not.

I asked for a benefit that corporations afford to same sex couples that is not afforded to married couples. Got any?

If all you have are examples of marriage benefits that companies extend to gays in states where they are legally discriminated against, then I applaud those companies; they are doing their best to give them the same rights that other employees have.

Technically Bill, that is not true. You or I have no different right than a homosexual man or woman. You and I can not marry another man. There are all sorts of "laws" or practices of society that prevent us from doing things we may want to do.

As for what you asked for, it's not apples to apples. A same sex couple, un-married is not a valid comparison to a hetero married couple. The example I cited was a more level comparison.

In Vermont, I expect that a legally recognized marriage will afford those benefits in that state. Great, I guess...however, I firmly believe that (as with most laws passed by various levels of government) there will be unforeseen circumstances, which will touch on education, child development, social security, even divorce law...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Marriage is not just a legal issue, it's also a religious issue.

I think we'd all be better off if it was _only_ a religious (or personal, if you prefer) issue.

Why in the heck do we need the government to give us it's permission to marry? Why is this not simply a private affair between private individuals?

Getting the government out of the marriage business would solve this whole issue.

Tada!!

Of course, unwinding the rest of society from this stifles the imagination all by itself.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

It's a good example of the private sector just going ahead and solving a problem while politicians are still bickering over it.

They solved it for the Bay Area, where not granting such benefits would put you at a competitive disadvantage, not to mention have many straight people deliberately choose not to work for you. But that doesn't help those living outside an area where gays are accepted (ie, most of the country).

And as shotgun writes, taxation differs. I was already ticked that COBRA is post tax, while employed people are pre tax.

[wolfriverjoe 1,346]

Quote

I have a question: What does "gay marriage" provide that a "civil union" cannot?

I heard this on the radio a while back: Family discounts into many tourist attractions, including federally funded national parks.
Even if both adults are legal guardians of the kids, a same-sex couple has to pay individual admissions for each person. It adds up fast.

Kind of trivial, but it shows how pervasive the discrimination is.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

I have a question: What does "gay marriage" provide that a "civil union" cannot?

A slap to the face of anyone who goes to church.

[billvon 2,416]

>You or I have no different right than a homosexual man or woman.
>You and I can not marry another man.

I agree. And as I noted before, that was also 100% true back when whites could use the white bathroom and blacks could use the black bathroom. Everyone had the same rights, technically.

Still, if I lived back then, I would have supported the diners who let blacks use the "regular" bathroom - even if white patrons thought they were "losing out."

>As for what you asked for, it's not apples to apples. A same sex couple,
>un-married is not a valid comparison to a hetero married couple.

Sure it is - because in both cases, that is the maximum legal recognition they can get. Now, legalize gay marriage, and you would have an excellent argument that the two are no longer valid comparisons.

>In Vermont, I expect that a legally recognized marriage will afford those
>benefits in that state. Great, I guess...however, I firmly believe that (as
>with most laws passed by various levels of government) there will be
>unforeseen circumstances, which will touch on education, child
>development, social security, even divorce law...

Absolutely. I have no doubt that it will be as messy, as ugly and as nasty as, say, regular heterosexual family court and divorce law.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

>I have a question: What does "gay marriage" provide that a "civil union" cannot?

Here are a few:


1. Joint parental rights of children
2. Joint adoption
3. Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
4. Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
5. Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
6. Crime victims recovery benefits
7. Domestic violence protection orders
8. Judicial protections and immunity
9. Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
10. Public safety officers death benefits
11. Spousal veterans benefits
12. Social Security
13. Medicare
14. Joint filing of tax returns
15. Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
16. Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
17. Child support
18. Joint Insurance Plans
19. Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
20. Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
21. Estate and gift tax benefits
22. Welfare and public assistance
23. Joint housing for elderly
24. Credit protection
25. Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

Would you please cite the source for this? Some of this stuff makes me want to yell out shenanigans...but I'm willing to read up on it first...

Spousal veterans benefits?

Like the VA hospital?

Wow so like we can have gays that don't ask and don't tell but their gay husbands can still get VA benefits?

So while actual veterans can be denied or delayed we can have the VA pay for gays to be treated?

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Quote

I have a question: What does "gay marriage" provide that a "civil union" cannot?

A slap to the face of anyone who goes to church.

Good point. Much like a girl going to school is a slap in the face of anyone who goes to a radical Muslim Madrasah.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[billvon 2,416]

>Wow so like we can have gays that don't ask and don't tell but their
>gay husbands can still get VA benefits?

We have veterans whose husbands CANNOT get VA benefits. Fear not; a wounded veteran's husband will still be kicked out onto the street as long as the wounded veteran is also a man. That should make you very happy I imagine.

[FallingOsh 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

>I have a question: What does "gay marriage" provide that a "civil union" cannot?

Here are a few:


1. Joint parental rights of children
2. Joint adoption
3. Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
4. Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
5. Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
6. Crime victims recovery benefits
7. Domestic violence protection orders
8. Judicial protections and immunity
9. Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
10. Public safety officers death benefits
11. Spousal veterans benefits
12. Social Security
13. Medicare
14. Joint filing of tax returns
15. Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
16. Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
17. Child support
18. Joint Insurance Plans
19. Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
20. Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
21. Estate and gift tax benefits
22. Welfare and public assistance
23. Joint housing for elderly
24. Credit protection
25. Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

Gay people can't have medicare, welfare, social security, restraining orders, or credit protection?

--------------------------------------------------
Stay positive and love your life.

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[philh 0]

Why are the considerations of ancient cultures a relevant concern? That argument could easily be used to defend slavery ( and was ). A quick bible verse might do the job:
lev 25,44

'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

>Wow so like we can have gays that don't ask and don't tell but their
>gay husbands can still get VA benefits?

We have veterans whose husbands CANNOT get VA benefits. Fear not; a wounded veteran's husband will still be kicked out onto the street as long as the wounded veteran is also a man. That should make you very happy I imagine.

So you would break the bank by treating non veterans before veterans, I understand now.

BTW the VA is a federal entity, not state.

Your point is useless.

[warpedskydiver 0]

If you were a disabled veteran who needs the VA you might feel a bit differently

How do things look from up there?