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.
All I could think of is Social Security payments due to deceased spouses.
It will also cost money to extend benefits as well, but I feel benefits should only be extended for specific reasons, not an automatic "right", be it gay or straight.
When will the Supremes decide that state laws do not specifically have to allow them to get a divorce, that since they are married they automatically have the right to divorce?
That will probably be part of the ruling. I'm not saying that some of the backwards yokels in fly-over country won't spend their constituents' money on losing a court case like that, but most will do what bullies do when checked: Pretend it was never important anyway.
Quote:
Before, they could just divide their property any old way and go their separate ways. NOW they must get a divorce, with lawyers, and court costs, and all the hassle, and the JUDGE will decide who keeps what, and who pays child support or alimony!
Yep, now they have the same rights as the rest of us poor fools!
Good for them!
Having a legal standard for division of the shared assets when dissolving a marriage is a feature, not a bug.
Last edited by Dane_in_LA; 01-16-2015 at 03:16 PM..
It will be legal by force.... Most Americans are against same-sex marriage though. Some Americans have changed their mind (such as Obama) due to pressure and/or not wanted being called for "backwards" and other bad names. BTW any Christian who oppose homosexuals are false Christians because Jesus Christ himself loved everybody and said to love one another. He saw everybody equally. Judaism and Islam the only religion where homosexuality is forbidden and a sin.
According to Gallup Polls, a majority in the US now supports SSM.
Christians are a mixed bag and opinions range from condemnation to acceptance within and across denominational sects. Here's a Pastor in Arizona who says homosexuals should be executed:
It will also cost money to extend benefits as well, but I feel benefits should only be extended for specific reasons, not an automatic "right", be it gay or straight.
That is only federally. Taking into account the revenue from marriage licenses and taxes on marriage related activities for the state that number would be higher.
That is only federally. Taking into account the revenue from marriage licenses and taxes on marriage related activities for the state that number would be higher.
I wasn't implying it would be a net loss or a net gain, I was simply pointing out an expense.
You are mistaken. Here is a passage from the book of Romans that speaks to this issue:
What do any of those bible teachings that you esteem have to do with Federal Laws Governing all of us? It is you that is mistaken, you are the one quoting a book that is most like the King James version and all bibles have been rewritten many many many times over many years, not one single bible is an original or in it original words. The King James version itself was altered by a king to suit his needs and wants, bet there was an uproar when that happened, but people got used to it and after a while assumed it as verbatim of the original beliefs. Do you think any one really is following those ancient traditions when people lived in the desert herding animals, to a T. Do you follow every rule and tenet of your bible? Of just those you choose to?
All I could think of is Social Security payments due to deceased spouses.
So? What of it? Does not the spouse deserve the ss of their spouse? What makes you think it is tied to gender? Gay people pay into social security too, not just straight people. Otherwise denying us the same rights to benefits is discrimination based on sexual orientation and undue taxation upon us without equal representation. That would designate us second class citizenship.
So? What of it? Does not the spouse deserve the ss of their spouse? What makes you think it is tied to gender? Gay people pay into social security too, not just straight people. Otherwise denying us the same rights to benefits is discrimination based on sexual orientation and undue taxation upon us without equal representation. That would designate us second class citizenship.
I'm not against gay marriage, I'm for it. I was just responding to another poster regarding potential costs of gay marriage.
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.
