Is gay marriage the most important issue in the USA?

[Pop23]

It's fun to watch the circular firing squad that is the GOP.

Meanwhile...when one of the two political parties wants to deny Americans who have violated no specific law of their rights, this is a large issue. Would the right wing idiot who started this thread feel the same way if his party wanted to deny blacks the chance to raise children, get married, enjoy survivor benefits, or even freaking visit one another in the hospital if they got sick...in other words, if it were based on skin color you may (or may not) find abhorrent is it any different than behavior you may (or may not) find abhorrent? If so...tell us how.

Ever heard of wills and powers of attorney?

Ever heard of wanting to hold the hand of your loved one as they are in pain?

YES.

I can't go into the hospital and do that with anybody I claim to love.

No you can't.

In the event of a catastrophic illness/accident, and in the absence of a medical directive from the individual (which for young people probably isn't in place in the case of accidents) - you need to be an immediate family member to go into ICU. Civil Marriage establishes a legal family member status.

Just walking up the reception desk in the hospital, saying "I'm Pop23 and I live John Doe (or Jane Doe) and I want access to his (her) room cause I love him" ain't going to hack it.


>>>>

Are medical directives impossible to obtain?

 

[Pop23]

Nope, its you on the left who have redefined it. Do you think two gay men living together is not a "living arrangement" ? Now, when does the arrangement become a marriage in your small mind?

Incorrect again you lying piece of shit. I'm on the right. I'm more conservative than you are.

All marriages may or may not include a living arrangement, as is taking a dog home from the pound. Marriage is not "just" a living arrangement. OMFG you don't know what a marriage is? WTF is wrong with you?

Oh no, same sex siblings have been my concern from the start, if we could discuss that, then we could still down, but regardless, same sex siblings is an incestuous relationship, only when sex is involved (in the classical sense).

You then assume that all such relationships would be based on other than love or financial benefit.

I pointed out that duress cannot be a part of a valid contract.

You however want to butt into their business and additionally want the government in their business.

Why now? It may be too late.

Pointing out that I'm correct in so far as duress not being part of a valid contract, is agreeing with argument (2) not disagreeing with argument (2).

I don't want to "butt" into anyone's business. I'm answering your question, which is what is the government interest.

Why now, what? You are the one asking for same sex marriages for sisters and brothers. You and the other people crying in your milk about gays getting the right to marry.

You seem to agree then, that same sex siblings cam marry thanks, since shotgun weddings are illegal.

Why do you feel you have the right to question a couples motivation to marry?

They must attest that they FREELY wish to join. I know "join" has a different meaning now, but joining because you simply want the financial benefit of such unions today seems to be acceptable.

In the good old days, those doing that were considered gold diggers, today?

Not so much.

Incorrect. As hundreds of people, including me, have told you. Incest is illegal. Thus, because it's illegal siblings can't marry. It does not matter whether they are sisters or brothers or parents and children.

Shot gun weddings have nothing to do with gay weddings or incest. That is nothing but another deflection of yours.

Why make up so many GD LIES? Not only did I never say I feel that I "have the right to question a couples motivation to marry?" I said THE OPPOSITE ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS. You are just making shit up.

You say, "They must attest that they FREELY wish to join. I know "join" has a different meaning now, but joining because you simply want the financial benefit of such unions today seems to be acceptable." This is just another deflection of yours, now to financial benefits of marriage. Your arguments are ludicrous. There has never been a law against there being a financial benefit of getting married. Just because gays are getting married it's all about the money? Is that why you got married for the money? If not why do you insist gays are just wanting to get married for the money?

People who get married for money are gold diggers. People who get tax breaks when married are married citizens. Getting a tax break is not gold digging.

Last sentence.

What is the governments compelling interest in denying same sex siblings the right to those tax benefits.

That is your affirmation to prove, no one else.

They seem to fall right in line with those that you claim for SSM.

 

[Pop23]

It's fun to watch the circular firing squad that is the GOP.

Meanwhile...when one of the two political parties wants to deny Americans who have violated no specific law of their rights, this is a large issue. Would the right wing idiot who started this thread feel the same way if his party wanted to deny blacks the chance to raise children, get married, enjoy survivor benefits, or even freaking visit one another in the hospital if they got sick...in other words, if it were based on skin color you may (or may not) find abhorrent is it any different than behavior you may (or may not) find abhorrent? If so...tell us how.

Ever heard of wills and powers of attorney?

Ever heard of wanting to hold the hand of your loved one as they are in pain?

YES.

I can't go into the hospital and do that with anybody I claim to love.

Actually you cannot if the doctor orders otherwise.

Actually I can't with most people I love.

 

[candycorn]

It's fun to watch the circular firing squad that is the GOP.

Meanwhile...when one of the two political parties wants to deny Americans who have violated no specific law of their rights, this is a large issue. Would the right wing idiot who started this thread feel the same way if his party wanted to deny blacks the chance to raise children, get married, enjoy survivor benefits, or even freaking visit one another in the hospital if they got sick...in other words, if it were based on skin color you may (or may not) find abhorrent is it any different than behavior you may (or may not) find abhorrent? If so...tell us how.

Ever heard of wills and powers of attorney?

Ever heard of wanting to hold the hand of your loved one as they are in pain?

YES.

I can't go into the hospital and do that with anybody I claim to love.

Actually you cannot if the doctor orders otherwise.

Actually I can't with most people I love.

You lost me.

 

[Pop23]

Ever heard of wills and powers of attorney?

Ever heard of wanting to hold the hand of your loved one as they are in pain?

YES.

I can't go into the hospital and do that with anybody I claim to love.

Actually you cannot if the doctor orders otherwise.

Actually I can't with most people I love.

You lost me.

I love a lotttttt of people. And yes, they allllll love me back

 

[candycorn]

Ever heard of wanting to hold the hand of your loved one as they are in pain?

YES.

I can't go into the hospital and do that with anybody I claim to love.

Actually you cannot if the doctor orders otherwise.

Actually I can't with most people I love.

You lost me.

I love a lotttttt of people. And yes, they allllll love me back

I wouldn't be surprised by that.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Are medical directives impossible to obtain?

Who said anything about being "impossible". You claimed you would walk up and gain access to a patients room by claiming that you loved him or her - you were wrong.

You trying to move the goalposts now?

A Civilly Married couple establishes a next-of-kin relationship by default, they don't have to get a special medical directive. In every state I can think of the spouse is the first next-of-kin for medical decisions involving critically ill patients that may not be able to communicate with medical staff.


>>>>

 

[RKMBrown]

Admitting defeat?

Me? You just said anything illegal MUST stay illegal.

You're an idiot for admitting you lost all ability to actually think!

You: it's illegal, that's why.......

Good lord, cal the USSC and tell them to go home cud RK says their wasting their time.

Liar. I did not say "anything illegal MUST stay illegal." Why do you keep making up dumb ass lies out of left field?

I'm not the idiot in this conversation.

Yes, incest is illegal.

AS IS SAME SEX MARRIAGE DUMBASS.

Incorrect, same sex marriage is not illegal, not in all states. Why are you making shit up? Please cite federal law banning same sex marriage.

You do realize it's before the USSC right

Of course I do. You do realize why it's before the USSC right? You think the SC is weighing on legality of same sex marriage? heh.. no it's not. What they are weighing in on is the constitutionality of states banning SSM. There is no federal law banning same sex marriage.

 

[Pop23]

Are medical directives impossible to obtain?

Who said anything about being "impossible". You claimed you would walk up and gain access to a patients room by claiming that you loved him or her - you were wrong.

You trying to move the goalposts now?

A Civilly Married couple establishes a next-of-kin relationship by default, they don't have to get a special medical directive. In every state I can think of the spouse is the first next-of-kin for medical decisions involving critically ill patients that may not be able to communicate with medical staff.


>>>>

I actually said the opposite. Actually I said i can't with most people I love.

Now, are they impossible to get.

 

[Pop23]

Me? You just said anything illegal MUST stay illegal.

You're an idiot for admitting you lost all ability to actually think!

You: it's illegal, that's why.......

Good lord, cal the USSC and tell them to go home cud RK says their wasting their time.

Liar. I did not say "anything illegal MUST stay illegal." Why do you keep making up dumb ass lies out of left field?

I'm not the idiot in this conversation.

Yes, incest is illegal.

AS IS SAME SEX MARRIAGE DUMBASS.

Incorrect, same sex marriage is not illegal, not in all states. Why are you making shit up? Please cite federal law banning same sex marriage.

You do realize it's before the USSC right

Of course I do. You do realize why it's before the USSC right? You think the SC is weighing on legality of same sex marriage? heh.. no it's not. What they are weighing in on is the constitutionality of states banning SSM. There is no federal law banning same sex marriage.

And banned means?

 

[WorldWatcher]

I actually said the opposite. Actually I said i can't with most people I love.

You are correct, I missed the "n't".

Now, are they impossible to get.

Of course they are not impossible.

That's an irrelevant question though since default medical authority over medical decisions for a spouse is inherent in Civil Marriage in every state. The spouse is the legal next-of-kin in the event of an accident or medical catastrophe rendering a person unable to communicate their medical wishes to the doctors.

Civilly Married spouses don't need a medical directive.


>>>>

 

[Pop23]

I actually said the opposite. Actually I said i can't with most people I love.

You are correct, I missed the "n't".

Now, are they impossible to get.

Of course they are not impossible.

That's an irrelevant question though since default medical authority over medical decisions for a spouse is inherent in Civil Marriage in every state. The spouse is the legal next-of-kin in the event of an accident or medical catastrophe rendering a person unable to communicate their medical wishes to the doctors.


>>>>

We should create a law then.

You realize a marriage license isn't free. There is a cost involved in everything.

Not making lite of the argument. But it's not a difficult fix.

 

[Pop23]

I actually said the opposite. Actually I said i can't with most people I love.

You are correct, I missed the "n't".

Now, are they impossible to get.

Of course they are not impossible.

That's an irrelevant question though since default medical authority over medical decisions for a spouse is inherent in Civil Marriage in every state. The spouse is the legal next-of-kin in the event of an accident or medical catastrophe rendering a person unable to communicate their medical wishes to the doctors.


>>>>

We should create a law then.

You realize a marriage license isn't free. There is a cost involved in everything.

Not making lite of the argument. But it's not a difficult fix.

Oh, and I guess that' makes us even on the mis quotes.

 

[Londoner]

The biggest threat to traditional marriage is not gays but a divorce rate of over 50%.

If marriage is so sacred, why did the father of modern conservatism, Ronald Reagan, get divorced?

Conservatives have no problem making sacred marriage promises in a church before Jesus... "Until death do us part", and then tearing up that supposedly sacred contract like it was a fucking grocery store receipt.

Fucking morons.

(The government's job is merely to hand out contracts to consenting adults. Just because a gay couple has a stupid fucking government contract, it doesn't make your marriage any less sacred. You morons are giving too much power to Big Government, which should only be providing a minimalist stipulation of rights/obligations.

Only conservatives would believe that government can make something like marriage sacred. They don't understand that it is only the individual couple who can make marriage sacred.)

If you are letting your marriage be destroyed by the fact that two gay people have a stupid fucking legal contract, than you are turning to the wrong God for meaning.

(Wow, just wow. When are Republicans going to stop being such easy dupes for their cynical leadership, who are always trying to scare them into the voting booth with images of gay, terrorist, commie, islamo blah blah. It's just a silly wedge issue that plays with morons.)

 

[WorldWatcher]

Oh, and I guess that' makes us even on the mis quotes.

And we both acknowledged the error. That's the way it should work.

>>>>

 

[Pop23]

The biggest threat to traditional marriage is not gays but a divorce rate of over 50%.

If marriage is so sacred, why did the father of modern conservatism, Ronald Reagan, get divorced?

Conservatives have no problem making sacred marriage promises in a church before Jesus... "Until death do us part", and then tearing up that supposedly sacred contract like it was a fucking grocery store receipt.

Fucking morons.

(The government's job is merely to hand out contracts to consenting adults. Just because a gay couple has a stupid fucking government contract, it doesn't make your marriage any less sacred. You morons are giving too much power to Big Government, which should only be providing a minimalist stipulation of rights/obligations.

Only conservatives would believe that government can make something like marriage sacred. They don't understand that it is only the individual couple who can make marriage sacred.)

If you are letting your marriage be destroyed by the fact that two gay people have a stupid fucking legal contract, than you are turning to the wrong God for meaning.

(Wow, just wow. When are Republicans going to stop being such easy dupes for their cynical leadership, who are always trying to scare them into the voting booth with images of gay, terrorist, commie, islamo blah blah. It's just a silly wedge issue that plays with morons.)

Who the hell you addressing?

 

[WorldWatcher]

We should create a law then.

Make what law?

Make spouses the legal next-of-kin? Don’t need one Civil Marriage already does that.

Or do you mean make more laws and bigger government by requiring every adult over the age of 18 is mandated by law to have on file with the country clerk a notarized medical directive on file?

You realize a marriage license isn't free. There is a cost involved in everything.

Didn’t say anything about cost, I said Civil Marriage provides for emergency medical decision making power by the spouse by default.

Spouses don’t have to jump through additional hoops.

Not making lite of the argument. But it's not a difficult fix.

You are right, same-sex Civil Marriage fixes it just fine.



>>>>

 

[Pop23]

We should create a law then.

Make what law?

Make spouses the legal next-of-kin? Don’t need one Civil Marriage already does that.

Or do you mean make more laws and bigger government by requiring every adult over the age of 18 is mandated by law to have on file with the country clerk a notarized medical directive on file?

You realize a marriage license isn't free. There is a cost involved in everything.

Didn’t say anything about cost, I said Civil Marriage provides for emergency medical decision making power by the spouse by default.

Spouses don’t have to jump through additional hoops.

Not making lite of the argument. But it's not a difficult fix.

You are right, same-sex Civil Marriage fixes it just fine.



>>>>

It also opens the door to same sex sibling marriage. How many laws new laws will be needed then?

 

[Pop23]

We should create a law then.

Make what law?

Make spouses the legal next-of-kin? Don’t need one Civil Marriage already does that.

Or do you mean make more laws and bigger government by requiring every adult over the age of 18 is mandated by law to have on file with the country clerk a notarized medical directive on file?

You realize a marriage license isn't free. There is a cost involved in everything.

Didn’t say anything about cost, I said Civil Marriage provides for emergency medical decision making power by the spouse by default.

Spouses don’t have to jump through additional hoops.

Not making lite of the argument. But it's not a difficult fix.

You are right, same-sex Civil Marriage fixes it just fine.



>>>>

that is the same right to establish a "legal next of kin" as for millions of unmarried people.

Or

That I'm advocating everybody MUST establish same.

I don't. And I don't care if anyone opts out of establishing same, just like I don't care if one opts out of male/female marriage.

Neither is my business

I edited the above to more accurately reflect the conversation.

 

[Redfish]

Bullshit, if the SC rules that gay marriage is to be sanctioned in every state, that ruling would set a valid legal precedent for all forms of marriage.

For you information, the ACLU is already working on taking polygamy to the SC using gay marriage as precedent.

You, my friend, know nothing about how our legal system works.

Bullshit. Apparently, I know a helluva lot more about our legal system than you do. Anyone can make any argument, that does not mean the court will hear or agree with their argument.

Reasons for approving gay marriage:
equality
freedom to marry who you love
fairness
discrimination

those exact same arguments can, and will, be made for all forms of marriage, using gay marriage as a valid binding legal precedent.
.

Reasons for approving mixed race marraige
equality
freedom to marry who you love
fairness
discrimination

those exact same arguments can, and will be made for all forms of marriage, using mixed race marriage as a valid binding legal precedent.

If the courts allow mixed race marriages- then the court is opening the door to incest.......

(paraphrasing the arguments of the State of Virginia- 1967)

race and sexual orientation are not analogous.

Of course you don't like your 'logic' turned against you- but if 'gay marriage' is a legally binding precedent(which it isn't) then mixed race marriage would be also(which it isn't)

Reasons for approving gay marriage:
equality
freedom to marry who you love
fairness
discrimination

those exact same arguments can, and will, be made for all forms of marriage, using gay marriage as a valid binding legal precedent.

Reasons for approving mixed race marraige
equality
freedom to marry who you love
fairness
discrimination

those exact same arguments can, and will be made for all forms of marriage, using mixed race marriage as a valid binding legal precedent.

If the courts allow mixed race marriages- then the court is opening the door to incest.......

(paraphrasing the arguments of the State of Virginia- 1967)

total horseshit.

interracial marriage, and all the court cases on it, involve opposite sex couples. Its not the same as SSM

But you have yet to tell us why you would prohibit same sex sibling marriage. You say incest, but is it incest if sisters or brothers marry for financial reasons? Does a marriage require sexual activity? If so, who peeks in the windows to see if the "married" people are having sex?

SSM will lead to SSSM. Legally and logically. It will happen.