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.
To you it is a sin, but sin is relative to YOUR religion and not to law and your christian beliefs and church do not dictate law or what is or is not sin. Others have been told this over and over, in every state that bans marriage for homosexuals, they also ban civil unions or domestic partnerships, so why even put civl unions on the table when all that is is a ruse. You do not really want us to have access to any rights associated with marriage. And the will of the people is not to be used to dictate what rights any individual, group or minority can have. That would be tyranny of the majority and the free USA does not work in a tyranny or a theocracy.
Not to mention, the "will of the people" has changed. Today, a majority of Americans support SS marriage. The problem was that the now minority was using every tool it could to continue fighting SS marriage. And they're still fighting it... Ted Cruz screaming that he's going to amend the U.S. constitution to take away marriage rights from gay Americans
Not to mention, the "will of the people" has changed. Today, a majority of Americans support SS marriage. The problem was that the now minority was using every tool it could to continue fighting SS marriage. And they're still fighting it... Ted Cruz screaming that he's going to amend the U.S. constitution to take away marriage rights from gay Americans
That's such a d*ck move. Why are conservatives just so mean-spirited?
I have to believe that there are many republicans who are secretly relieved at this. It's now out of their hands, for all intents and purposes. Sure, you're gonna get boneheads like Carnival Cruz still talking about amendments and such, but for those of us who don't sniff paint thinner, it's over. And that effectively nullifies it as a political issue.
Tillis brought it up in the debate last night with Hagan saying he will fight to uphold the North Carolina law. Granted part of that might be an effort to get conservatives to the polls in a race he is trailing in, but he went hard against the Supreme Court's decision.
So when gays get divorced... who is entitled to 50% of the others possessions, alimony, custody preferences given, etc. like states have with hetero marriages?
So when gays get divorced... who is entitled to 50% of the others possessions, alimony, custody preferences given, etc. like states have with hetero marriages?
It's up to the judges and lawyers like it always is.
So when gays get divorced... who is entitled to 50% of the others possessions, alimony, custody preferences given, etc. like states have with hetero marriages?
I guess because the courts tend to favor the woman/wife.
They shouldn't. Rather, the courts often do and should favor the predominant custodial parent, whoever that would be, and do and should factor in the difference in earning potential between the partners.
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.
