Supreme Court to take up same-sex marriage (Montclair: schools, bill)

[Howest2008]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Baloney!!! I think this C-D member said it best:

Baloney!!! I think this C-D member said it best:

Quote:

Originally Posted by pigeonhole
The term "marriage" has a symbolic value in society. There's a difference between saying "this is my husband" and "this is my boyfriend". Denying homosexuals the right to marry implies that their relationship is inferior and not worthy of the same recognition

Phoney Generic Baloney A Domestic Partner " Is Not A Boyfriend or Girlfriend for that matter please try again.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Howest2008

I'm not Anti-Homosexual or Gay in any way or fashion and supported Domestic Partnership from the Get Go.....
the start , and anyway what civil rights were Gays Ever Lacking In The Great State Of CALIFORNIA. Somebody is going to be happy and somebody is going to be sad come September 2013. The Federal Government messed up with DOMA they should have given Domestic Partnership ALL FEDERAL GOV BENEFITS and RIGHTS that would've saved the INSTITUTION OF HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGE..

Ok. But my ulterior point is: marriage sucks. Between straights or gays. Based on religious fluff originally. Extended out today into a farcical drama.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by Howest2008

Baloney!!! I think this C-D member said it best:

Quote:


Phoney Generic Baloney A Domestic Partner " Is Not A Boyfriend or Girlfriend for that matter please try again.

Simple mind noted. It might as well be. Tell me, what do you have against same sex marriage that doesn't require a religious crutch to explain?

[cardinal2007]

Originally Posted by Howest2008

Domestic Partnership will work just as good as Homosexual Marriage ' don't you think ' ???!!!! , really the motivation behind the push for Homosexual Marriage is psychological " trying to make the general public think that Homosexual Sexual Relationships " are as normal as Heterosexual Relationships ( Marriage).

The clear answer is no, once DOMA is defeated any state's marriage license will apply as being married in the eyes of the federal government (as long as the couple remains in a state were their marriage is recognized as such), no other contract will suffice for the federal government to provide the same rights and benefits.

[Howest2008]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Simple mind noted. It might as well be. Tell me, what do you have against same sex marriage that doesn't require a religious crutch to explain?

What do you have against Domestic Partnership and Civil Unions: CHILLAX Bro you sound like a Militant Gay or something with your name calling.......I'm innocent of oppressing Gay....

[Howest2008]

Originally Posted by cardinal2007

The clear answer is no, once DOMA is defeated any state's marriage license will apply as being married in the eyes of the federal government (as long as the couple remains in a state were their marriage is recognized as such), no other contract will suffice for the federal government to provide the same rights and benefits.

The two houses of congress and POTUS Clinton messed up with DOMA that is not the way you protect the institution of Marriage , you give Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions all of the benefits (Federal) of Marriage.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Howest2008

The two houses of congress and POTUS Clinton messed up with DOMA that is not the way you protect the institution of Marriage , you give Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions all of the benefits (Federal) of Marriage.

I remain curious why you, and anybody else here, thinks marriage is an institution worthy of special status and protection. Why are married people, hetero or homo-sexual, more valuable than single people?

[bigdumbgod]

Are We not Feeding THE Troll-of-STRANGE-Capitalization here?

Having drawn the line where this word 'marriage' can only apply in one particular instance, we already pass the point of rationalization and are subsequently just yelling in the dark. Ingrained generational and cultural biases know little reason.

[cardinal2007]

Originally Posted by Howest2008

The two houses of congress and POTUS Clinton messed up with DOMA that is not the way you protect the institution of Marriage , you give Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions all of the benefits (Federal) of Marriage.

Seeing as we live in the current universe, not a parallel one, we are restricted in what we can do, in order for the people of California to give all couples equal rights, if DOMA is struck down, would be to give all consenting couples the right to marry.

Trust me, the people we send to Congress have very little power, if that wasn't the case would be really be paying so much more in taxes as a state than we get back in federal spending? We may have over 11% of the nation's population, but we are a weak state in Congress.

What is up with this idea of "protecting the institution of Marriage" anyway, it is a federal or state contract, what would limiting it defend it from?

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by Howest2008

The two houses of congress and POTUS Clinton messed up with DOMA that is not the way you protect the institution of Marriage , you give Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions all of the benefits (Federal) of Marriage.

I agree. Completely.