Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Marriage is legal in MA and CA
Civil Unions are legal in NJ, CT, VT, NH. Maine, Washington, Oregon and NY have some form of domestic partnership benefits/recognition.
We are making great strides!!!!
But why can't NY have civil unions! They have to rely on their citizens getting married out of state and coming home! Leave all those catering dollars at home.. I say! And California is fighting prop. 8 which is repealing gay marriage..
there is no difference. I basically am sickened by the institution of marriage as it gives the state another leash. if they want to have a ceremony, that's fine. I don't think they should have to have a contract, or license issued by the state, nor do I think they should enjoy any benefits. at least no additional benefits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonaLisaVito
I know. I want the government to butt out of a lot of things in our lives too. LESS GOVERNMENT PLEASE.
So what is the difference between a straight couple getting married at the courthouse and a gay couple getting married (civil union???) at the courthouse. (question not directed at you, just anyone who can answer)
I'm not tolerant of her use of the word "Tolerant" nor of her defenders.
Ha - I'm far from one of her supporters. In fact, I think she did poorly in the debate and clearly lost. But, like I said, this word has been misused for years and it's not like she just pulled it out last night. I think everyone knew she was going to say it. Both sides say it pretty much all the time.
making great strides and doing it the right way. making it a state decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjbradleynyc
Marriage is legal in MA and CA
Civil Unions are legal in NJ, CT, VT, NH. Maine, Washington, Oregon and NY have some form of domestic partnership benefits/recognition.
We are making great strides!!!!
I would rather have the "state" out of it all together. I don't need a license to dictate who I can sleep with, or live with. we are so over governed we don't even realize it anymore.
I respect your opinion. Its not my own but I can see where you are coming from. But without the government recognition, how can we ensure that same sex couples can see each other in hospitals? how can we ensure that if one partner predecedes the other they get their retirement benefits? you still have to have some sort of legislation.. don't you?
I'm not challenging you btw, I'm just curious what your solution would be, if any..
Location: The Frenchie Farm, Where We Grow 'em Big!
2,080 posts, read 6,940,624 times
Reputation: 1084
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjbradleynyc
Marriage is legal in MA and CA
Civil Unions are legal in NJ, CT, VT, NH. Maine, Washington, Oregon and NY have some form of domestic partnership benefits/recognition.
We are making great strides!!!!
We could exclude all of the southeast, parts of the midwest, all of the prairie states, and the mountain states (except colorado...they're turning around.) Equallity is for all men and women...until you come out of the closet.
Haven't you heard....the Gays are the Blacks of the 21st century. Can't marry! Can't adopt! Can't visit loved ones in the hospital! I say we got the short straw on this one.
Unless I missed it, Biden and Palin agreed on the topic. Biden, Palin, and Ifill all agreed that there was agreement on the issue.
And yet the left is still whining. What a joke.
I do not think govt should be involved in ANY marriage at all. Let people do their own thing and get out of it. But since the IRS is involved, do not expect it to ever be an issue that govt is not involved with.
there is no difference. I basically am sickened by the institution of marriage as it gives the state another leash. if they want to have a ceremony, that's fine. I don't think they should have to have a contract, or license issued by the state, nor do I think they should enjoy any benefits. at least no additional benefits.
instead of adding laws that give gays rights, why not repeal the laws that took those rights from them? there must be laws on the books that makes it so they can't see their partners in the hospitals. the government just needs a huge eraser. they can get the retirement benefits VIA a will. most people have IRA's or 401k's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by minibrings
I respect your opinion. Its not my own but I can see where you are coming from. But without the government recognition, how can we ensure that same sex couples can see each other in hospitals? how can we ensure that if one partner predecedes the other they get their retirement benefits? you still have to have some sort of legislation.. don't you?
I'm not challenging you btw, I'm just curious what your solution would be, if any..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) at the courthouse. (question not directed at you, just anyone who can answer)
