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.
In our nation, we have laws that say and man can marry and women and that a woman can marry a man. Since these apply to everyone, how is it not equal? I know you will say that this person or that person does not want to marry and man or a women, they want to marry a person of the same sex. In most areas, you can't do that. The law is concerned with equal application, not equal outcome. In other words, the law is concerned with treating everyone the same as much as it can, but the law is not concerned with whether the outcome you want is the one you get. Lets take a much more common law like stop signs. The law says everyone has to stop fully at all stop signs. This applies to everyone, not just the people for whom it is convenient. I, as with most people assumibly, know of MANY places where I live where there are stop signs in places where you can see long before you get to the intersection whether there is other traffic there or not, especially four-way stops in neighborhoods where there is hardly ever anyone else there when you get there. In these afore mentioned situations, there is no logical reason to stop, assuming the reason to stop is to avoid accidents. ...but since the law strives to be equal to all, I have to stop whether I want to or not. Likewise, homosexuals CAN get married everywhere, just not to the same sex person everywhere. Since this is just like everywhere else, it IS marriage equality. If any state wants homosexual marriage, it couldn't care less. I am just trying to see how marriage is not equal when it applies to everyone equally.
the over 1000 benefits that are automatically given to married couples
those same benefits would require thousands of dollars to draw up legally, if they aren't married. some of those benefits (like sponsoring your spouse when they are not an American Citizen) cannot be achieved, unless you are married.
In our nation, we have laws that say and man can marry and women and that a woman can marry a man. Since these apply to everyone, how is it not equal? I know you will say that this person or that person does not want to marry and man or a women, they want to marry a person of the same sex. In most areas, you can't do that. The law is concerned with equal application, not equal outcome. In other words, the law is concerned with treating everyone the same as much as it can, but the law is not concerned with whether the outcome you want is the one you get. Lets take a much more common law like stop signs. The law says everyone has to stop fully at all stop signs. This applies to everyone, not just the people for whom it is convenient. I, as with most people assumibly, know of MANY places where I live where there are stop signs in places where you can see long before you get to the intersection whether there is other traffic there or not, especially four-way stops in neighborhoods where there is hardly ever anyone else there when you get there. In these afore mentioned situations, there is no logical reason to stop, assuming the reason to stop is to avoid accidents. ...but since the law strives to be equal to all, I have to stop whether I want to or not. Likewise, homosexuals CAN get married everywhere, just not to the same sex person everywhere. Since this is just like everywhere else, it IS marriage equality. If any state wants homosexual marriage, it couldn't care less. I am just trying to see how marriage is not equal when it applies to everyone equally.
Charles Sands
37129
The reason is they weren't equal at the federal level. They were penalized even if legally married in their state because the federal government wouldn't recognize the marriage. One of the people who begun the legal fight did so after her partner of many decades died, and she had to pay something like $360,000.00 in federal estate taxes even though they were legally married in their state, which wouldn't have applied if she had been recognized legally as a spouse. Same thing with survivor SS benefits, pensions, etc.
In our nation, we have laws that say and man can marry and women and that a woman can marry a man. Since these apply to everyone, how is it not equal? I know you will say that this person or that person does not want to marry and man or a women, they want to marry a person of the same sex. In most areas, you can't do that. The law is concerned with equal application, not equal outcome. In other words, the law is concerned with treating everyone the same as much as it can, but the law is not concerned with whether the outcome you want is the one you get. Lets take a much more common law like stop signs. The law says everyone has to stop fully at all stop signs. This applies to everyone, not just the people for whom it is convenient. I, as with most people assumibly, know of MANY places where I live where there are stop signs in places where you can see long before you get to the intersection whether there is other traffic there or not, especially four-way stops in neighborhoods where there is hardly ever anyone else there when you get there. In these afore mentioned situations, there is no logical reason to stop, assuming the reason to stop is to avoid accidents. ...but since the law strives to be equal to all, I have to stop whether I want to or not. Likewise, homosexuals CAN get married everywhere, just not to the same sex person everywhere. Since this is just like everywhere else, it IS marriage equality. If any state wants homosexual marriage, it couldn't care less. I am just trying to see how marriage is not equal when it applies to everyone equally.
Charles Sands
37129
Same argument was used against interracial marriages... and that was decades ago.
That's odd. I don't see how my argument could be used against interratial marriages. As far as all of the 1000s of "rights" they don't have, they do, IF THEY MARRY THE OPPOSITE SEX. Again, still equal.
In our nation, we have laws that say and man can marry and women and that a woman can marry a man. Since these apply to everyone, how is it not equal? I know you will say that this person or that person does not want to marry and man or a women, they want to marry a person of the same sex. In most areas, you can't do that. The law is concerned with equal application, not equal outcome.
In Saudi Arabia, there are laws that say that anyone can worship, just as long as they follow Islam. The Christians might feel they're being discriminated against, but the laws apply to everyone, how is that not equal?
That's odd. I don't see how my argument could be used against interratial marriages. As far as all of the 1000s of "rights" they don't have, they do, IF THEY MARRY THE OPPOSITE SEX. Again, still equal.
The argument was that it wasn't discrimination since it applied to both races equally and was therefore equality under the law. Feel free to look it up, but gay marriage isn't going anywhere.
Gays have the right to be married as long as it is to the opposite sex.
Black men have the right to get married as long as it is to a black woman.
White women have the right to get married as long as it is to a white man.
Black women have the right to get married as long as it is to a black man.
White men have the right to get married as long as it is to a white woman.
In Saudi Arabia, there are laws that say that anyone can worship, just as long as they follow Islam. The Christians might feel they're being discriminated against, but the laws apply to everyone, how is that not equal?
I wasn't aware Saudi Arabia was a democracy. What do their laws have to do with ours? They never claimed to be a free country or to grant their citizens justice or equality or the right to pursue happiness. We did.
As far as the laws of Islam for Christains in SA, it IS equal. Its their country, and they can make what laws the systems allows them to make. As far as the "interratial marriages" statement are concerned, if a man and woman can marry, I don't see what the race matters. ...but tell me the flaw in my logic about homosexual marriage. Perhaps I am missing something.
Charles Sands
37129
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.
