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.
"Gay Marriage" isn't in the law, you said civil marriage which is not to be conflated with "gay marriage."
You even said to another poster:
You can't have it both ways.
I find it a bit strange that you've said that this is "not about religious or whatever-particular-tradition marriages" even though that is what legal marriage has always been based on and that "gay marriage" follows that same legal construct only with a same-sex couple. So its only bad when it is a male and female that are married?
I'm understanding the summation of what you've said to mean that since individual states have legalized "gay marriage" (with different variables no less) that their state laws should simply be applied on the federal level? To me it seems like you're trying to make (or force) "gay marriage" to be on par with civil marriage and I don't know if you would intend that to be from a legal or literal standpoint or both.
I appreciate that you are being civil with me in the discussion about the matter
Legal marriage is based on civil law, not religion, religion was removed from marriage when each religion tried to enforce their individual beliefs upon the others. Every time the church changed under the ruling powers in England, that church would decide where one could marry and what determined its legality. A wedding in the church is not legal without the civil marriage part. Yet a civil marriage is legal on its own standing.
That's not what your post and POSTING history reflect.
Sure it is - it is only your faulty perception - informed by your bias against my moral position - and your tendancy to use hyperbole instead of logic - that causes you to say otherwise.
I was commenting on an interesting point. I thought that was what we did here on C-D. It is an interesting question and should be in know way insulting. Why get so defensive? If you can't have a discussion about things like this, then how do you think you will ever influence anyone's opinions and actions. It is a real question. If gay marriage was legal throughout the land, would gays embrace the idea of changing the definition of marriage to include polygamy? Why is that so hard to answer? It will come up if gay marriage is legalized so you might as well think about how you feel about it now.
In no way was I meaning to be insulting to you.....you're new here, so I can only suppose you dont realize that the bringing up of old threads, as well as the reading of them is encouraged by the mods.
I have posted ad nauseum on those threads, as has everyone of the older posters on this thread.
If you took what I posted as insulting, then you misunderstood my intent.
How would you feel that you lived with your wife/husband for 40 years, never been unfaithful, supported each other to the very end, then once your spouse dies, you are faced with a $300,000 tax bill? A bill that wouldn't have come your way, if the government recognized your union as a real marriage?
If they had visited a competent financial planner prior to her death, they could have made appropriate arrangements to lessen the tax burden. If people have assets, it is up to them to protect them the best that they can. Otherwise, they must pay estate taxes. What's so hard about that?
I was commenting on an interesting point. I thought that was what we did here on C-D. It is an interesting question and should be in know way insulting. Why get so defensive? If you can't have a discussion about things like this, then how do you think you will ever influence anyone's opinions and actions. It is a real question. If gay marriage was legal throughout the land, would gays embrace the idea of changing the definition of marriage to include polygamy? Why is that so hard to answer? It will come up if gay marriage is legalized so you might as well think about how you feel about it now.
I have no problem with polygamy. I have a friend who has been in a relationship with 2 others going on over 12 years and they added a fourth to their relationship and that was over a year ago. They all get along and live in the same house. Does that answer your question?
If they had visited a competent financial planner prior to her death, they could have made appropriate arrangements to lessen the tax burden. If people have assets, it is up to them to protect them the best that they can. Otherwise, they must pay estate taxes. What's so hard about that?
20yrsinBranson
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.
