Marriage Matters: Consequences of Redefining Marriage

[WorldWatcher]

I am old fashioned and believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

However, I am not going to judge someone if their preference of loving someone is that of the same sex, so they should have legal rights similar to that of married couples, so Civil Unions should be made legally available for them.

I'm old fashioned, I think voting should be reserved for landowning white males.

I think we should have the exact same rights so if you don't want us to have civil marriage, take it out of the equation for everyone. Separate but equal isn't going to fly.

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay,

Incorrect, she doesn't want tax breaks for being gay. She wants the tax breaks for being Civilly Married (which she is) just like different sex Civilly Married couples.

if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay,

Incorrect, she doesn't want to be able to leave property to her spouse for being gay. She wants to be able to transfer property for being Civilly Married (which she is) just like different sex Civilly Married couples.

if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

Incorrect, she doesn't want to be able to get a pension for being gay. She wants to be able to leave her pension to her spouse for being Civilly Married (which she is) just like different sex Civilly Married couples.

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life.

So different-sex couples only get married for tax breaks, property transfer, and pensions and they should just have a ceremony and be happy in life without trying to legally protect their property also right?

The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

So when a different sex couple gets Civilly Married they are inviding the government into their bed so they can fuck the system out of every penny.

Got it.



>>>>

 

[jgarden]

Good article....

Why Marriage Matters: Consequences of Redefining Marriage

The reality is that the definition of marriage is constantly "evolving."

In many parts of the world, marriages are still "arranged" with the very best of intensions, to ensure that women will continue to be looked after when they were no longer under the protection of their father.

In the Old Testament, if one brother died another male relative was obligated to marry his wife, based on the premise that it was extremely difficult for an unmarried woman to survive in a traditional society.

 

[Redfish]

I'm old fashioned, I think voting should be reserved for landowning white males.

I think we should have the exact same rights so if you don't want us to have civil marriage, take it out of the equation for everyone. Separate but equal isn't going to fly.

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay, if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay, if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life. The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay, if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay, if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life. The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

Social Security does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Inheritance Tax exemptions does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Estate Tax law does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Military Survivor Benefit Plan (which is basically live insurance with premimums paid by the retiree) is only available to Civil Marriage spouses, it does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.



>>>>

 

[dilloduck]

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

Social Security does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Inheritance Tax exemptions does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Estate Tax law does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Military Survivor Benefit Plan (which is basically live insurance with premimums paid by the retiree) is only available to Civil Marriage spouses, it does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.



>>>>

Those are the issues that should be addressed instead of attempting to change the definition of marriage.

 

[WorldWatcher]

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

Social Security does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Inheritance Tax exemptions does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Estate Tax law does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Military Survivor Benefit Plan (which is basically live insurance with premimums paid by the retiree) is only available to Civil Marriage spouses, it does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.



>>>>

Those are the issues that should be addressed instead of attempting to change the definition of marriage.

Then write your congressman & senator and have them introduce legislation that would: (A) repeal DOMA Section 3, and (B) recognize - for federal purposes - all Civil Marriage and Civil Unions entered into under state law as equally valid under federal law.

Then it is up to what the state calls it.


>>>>

 

[Seawytch]

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

Social Security does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Inheritance Tax exemptions does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Federal Estate Tax law does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.

Military Survivor Benefit Plan (which is basically live insurance with premimums paid by the retiree) is only available to Civil Marriage spouses, it does not recognize Civil Unions for benefit sharing of a deceased union partner.



>>>>

Those are the issues that should be addressed instead of attempting to change the definition of marriage.

So go ahead, do it.

Name a single state where gays have turned down civil unions. (We'll still fight against separate but equal though)

 

[Nosmo King]

Does it come down to semantics? Those fearing marriage equality are hung up on them. Changing the definition of marriage is the last bastion of the homophobe. What possible harm will befall existing marriages once the nation accepts marriage equality? Will marriages be dissolved due to accepting same sex couples as legally married?

There's no danger in tolerance. The real crime is the continued intolerance, as usual, from Social Conservatives who insist on their Biblical interpretation as secular law.

 

[Luissa]

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay, if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay, if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life. The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

No it doesn't.

 

[Murhy]

No, children don't "need" a mother or a father. Children need parents that love them unconditionally.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage

To be fair, children quite literally NEED a mother and father. If they didn't have them both....they wouldn't exist. Genetics must be a Republican.

 

[Seawytch]

No, children don't "need" a mother or a father. Children need parents that love them unconditionally.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage

To be fair, children quite literally NEED a mother and father. If they didn't have them both....they wouldn't exist. Genetics must be a Republican.

Sperm egg and oven. None of those are what makes someone a parent.

 

[Seawytch]

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay, if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay, if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life. The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

Fishy! I didn't see you there. Didn't you already leave this thread "for the last time" a few times now?

You've already been proven wrong on this issue. It's about a word for you, equality for me.

 

[P@triot]

No, children don't "need" a mother or a father. Children need parents that love them unconditionally.

Children in gay adoptions at no disadvantage

To be fair, children quite literally NEED a mother and father. If they didn't have them both....they wouldn't exist. Genetics must be a Republican.

Sperm egg and oven. None of those are what makes someone a parent.

No - but it is what makes a baby. And there is a reason for that (even if you can't bring yourself to admit it).

 

[P@triot]

I'm old fashioned, I think voting should be reserved for landowning white males.

I think we should have the exact same rights so if you don't want us to have civil marriage, take it out of the equation for everyone. Separate but equal isn't going to fly.

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay, if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay, if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life. The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

I didn't "demand" that the government do shit, nor would I ever. If the government didnt recognize my heterosexual marriage, I still would have held a ceremony with my wife and gone about my life.

And thank you for admitting that it's ALL about bilking the system for benefits. It's the first honest thing you've ever said on USMB.

Just a quick suggestion though - go buy a life insurance policy. It's a lot easier (and cheaper) than trying to force the entire nation to bow to your absurdity. I know the thought of doing something yourself, or - God forbid - paying for your own needs instead of having the government do it for you is a horrific thought for the parasites that are libtards, but, get over it already.

 

[P@triot]

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

A civil union gets you all the benefits that you want. This is not about equal benefits, its about forcing the rest of us to call your gay union a marriage-------thats all this has ever been about, and you know it.

Fishy! I didn't see you there. Didn't you already leave this thread "for the last time" a few times now?

You've already been proven wrong on this issue. It's about a word for you, equality for me.

Oh for the love of God, would you listen to the DRAMA QUEEN here? Yeah, you're soooooo oppressed Wytchey. No "equality" for you, uh? You're not allowed to eat at straight restaraunts, drink from straight water fountains, or stay at straight hotels, uh?

I haven't met a libtard yet that gives a fuck about "rights" or freedom. They would trade both for the most trivial of government table scraps. The greedy parasite libtard is only concerned with what they can bilk Uncle Sam out of - and that's exactly what SW is concerned with on this issue.

 

[OnePercenter]

The only Consequences of Redefining Marriage I can see is pissing off homophobs.....so there really isn't a downside.

 

[Seawytch]

To be fair, children quite literally NEED a mother and father. If they didn't have them both....they wouldn't exist. Genetics must be a Republican.

Sperm egg and oven. None of those are what makes someone a parent.

No - but it is what makes a baby. And there is a reason for that (even if you can't bring yourself to admit it).

No, I just described what makes a baby. It's what comes afterwards that matters...and what makes a parent.

 

[Seawytch]

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay, if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay, if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life. The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

Wrong, Puppy. I want my partner to get MY benefits. She should get my military pension and my SS when I die, just like your legal spouse gets. (Except maybe the military pension part. Do you get one of those?)

Is that what you did, Puppy, just hold a ceremony or did you demand the government climb into your bed?

I didn't "demand" that the government do shit, nor would I ever. If the government didnt recognize my heterosexual marriage, I still would have held a ceremony with my wife and gone about my life.

And thank you for admitting that it's ALL about bilking the system for benefits. It's the first honest thing you've ever said on USMB.

Just a quick suggestion though - go buy a life insurance policy. It's a lot easier (and cheaper) than trying to force the entire nation to bow to your absurdity. I know the thought of doing something yourself, or - God forbid - paying for your own needs instead of having the government do it for you is a horrific thought for the parasites that are libtards, but, get over it already.

No puppy, it's not about "bilking the system". It's about getting the same protections for my family that you have for yours.

 

[OnePercenter]

I say again. The only Consequences of Redefining Marriage I can see is pissing off homophobs.....so there really isn't a downside.

 

[sfcalifornia]

I am old fashioned and believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

However, I am not going to judge someone if their preference of loving someone is that of the same sex, so they should have legal rights similar to that of married couples, so Civil Unions should be made legally available for them.

I'm old fashioned, I think voting should be reserved for landowning white males.

I think we should have the exact same rights so if you don't want us to have civil marriage, take it out of the equation for everyone. Separate but equal isn't going to fly.

You have to remember Jackson - Seawytch here is a libtard. Which means she is furious if she can't bilk the U.S. government for all it is worth. If she can't get tax breaks for being gay, if she can't get free property and money left in wills for being gay, if she can't get her greedy little hands on another gay persons pension, then she is being "oppressed"...

If you cared about someone, you would just hold a ceremony and be happy in life. The fact that the gay libtard feels they need to demand that government climb into their gay bed with them and recognize their gayness is indisputable glaring evidence that it's all about fucking the system for every penny.

If you're so pissed off that the government offers benefits to married couples then exactly which laws would you be willing to live without? You do realize every government benefit granted to married couples is put in place to legally protect YOU both financially and custodial and especially in the event of death or divorce of your spouse?

Marriage might be all lovey-dovey and spiritual at first but after awhile, reality sets in. Why shouldn't gay individuals be granted those same protections and regulations when they get married?