mattskramer
Senior Member
Just because YOU want homosexuals to ruin the institute of marraige doesn't mean your right either,AND in a democracy where the majority rules, guess what?
I do not want marriage to be ruined. Homosexuals do not want marriage to be ruined. Allowing for homosexual marriage will not ruin marriage any more than allowing people to eat chocolate ice cream ruins ice cream. I am happily married. Allowing for gay marriage will not cause me to divorce my wife to get married to a man. How absurd can you be? In addition, I know that we live in a democracy where, to a strong extent, majority rules. I also prefer our political system. At the same time, just because something is not popular does not make it wrong. Something is not right just because most people think that it is right. Clinton won popular vote twice. Was he better than Bush Sr.?
The only places that have allowed it are by court decrees from activist Judges removing the right of the legislature to well legislate. And your all for denying the majority the right to decide.
No. Elected officials are allowing for civil unions essentially granting homosexual couples the same rights and responsibilities that heterosexual couples enjoy.
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070426/REPOSITORY/70426002/1030
A bill authorizing civil unions for gays cleared its last hurdle today in New Hampshire, the first state to embrace same-sex unions without a court order or the threat of one.
http://hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section...EMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm
Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nations largest gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender civil rights organization, issued the following statement regarding New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzines signing of a civil unions bill into law today.
http://hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section...EMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm
Connecticut was the first state to establish civil unions voluntarily, without having been ordered to do so by a court.
Once again, Homosexuals have the ability to duplicate all but a few of the "perks" of a "marriage" and some people claim those perks aren't even perks.
No. There is a long list of benefits that government provides for married couples. Gay couples should not have to jump through extra hoops to receive these perks.
http://gaylife.about.com/od/samesexmarriage/a/benefits.htm
According to a report given to the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. General Accounting Office, here are a few of the 1,049 benefits the United States government provides to legally married couples:
Access to Military Stores
Assumption of Spouses Pension
Bereavement Leave
Immigration
Insurance Breaks
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Social Security Survivor Benefits
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Tax Breaks
Veterans Discounts
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison
Here are a few of the state level benefits within the United States:
Assumption of Spouses Pension
Automatic Inheritance
Automatic Housing Lease Transfer
Bereavement Leave
Burial Determination
Child Custody
Crime Victims Recovery Benefits
Divorce Protections
Domestic Violence Protection
Exemption from Property Tax on Partners Death
Immunity from Testifying Against Spouse
Insurance Breaks
Joint Adoption and Foster Care
Joint Bankruptcy
Joint Parenting (Insurance Coverage, School Records)
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner
Certain Property Rights
Reduced Rate Memberships
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Visitation of Partners Children
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison
Wrongful Death (Loss of Consort) Benefits
More importantly this thread and that article claim Homosexuals have no legal recourse in a slew of issues, which is simply NOT true.
Homosexual couples have legal recourse. Yet they should not have to put up with such trouble. It is true that without granting, at least, civil unions for gay couples, homosexual couples will have to continue jumping through extra hoops that married heterosexuals need not jump through. Consider Intestacy. In marriage, when a partner dies intestate, the other partner receives a large sum of the deceased partners estate. When a homosexual partner dies without a will, the other partner might receive nothing.
Homosexuals don't want "equal" they want "special privaleges" as can be seen by the attempts to give them special status for years now.
That is a typical generalization. Some members within any group will want more than will other members within the group. From what I have seen, I think that most gays merely want marriage or at least civil union status, so that they can get benefits as easily as to heterosexual couples.
Whats next? The right to marry your dog?
First of all, just like a child cant give informed consent to get married and understand/receive the benefits of marriage as I listed above, a dog cant give informed consent either.
Secondly, Do you think that people should be allowed to smoke cigarettes? What next marijuana or cocaine? There is moderation in so many things. It comes down to where to draw the line. The domino effect does not always occur. It did not happen in Vietnam (Not all Asian countries are Communist.) and it is unlikely to happen with respect to gay marriage. I doubt that allowing civil unions for gay couples will culminate in people wanting to get married to cockroaches.