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.
Simple.
Because the wonderful MainStream media in the US is unwilling or unable to discuss the real issues in this proposed new law - they have it all wrapped up in a "happy fog".
I suppose that most Americans are so dumbed-down that they have not even noticed - that is the usual way these days.
LOL. Sounds like typical right-wing thinking. Talk about dumbed-down...
Simple - and there are many explanations here already:
The institution of marriage, is to provide a safe and stable arrangement for having and raising children.
It is not an institution whose function is to capture benefits and pass them on to a "loved" one.
Let's reinforce and clarify the function, through better divorce laws, instead of watering it down, and turning Marriage into another state-sanctioned way of grabbing benefits.
Put a FORK IN:
+ Gay Marriage (where it is "about the money"), and
+ Financial Predators exploiting marriage
Thanks everyone, for driving me to better clarity in my thinking, and lets work to change the absurd divorce laws, while also finding a way for Gays to make a life-long and respected commitment to their partners, which is NOT ABOUT GRABBING MONEY.
Bogus, why was my neighbor Barbara who was over 60 able to get her husbands benefits when he died and they did not have kids. Marriage rights and benefits that go with marriage are not about children. If that were the case, then only couples with children would get those benefits. Yet less than 50% of married straight couples are having children and they still get those benefits. It is all just a lie on the part of people like you who are comfortable sucking up all the money that everyone pays into.
Fine.
Then get your hand out of my pocket, and out of my wallet
Get your hands out of my pocket and wallet, it is you stealing from us. We pay taxes too and deserve the exact same benefits, not a different set with less benefits.
Breaking news:
Earlier today - actually just a few hours hours ago - the British House of Commons passed a law to legalize same sex marriage by a vote of 366 in favor to 161 against.
Well, I have news for you:
IT IS NOT LAW YET.
And may never be... so you can cancel your plans to emigrate to the UK.
Mad, swivel-eyed loons are still not a protected species there yet.
The bill will move onto the House of Lords, where it is expected to face opposition.
Several Tory MPs spoke out against the bill, which has caused tensions within the party. The Labour and Liberal Democrat leaderships backed the bill.
British Prime Minister David Cameron hopes the bill will soon be enacted into law, with the first marriage ceremonies taking place by next summer.
Cameron is eager to force the bill’s passage, in attempts to display his party’s liberal and progressive side, particularly following spending cuts and a lurch to the right on immigration policy, which a number of parties are pursuing following a recent surge in the UK Independence Party’s popularity.
Grassroots conservatives have voiced opposition at Cameron and the bill, with conservative co-chairman Lord Feldman reportedly calling activists “mad, swivel-eyed loons.”
===
Marriage is a right, is it not? Denying us gay marriage is not equal representation.
This is a good example of dim thinking.
Based on that logic (as I have said previously), where do you draw the line:
+ If single, do you marry you best friend (when you are on death's door) to pass benefits to them?
+ Do three people or four people, have a group marriage to "share the wealth"?
+ Do you marry your cat, so he/she will be provided for, by your benefits, after your death?
As I said: WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?
Claiming "rights" is not good enough - there must be a principle behind them somewhere.
Marriage between one man and one woman has eons of history and tradition behind it. Modify it once, and someone else will try to stretch it again... and again. Where will it end?
Claiming "rights" is not good enough - there must be a principle behind them somewhere.
Here is the principle:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
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.
