Obama: 'TX Pressure Congress to pass my agenda' (Victoria, Roma: wedding, military)

[doctorjef]

Originally Posted by Cathy4017

I never quoted what percentage of the population is gay--I have no idea what the actual number is, don't care. I just know that they are a very small percentage.

All they have to do is have a will drawn up, specifying everything.

Wanting "marriage" per se is ludicrous--it's not the same as traditional marriage, for VERY obvious reasons, and it should NOT be treated as such, ever. It's NOT equal. Period. If it is so dammed important to those involved, draw up a will and quit whining.

There are far more important issues affecting the population as a whole that should be addressed, without having BO come to this state to shove his agenda down our throats.

You are very poorly informed and/or not thinking this through. A Will or any other legal instruments will not provide for one's partner to receive social security survivor benefits, for example. The fight for marriage equality involves action at both state and federal levels. We have got to change not only state laws but get rid of DOMA at the federal level and thus compel the federal government to recognize same-gender marriages contracted under state laws and in foreign jurisdictions.

Further, drawing up a series of legal instruments is no simple or inexpensive matter, especially for those of us who have more complicated finances and estates. In any event, various powers of attorney, priority of medical visitation, designation of power to make arrangements for disposition of mortal remains, etc are all needed in jurisdictions that don't provide either same-gender marriage or a robust civil unions law for same-sex couples. Without such laws you also won't have the array of legal protections that states afford married couples, e.g., a legally married person cannot be required to testify in court against their spouse.

When we lived in Texas my spouse and I had a full range of legal instruments drawn up to protect our rights with regard to one another as much as possible, but it still doesn't provide what marriage equality provides. We were legally married in Canada in 2003 when it became possible in Ontario, even though it would not be recognized in TX. We now live in a state that first enacted civil unions and has now enacted marriage equality. That takes care of the state issues for us, but we still crucially have to secure change at the federal level.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

You are very poorly informed and/or not thinking this through. A Will or any other legal instruments will not provide for one's partner to receive social security survivor benefits, for example. The fight for marriage equality involves action at both state and federal levels. We have got to change not only state laws but get rid of DOMA at the federal level and thus compel the federal government to recognize same-gender marriages contracted under state laws and in foreign jurisdictions.

Further, drawing up a series of legal instruments is no simple or inexpensive matter, especially for those of us who have more complicated finances and estates. In any event, various powers of attorney, priority of medical visitation, designation of power to make arrangements for disposition of mortal remains, etc are all needed in jurisdictions that don't provide either same-gender marriage or a robust civil unions law for same-sex couples. Without such laws you also won't have the array of legal protections that states afford married couples, e.g., a legally married person cannot be required to testify in court against their spouse.

When we lived in Texas my spouse and I had a full range of legal instruments drawn up to protect our rights with regard to one another as much as possible, but it still doesn't provide what marriage equality provides. We were legally married in Canada in 2003 when it became possible in Ontario, even though it would not be recognized in TX. We now live in a state that first enacted civil unions and has now enacted marriage equality. That takes care of the state issues for us, but we still crucially have to secure change at the federal level.

Well, as long as you're happy with your situation, that's fine.

I'm very well aware that wills are neither cheap to draw up--and that traditional marriage benefits are not conferred on same-sex partners.

I don't even have a problem with civil unions and legal protections, but civil unions should not be treated the same as traditional marriage.

But at some point, I'm sure that every state will most likely will do so, and there will be no more DOMA.

I sincerely hope I am long dead and gone before that happens, but I doubt it. It will most likely happen within the next 10 years for all states.

[doctorjef]

In what ways would you think civil unions should be treated differently than marriages in terms of legalities ( I'm not interested in conflating civil unions or civil marriages with any church or religious definition of matrimony for their own internal purposes)? And why would you prefer to be dead and gone when lesbian and gay couples are freely able to marry under the laws of the state? Does it so offend your sensibilities? What's it to you?

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

In what ways would you think civil unions should be treated differently than marriages in terms of legalities ( I'm not interested in conflating civil unions or civil marriages with any church or religious definition of matrimony for their own internal purposes)? And why would you prefer to be dead and gone when lesbian and gay couples are freely able to marry under the laws of the state? Does it so offend your sensibilities? What's it to you?

Suffice it to say that I find it strange as hell--and leave it at that, OK?

What is it to you that many straights feel exactly the same way as I do? You got what you wanted, so......

[doctorjef]

Well, I'll have what I personally want when the federal goverent recognizes my marriage and grants us equal federal treatment. But of course gay and lesbian couples in Texas and other states that don't yet have marriage equality want legal recognition in their states of residence. If you find it strange as hell, that's nothing to me. It only matters when such attitudes are politically expressed to restrict my and my spouse's equality before the law and that of other gay and lesbian couples.

[Midessan]

President Obama " Help me pass my agenda. Or I'll sick the IRS on you." This administration is terrible, I hope someone goes to jail over this. But I won't hold my breath.

[Cathy4017]

Originally Posted by Midessan

President Obama " Help me pass my agenda. Or I'll sick the IRS on you." This administration is terrible, I hope someone goes to jail over this. But I won't hold my breath.

Nah. Too much like Slick Willie. Nothing sticks, regular teflon backs. I just hope BO never returns to Texas, period.

[theSUBlime]

Originally Posted by doctorjef

You are very poorly informed and/or not thinking this through. A Will or any other legal instruments will not provide for one's partner to receive social security survivor benefits, for example. The fight for marriage equality involves action at both state and federal levels. We have got to change not only state laws but get rid of DOMA at the federal level and thus compel the federal government to recognize same-gender marriages contracted under state laws and in foreign jurisdictions.

Further, drawing up a series of legal instruments is no simple or inexpensive matter, especially for those of us who have more complicated finances and estates. In any event, various powers of attorney, priority of medical visitation, designation of power to make arrangements for disposition of mortal remains, etc are all needed in jurisdictions that don't provide either same-gender marriage or a robust civil unions law for same-sex couples. Without such laws you also won't have the array of legal protections that states afford married couples, e.g., a legally married person cannot be required to testify in court against their spouse.

When we lived in Texas my spouse and I had a full range of legal instruments drawn up to protect our rights with regard to one another as much as possible, but it still doesn't provide what marriage equality provides. We were legally married in Canada in 2003 when it became possible in Ontario, even though it would not be recognized in TX. We now live in a state that first enacted civil unions and has now enacted marriage equality. That takes care of the state issues for us, but we still crucially have to secure change at the federal level.

I was going to say this, but I didn't think anyone here would be smart enough to believe me. You cannot just go get a will to get the federal/local government to do those things Cathy was talking about.

The reason why DOMA is being challenged is because Edith Windsor had to pay $363,000 in estate taxes that a widower of a "traditional couple" wouldn't have to pay after 40 years. 40. I don't care what anyone thinks about gay marriage, but that's just silly. I don't even care if it's called marriage, but it just doesn't make sense, especially after 40 years. For me it isn't even about cultural acceptance as much as it is about money. It's not hate, it's just dumb.

[Rakin]

Originally Posted by theSUBlime

I don't care what anyone thinks about gay marriage, but that's just silly. I don't even care if it's called marriage, but it just doesn't make sense, especially after 40 years. For me it isn't even about cultural acceptance as much as it is about money. It's not hate, it's just dumb.

As OP, this thread was meant to knock Obama for trying to tell us Texans how to run this state economically and create jobs. He's way out of his league with his advice.

But as the divorced father of a gay son, I agree with above. Why do we need the Govt determining there are any special benefits for married, divorced or singles. Let get all Govt and special rules out of marriage between couples.

Let each couple and their faith decide on their commitment.

Texans are about less Govt involvement, not more. Don't penalize or reward me because I'm married or not married.

[Cowboys fan in Houston]

Originally Posted by Rakin

Texans are about less Govt involvement, not more. Don't penalize or reward me because I'm married or not married.

If this statement were true, I would be a die hard Republican but it isn't. The elected officials in Texas are only about less government where business regulation is involved. They want HUGE government when it comes to legislating conservative Christian morality. That's why, despite having gay friendly cities like Austin, Dallas, and Houston, the elected officials in Texas are some of the most anti-gay in the country. They want people to know that, if you're gay, you're not equal and you don't deserve the same rights.

Statements from some posters on this thread reflect that as well. Saying that just getting a will is going to somehow solve everything or that gays have all the same rights as straights in the constitution is simply their way of trying to sweep it under the rug. After all, as has been shown in this thread, its ok to oppress a minority as long as its not a big minority.

Personally, I think it should be up to the church. The government should only be involved in the civil union part of the marriage for both straights and gays. If a church wants to marry a gay couple, they should be able to and if not, they shouldn't have to.