Whatever ever happened to the little sign ‘We have a right to refuse service’?

[Kondor3]

You know what....you are right on that last point. I must apologize. You are obviously not an idiot. But...you have some kind of flaw that permits you to buy into such nonsense in spite of your intelligence. Not sure what that is. Wish I knew.

Well, thank you for that much, anyway. I will confess to great surprise at such an honest and open undertaking, and also apologize, in turn, for some of what I've said this morning, without impairing our adversarial roles and behaviors. Much obliged.

If it's any consolation, we both see 'flaws' in the others' personalities and/or behaviors or arguments, and are irreconcilable on this issue. On my end, I assure you that I hold very little - perhaps even no - personal animosity directed towards homosexuals. It is merely that I hold a much more traditional and conservative and negative and visceral perception of that mode of behavior and the risks attendant with legitimizing it.

Rightly or wrongly, I believe it to be dangerous, and a shameful turn of events for our Nation and its People.

I suspect that you'll come around in time. You could speed that up by making a list of all of the people in your life....past and present.....who you love dearly and respect unconditionally.

Then consider that 1-3% of them ( your numbers) are homosexual. Finally, imagine how much you'd hurt them if you read this thread to them.

Yes. I suspect that you will end up having a change of heart.

I have spent years working as a technology support manager in a couple of well-known charities or nonprofit social services settings.

These work-environments draw a highly-disproportionate share of Liberal folk, including a disproportionate percentage of homosexual folk.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the most dissipated and vicious attack-dogs that it has ever been my displeasure to associate with.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the gentlest and kindest and most loving and caring folk that it has ever been my great pleasure and honor to associate with.

Within the realm of the latter, I count several of these as Lifelong Casual Friends and Good Acquaintances, and I care very much about their quality of life.

I have had fairly deep Adversarial Role -caliber conversations with a half-dozen or more of these in recent years.

My position caused me to lose the goodwill of one, and that bothered me greatly, although it did not alter my own personal sense of Right and Wrong.

As for the others... my position triggers some understandable sadness on their part, and is perceived as a 'flaw' in much the same way that I view their own sexuality and behaviors as a flaw, but, those others also know me to be a fairly decent fellow, who argues from conviction and sincerity and even logic, and without any particular malice directed at them.

Those good folk continue to count me among their own Lifelong Casual Friends or Good Acquaintances, and I consider myself fortunate for their continued goodwill and even friendship, despite our differences in that important regard.

And I am content that it be so.

 

[P@triot]

The gay community and the liberals have lost their little Nazi minds. A privately owned business has the right to refuse to conduct business with anybody they want. Period. It's not even open for debate.

Further still, the 1st Amendment affords you the right to practice your religious belief. And the little liberal/gay Nazi community is working so hard to trample on that right as well.

All I can say is that I hope these companies deliver the most dreadful products and services when they are unconstitutionally forced to by the liberal Nazi's. If you're a bakery and you're forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding, I hope you put 70lbs of salt in the cake and make the frosting primarily out of vinegar so that they vomit when they eat it. Then maybe word will spread in their little gay circles that your bakery isn't any good and you can be left the hell alone to conduct your private business as you see fit.

*Note - desperate Nazi liberals will try to spin this as "homophobia" because they need to justify their anti-constitutional Nazi beliefs. However, it is not. I couldn't care less if someone is gay. What I do care about however is when they unconstitutionally force someone to do their bidding because they think being gay makes them special and entitled.

It's an agenda of reeducation

Large amounts of Epsom Salts would be my main ingredient.

I'd give it to them free.


No liability that way.

Well that's exactly why I said salt and vinegar as opposed to putting dirt and mucus in it. You could be brought up on charges for that due to health department codes.

However, there is no liability against making an awful cake with legitimate ingredients in a sanitary environment. You can't help it if you're not a very good baker... (wink, wink).

And then maybe these little Nazi homo's will give you a bad reputation in their circles and you could go about conducting your business as you have the RIGHT to do.

 

[P@triot]

Well, thank you for that much, anyway. I will confess to great surprise at such an honest and open undertaking, and also apologize, in turn, for some of what I've said this morning, without impairing our adversarial roles and behaviors. Much obliged.

If it's any consolation, we both see 'flaws' in the others' personalities and/or behaviors or arguments, and are irreconcilable on this issue. On my end, I assure you that I hold very little - perhaps even no - personal animosity directed towards homosexuals. It is merely that I hold a much more traditional and conservative and negative and visceral perception of that mode of behavior and the risks attendant with legitimizing it.

Rightly or wrongly, I believe it to be dangerous, and a shameful turn of events for our Nation and its People.

I suspect that you'll come around in time. You could speed that up by making a list of all of the people in your life....past and present.....who you love dearly and respect unconditionally.

Then consider that 1-3% of them ( your numbers) are homosexual. Finally, imagine how much you'd hurt them if you read this thread to them.

Yes. I suspect that you will end up having a change of heart.

I have spent years working as a technology support manager in a couple of well-known charities or nonprofit social services settings.

These work-environments draw a highly-disproportionate share of Liberal folk, including a disproportionate percentage of homosexual folk.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the most dissipated and vicious attack-dogs that it has ever been my displeasure to associate with.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the gentlest and kindest and most loving and caring folk that it has ever been my great pleasure and honor to associate with.

Within the realm of the latter, I count several of these as Lifelong Casual Friends and Good Acquaintances, and I care very much about their quality of life.

I have had fairly deep Adversarial Role -caliber conversations with a half-dozen or more of these in recent years.

My position caused me to lose the goodwill of one, and that bothered me greatly, although it did not alter my own personal sense of Right and Wrong.

As for the others... my position triggers some understandable sadness on their part, and is perceived as a 'flaw' in much the same way that I view their own sexuality and behaviors as a flaw, but, those others also know me to be a fairly decent fellow, who argues from conviction and sincerity and even logic, and without any particular malice directed at them.

Those good folk continue to count me among their own Lifelong Casual Friends or Good Acquaintances, and I consider myself fortunate for their continued goodwill and even friendship, despite our differences in that important regard.

And I am content that it be so.

 

[P@triot]

Gee. That's not very kind. Calling those who oppose you.....sheeple. That is so unlike you to throw insults around like that.

1. you have a core of people who are firmly supportive of legitimizing Homosexuality.

2. you have a core of people who are firmly opposed to the legitimizing of Homosexuality.

3. you have a huge mass of people who are fickle and who sway with the latest wind.

Those falling under Category Three are Sheeple.

They don't oppose me (the anti-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They don't oppose you (the pro-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They bend and sway and "trend" with whatever way the wind is blowing.

Oh, and, I'm about as far from being free from the sin of name-calling as one can get.

It's just that I usually reserve that for extremis, rather than as part-and-parcel of my day-to-day interactions.

But, when the mood descends, I can get down and dirty with the best (and worst) of them.

And enjoy myself, and take my lumps, like anybody else.

Maybe you mean those of us who take the live and let live approach. I have known quite a few homosexuals. None of them ever impacted my life in a negative way. Therefore why should I be all upset about what they do in their sexual lives and care about who they love?

What is it that gay sex does to you personally Kondor that hurts you or yours? How does it effect your life in a negative way? Just curious.

If your reasoning is that you hate gay sex cause you hate gay sex, well guess what. That just isn't going to be a good enough reason anymore to deny gays the same rights as non gays.

Gays may not like your sex life either. What you gonna do?

You are the farthest thing from "live and let live". You're a little parasite Nazi who wants to impose his fucked up ideology on humanity.

If you were "live and let live", you would fully support this bakers right to not violate his religious beliefs and personal moral code - and you would tell the gay couple to simply find a bakery which does support their marriage.

That is "live and let live". You, however, are a typical liberal Nazi. Piss on the Constitution and force people into the very fucked up liberal ideology.

 

[Bfgrn]

You're the one who needs an adult to have things explained to you. He's saying that, unlike race, homosexuality is a behavior that has negative consequences for society. Pointing those consequences doesn't make you a racist or someone who wants to commit genocide. Only a sleazy scumbag like you would make such a claim.

He is painting gays with the same ignorant bigoted brush Hitler painted the Jews with. And you are agreeing with him.

Stop freaking out about who says what about homosexuals. That is not the issue here.

The issue is FREEDOM. Nazi liberals do not have the right to force someone into their views. If you want to serve the gay community wedding cakes, then get up off of your lazy ass open up your own fucking bakery. But you have zero right to force someone else who did just that to bend to your will just because you're too lazy to open your own bakery. That is the issue...

Trying to paint people as "homophobes" to justify your Nazi position is pure idiocy. Whether they are or not is not the issue.

Yes, the issue IS FREEDOM. Which of these FREEDOMS would YOU be willing to give up?


Get the Facts! Because, Marriage Matters...
FACT = something that actually exists, reality, truth.

Marriage equality is an issue that often sparks intense emotions, both in those who are working for equality, and in those who oppose it. The institution of marriage is also surrounded by a great deal of assumption and mythology. It behooves us all to Get the Facts before discussing marriage equality. We hope that reading through Get the Facts will prove useful and answer your questions.

Marriage offers many legal benefits and responsibilities that protect families. It also provides societal status and emotional benefits. Here are just a fraction of the reasons why marriage matters to couples who choose/desire to marry.

The Practical

Marriage offers 1,138 Federal benefits and responsibilities, not including hundreds more offered by every state.

• In times of crisis, spouses have hospital visitation rights and can make medical decisions in event of illness or disability of their spouse.

• Employers offer spouses sick leave, bereavement leave, access to health insurance and pension

• The law provides certain automatic rights to a person's spouse regardless of whether or not a will exists.

• Married couples in elderly care facilities are generally not separated unless one spouse's health dictates hospitalization or special care.

• The dissolution of a marriage requires a determination of property distribution, award of child custody and support and spousal support. Absent divorce, there is no uniform system for sorting out the ending of a relationship.

The Financial

Financial issues are complex and challenging, no matter the couple. When home ownership, kids and other assets are a part of the equation, planning for the present and especially the future is even more critical for greater security.

• Married couples are permitted to give an unlimited amount of gifts to each other without being taxed.

• The law presumes that a married couple with both names on the title to their home owns the property as "tenants by the entirety."

• A married couple, by statute, has creditor protection of their marital home.

• Many married people are entitled to financial benefits relating to their spouses, such as disability, pension and social security benefits.

• With marriage, a couple has the right to be treated as an economic unit and to file joint tax returns (and pay the marriage penalty), and obtain joint health, home and auto insurance policies.

• When a spouse dies, there is no need to prove ownership of every item in the household for taxable purposes.

Protecting Children

• A child who grows up with married parents benefits from the fact that his or her parents' relationship is recognized by law and receives legal protections.

• Spouses are generally entitled to joint child custody and visitation upon divorce (and bear an obligation to pay child support).

• The mark of a strong family and healthy children is having parents who are nurturing, caring, and loving. Parents should be judged on their ability to parent, not by their age, race, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity.

A study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, entitled The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children found that:

• Same-gender couples live in 99.3% of all US counties.

• Same-gender couples are raising children in at least 96% of all US counties.

• Nearly one quarter of all same-gender couples are raising children.

• Nationwide, 34.3% of lesbian couples are raising children, and 22.3% of gay male couples are raising children (compared with 45.6% of married heterosexual and 43.1% of unmarried heterosexual couples raising children).

• Vermont has the largest aggregation of same gender-couples (~1% of all households) followed by California, Washington, Massachusetts, and Oregon.

According to this 2006 study Census 2000 and related demographic research make it clear that parenting by same-gender couples is an established and growing part of the diverse structure of families in the United States. Public policies that aim to promote family stability and security typically are established without consideration for same-gender parents and their children, and they place these families at a disadvantage, as they do heterosexual unmarried parents, single parents, and extended-family caregivers. Public policy designed to promote the family as the basic building block of society has at its core the protection of children's health and well-being. Children's well being relies in large part on a complex blend of their own legal rights and the rights derived, under law, from their parents. Children of same-gender parents often experience economic, legal, and familial insecurity as a result of the absence of legal recognition of their bonds to their nonbiological parents. Current public-policy trends, with notable exceptions, favor limiting or prohibiting the availability of civil marriage and limiting rights and protections to same-gender couples.

The Healthy Advantage

Studies show that people who are married tend to live longer and lead healthier lives.

• For adults, a stable, happy marriage is the best protector against illness and premature death. Decades of research have clearly established these links. (Burman & Margolin, 1992; Dawson, 1991; Verbrugge, 1979).

• Studies on marriages have found that married people live longer, have higher incomes and wealth, engage less in risky behaviors, eat healthier, and have fewer psychological problems than unmarried people. (Waite, Linda J. Why Marriage Matters Strengthening Marriage Roundtable. Washington, DC, June 1997)

• Research shows that unmarried couples have lower levels of happiness and well-being than married couples. (Popenoe, David and Dafoe Whitehead, Barbara, USA Today, July, 2000)

• A recent study shows that denying same-sex couples the right to marry has a negative impact on their mental health - I Do, But I can't: The impact of marriage denial on the mental health of sexual citizenship of Lesbians and Gay Men in the United States (Herdt, G. & Kertzner, R. 2006).

 

[Kondor3]

...Maybe you mean those of us who take the live and let live approach...

No. I agree that I should have included a fourth category in that enumeration; the sincere 'live and let live' folks. My bad.

...I have known quite a few homosexuals. None of them ever impacted my life in a negative way. Therefore why should I be all upset about what they do in their sexual lives and care about who they love?...

There is no reason whatsoever why you should be upset over that.

...What is it that gay sex does to you personally Kondor that hurts you or yours? How does it effect your life in a negative way? Just curious...

It is symptomatic of the 'rot' that sets in, when a society is at-risk of losing its compass.

...If your reasoning is that you hate gay sex cause you hate gay sex, well guess what. That just isn't going to be a good enough reason anymore to deny gays the same rights as non gays...

Agreed.

What will be required will be to pitch Homosexuality as dangerous to society at-large.

Using the Law to do it.

Not through Constitutional Amendment.

But through a more traditional and conservative re-interpretation of existing Constitutional Law and related statute and judicial findings, in order to reverse current trends.

...Gays may not like your sex life either. What you gonna do?

Change the way that the Law is interpreted, if practicable.

 

[Bfgrn]

I suspect that you'll come around in time. You could speed that up by making a list of all of the people in your life....past and present.....who you love dearly and respect unconditionally.

Then consider that 1-3% of them ( your numbers) are homosexual. Finally, imagine how much you'd hurt them if you read this thread to them.

Yes. I suspect that you will end up having a change of heart.

I have spent years working as a technology support manager in a couple of well-known charities or nonprofit social services settings.

These work-environments draw a highly-disproportionate share of Liberal folk, including a disproportionate percentage of homosexual folk.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the most dissipated and vicious attack-dogs that it has ever been my displeasure to associate with.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the gentlest and kindest and most loving and caring folk that it has ever been my great pleasure and honor to associate with.

Within the realm of the latter, I count several of these as Lifelong Casual Friends and Good Acquaintances, and I care very much about their quality of life.

I have had fairly deep Adversarial Role -caliber conversations with a half-dozen or more of these in recent years.

My position caused me to lose the goodwill of one, and that bothered me greatly, although it did not alter my own personal sense of Right and Wrong.

As for the others... my position triggers some understandable sadness on their part, and is perceived as a 'flaw' in much the same way that I view their own sexuality and behaviors as a flaw, but, those others also know me to be a fairly decent fellow, who argues from conviction and sincerity and even logic, and without any particular malice directed at them.

Those good folk continue to count me among their own Lifelong Casual Friends or Good Acquaintances, and I consider myself fortunate for their continued goodwill and even friendship, despite our differences in that important regard.

And I am content that it be so.

WOW, you applaud this creeps haughty narcissism?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well, thank you for that much, anyway. I will confess to great surprise at such an honest and open undertaking, and also apologize, in turn, for some of what I've said this morning, without impairing our adversarial roles and behaviors. Much obliged.

If it's any consolation, we both see 'flaws' in the others' personalities and/or behaviors or arguments, and are irreconcilable on this issue. On my end, I assure you that I hold very little - perhaps even no - personal animosity directed towards homosexuals. It is merely that I hold a much more traditional and conservative and negative and visceral perception of that mode of behavior and the risks attendant with legitimizing it.

Rightly or wrongly, I believe it to be dangerous, and a shameful turn of events for our Nation and its People.

I suspect that you'll come around in time. You could speed that up by making a list of all of the people in your life....past and present.....who you love dearly and respect unconditionally.

Then consider that 1-3% of them ( your numbers) are homosexual. Finally, imagine how much you'd hurt them if you read this thread to them.

Yes. I suspect that you will end up having a change of heart.

I have spent years working as a technology support manager in a couple of well-known charities or nonprofit social services settings.

These work-environments draw a highly-disproportionate share of Liberal folk, including a disproportionate percentage of homosexual folk.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the most dissipated and vicious attack-dogs that it has ever been my displeasure to associate with.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the gentlest and kindest and most loving and caring folk that it has ever been my great pleasure and honor to associate with.

Within the realm of the latter, I count several of these as Lifelong Casual Friends and Good Acquaintances, and I care very much about their quality of life.

I have had fairly deep Adversarial Role -caliber conversations with a half-dozen or more of these in recent years.

My position caused me to lose the goodwill of one, and that bothered me greatly, although it did not alter my own personal sense of Right and Wrong.

As for the others... my position triggers some understandable sadness on their part, and is perceived as a 'flaw' in much the same way that I view their own sexuality and behaviors as a flaw, but, those others also know me to be a fairly decent fellow, who argues from conviction and sincerity and even logic, and without any particular malice directed at them.

Those good folk continue to count me among their own Lifelong Casual Friends or Good Acquaintances, and I consider myself fortunate for their continued goodwill and even friendship, despite our differences in that important regard.

And I am content that it be so.

Do they know that you consider them to be the nexus of the downfall of this nation? If they do, they probably think there is some malice directed at them.

I'm confident that you'll see things differently in time.

But.....for now.....revel in the fact the the OP applauds you. That's something.

 

[P@triot]

You are exactly the kind of person the Constitution is designed to protect us from.

On the contrary...

The Constitution is designed to protect The Nation and its People from tyranny...

Forcing the population to legitimize Sexual Perversity against its will is a form of tyranny...

The Constitution is also designed to protect The Nation and its People from the imposition of restrictions on Sexual Perversity without due process of Law...

Opponents of the Legitimizing of Homosexuality seek to use the Law, to reverse the recent and most unfortunate trend toward such legitimizing...

The Constitution does not prohibit Opposition working within The Law...

Not the last time I looked anyway...

Liberals have not yet been able to wreak that degree of havoc upon our Republic...

The People also get to define what is 'sexual perversity'. Not you. Are there enough of 'you' to amend the Constitution to exclude gays from the rights that Americans have under the Constitution?

No, there are not. Democracy wins, and we get treated to the spectacle of you crying about it ad nauseum.

Which is why everyone wins when the cancer known as liberalism ceases to exist. In the world of Constitutional Conservatism, nobody even cares what constitutes "sexual perversity" and thus no one attempts to define it and then vote on it like they do with liberal mob-mentality. And as such, the sexual perverse are free to do their thing (protected by the Constitution) and those that disagree are free to do their thing (protected by the Constitution). Everybody wins as the Constitution intended.

Instead, thanks to liberal cancer such as yourself, we have to fight being forced into that Nazi-like view of "I'm building a superior nation and you must accept my view of it and thus accept my way for those views".

I'm still waiting for a liberal in this thread to give the slightest form of an intelligent answer to the question: why the fuck would you want to patronize someone who doesn't want your business? Why would you want to make them wealthier and more powerful? They will take your money and promote anti-gay laws and anti-gay politicians. Liberals are so fuck'n stupid they actually support causes trying to defeat them out of that ignorant "I'll cut off my nose just to spirt my face" mentality...

 

[Kondor3]

WOW, you applaud this creeps haughty narcissism?

I voluntarily serve-up an honest rendering of my own personal circumstances in this context, as an aid to conversation, when prompted by a curious and sincere adversarial colleague, and find myself pilloried for it? What I volunteered was neither creepy nor narcissistic. It was an open-air information piece, describing my experiences, the outcomes of such discussions with some of my work-environment colleagues over time, and the feedback they gave me. Your personal opinion about the truthfulness or validity of all that is a matter of relative indifference to me.

 

[P@triot]

I have spent years working as a technology support manager in a couple of well-known charities or nonprofit social services settings.

These work-environments draw a highly-disproportionate share of Liberal folk, including a disproportionate percentage of homosexual folk.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the most dissipated and vicious attack-dogs that it has ever been my displeasure to associate with.

Some of those homosexual folk are among the gentlest and kindest and most loving and caring folk that it has ever been my great pleasure and honor to associate with.

Within the realm of the latter, I count several of these as Lifelong Casual Friends and Good Acquaintances, and I care very much about their quality of life.

I have had fairly deep Adversarial Role -caliber conversations with a half-dozen or more of these in recent years.

My position caused me to lose the goodwill of one, and that bothered me greatly, although it did not alter my own personal sense of Right and Wrong.

As for the others... my position triggers some understandable sadness on their part, and is perceived as a 'flaw' in much the same way that I view their own sexuality and behaviors as a flaw, but, those others also know me to be a fairly decent fellow, who argues from conviction and sincerity and even logic, and without any particular malice directed at them.

Those good folk continue to count me among their own Lifelong Casual Friends or Good Acquaintances, and I consider myself fortunate for their continued goodwill and even friendship, despite our differences in that important regard.

And I am content that it be so.

WOW, you applaud this creeps haughty narcissism?

It's "narcissistic" in your mind to engage in dialogue with people who don't agree with you and then form friendships with them despite your differences because you don't feel the need to be a liberal-Nazi and force everyone into your own fucked up ideology? Really?

See the highlight section above and please try to explain what is "haughty" and "narcissistic" about it junior.mthe fact that you didn't even attempt to support your declaration in the first place speaks volumes.

 

[Bfgrn]

WOW, you applaud this creeps haughty narcissism?

I voluntarily serve-up an honest rendering of my own personal circumstances in this context, as an aid to conversation, when prompted by a curious and sincere adversarial colleague, and find myself pilloried for it? What I volunteered was neither creepy nor narcissistic. It was an open-air information piece, describing my experiences, the outcomes of such discussions with some of my work-environment colleagues over time, and the feedback they gave me. Your personal opinion about the truthfulness or validity of all that is a matter of relative indifference to me.

YOU are the center of the universe.

 

[P@triot]

He is painting gays with the same ignorant bigoted brush Hitler painted the Jews with. And you are agreeing with him.

Stop freaking out about who says what about homosexuals. That is not the issue here.

The issue is FREEDOM. Nazi liberals do not have the right to force someone into their views. If you want to serve the gay community wedding cakes, then get up off of your lazy ass open up your own fucking bakery. But you have zero right to force someone else who did just that to bend to your will just because you're too lazy to open your own bakery. That is the issue...

Trying to paint people as "homophobes" to justify your Nazi position is pure idiocy. Whether they are or not is not the issue.

Yes, the issue IS FREEDOM. Which of these FREEDOMS would YOU be willing to give up?


Get the Facts! Because, Marriage Matters...
FACT = something that actually exists, reality, truth.

Marriage equality is an issue that often sparks intense emotions, both in those who are working for equality, and in those who oppose it. The institution of marriage is also surrounded by a great deal of assumption and mythology. It behooves us all to Get the Facts before discussing marriage equality. We hope that reading through Get the Facts will prove useful and answer your questions.

Marriage offers many legal benefits and responsibilities that protect families. It also provides societal status and emotional benefits. Here are just a fraction of the reasons why marriage matters to couples who choose/desire to marry.

The Practical

Marriage offers 1,138 Federal benefits and responsibilities, not including hundreds more offered by every state.

• In times of crisis, spouses have hospital visitation rights and can make medical decisions in event of illness or disability of their spouse.

• Employers offer spouses sick leave, bereavement leave, access to health insurance and pension

• The law provides certain automatic rights to a person's spouse regardless of whether or not a will exists.

• Married couples in elderly care facilities are generally not separated unless one spouse's health dictates hospitalization or special care.

• The dissolution of a marriage requires a determination of property distribution, award of child custody and support and spousal support. Absent divorce, there is no uniform system for sorting out the ending of a relationship.

The Financial

Financial issues are complex and challenging, no matter the couple. When home ownership, kids and other assets are a part of the equation, planning for the present and especially the future is even more critical for greater security.

• Married couples are permitted to give an unlimited amount of gifts to each other without being taxed.

• The law presumes that a married couple with both names on the title to their home owns the property as "tenants by the entirety."

• A married couple, by statute, has creditor protection of their marital home.

• Many married people are entitled to financial benefits relating to their spouses, such as disability, pension and social security benefits.

• With marriage, a couple has the right to be treated as an economic unit and to file joint tax returns (and pay the marriage penalty), and obtain joint health, home and auto insurance policies.

• When a spouse dies, there is no need to prove ownership of every item in the household for taxable purposes.

Protecting Children

• A child who grows up with married parents benefits from the fact that his or her parents' relationship is recognized by law and receives legal protections.

• Spouses are generally entitled to joint child custody and visitation upon divorce (and bear an obligation to pay child support).

• The mark of a strong family and healthy children is having parents who are nurturing, caring, and loving. Parents should be judged on their ability to parent, not by their age, race, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity.

A study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, entitled The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children found that:

• Same-gender couples live in 99.3% of all US counties.

• Same-gender couples are raising children in at least 96% of all US counties.

• Nearly one quarter of all same-gender couples are raising children.

• Nationwide, 34.3% of lesbian couples are raising children, and 22.3% of gay male couples are raising children (compared with 45.6% of married heterosexual and 43.1% of unmarried heterosexual couples raising children).

• Vermont has the largest aggregation of same gender-couples (~1% of all households) followed by California, Washington, Massachusetts, and Oregon.

According to this 2006 study Census 2000 and related demographic research make it clear that parenting by same-gender couples is an established and growing part of the diverse structure of families in the United States. Public policies that aim to promote family stability and security typically are established without consideration for same-gender parents and their children, and they place these families at a disadvantage, as they do heterosexual unmarried parents, single parents, and extended-family caregivers. Public policy designed to promote the family as the basic building block of society has at its core the protection of children's health and well-being. Children's well being relies in large part on a complex blend of their own legal rights and the rights derived, under law, from their parents. Children of same-gender parents often experience economic, legal, and familial insecurity as a result of the absence of legal recognition of their bonds to their nonbiological parents. Current public-policy trends, with notable exceptions, favor limiting or prohibiting the availability of civil marriage and limiting rights and protections to same-gender couples.

The Healthy Advantage

Studies show that people who are married tend to live longer and lead healthier lives.

• For adults, a stable, happy marriage is the best protector against illness and premature death. Decades of research have clearly established these links. (Burman & Margolin, 1992; Dawson, 1991; Verbrugge, 1979).

• Studies on marriages have found that married people live longer, have higher incomes and wealth, engage less in risky behaviors, eat healthier, and have fewer psychological problems than unmarried people. (Waite, Linda J. Why Marriage Matters Strengthening Marriage Roundtable. Washington, DC, June 1997)

• Research shows that unmarried couples have lower levels of happiness and well-being than married couples. (Popenoe, David and Dafoe Whitehead, Barbara, USA Today, July, 2000)

• A recent study shows that denying same-sex couples the right to marry has a negative impact on their mental health - I Do, But I can't: The impact of marriage denial on the mental health of sexual citizenship of Lesbians and Gay Men in the United States (Herdt, G. & Kertzner, R. 2006).

In typical greedy liberal fashion, these are not FREEDOMS. These are perks and benefits. Apparently the only thing you shallow, materialistic, greedy liberals can focus on.

The fact that you can't see the difference between perks/benefits/handouts and freedoms speaks volumes.

 

[Kondor3]

...Do they know that you consider them to be the nexus of the downfall of this nation?...

Not the nexus.

Merely a substantive contributing factor, and an early-warning-signs symptom.

...If they do, they probably think there is some malice directed at them...

Perhaps.

I can only summarize and faithfully relay the feedback that I have received, as well as any less-well-grounded perceptions that I might have.

I can honestly say that Social Workers, and especially those with a strong grounding in applied psychology, are well-tutored in Conflict Resolution, and are sensitized to a respecting-of and tolerance-for diverse opinion, to an extent unknown to those outside their line of work.

That, too, may have something to do with their continued goodwill or friendship directed at me, and their higher level of tolerance for a diversity of sincere opinion on the subject.

...I'm confident that you'll see things differently in time...

Anything is possible. None of us own a functional crystal ball.

...But.....for now.....revel in the fact the the OP applauds you. That's something.

I am glad for the approval of anyone, who examines a recital along the lines of the one I just shared, who perceives it as truthful, and who see some merit in the personal sentiments that I expressed there.

 

[Kondor3]

WOW, you applaud this creeps haughty narcissism?

I voluntarily serve-up an honest rendering of my own personal circumstances in this context, as an aid to conversation, when prompted by a curious and sincere adversarial colleague, and find myself pilloried for it? What I volunteered was neither creepy nor narcissistic. It was an open-air information piece, describing my experiences, the outcomes of such discussions with some of my work-environment colleagues over time, and the feedback they gave me. Your personal opinion about the truthfulness or validity of all that is a matter of relative indifference to me.

YOU are the center of the universe.

Hardly.

Merely highly active, for a few fleeting moments, in the shared conversation.

Although it is fast becoming clear that you see yourself as some kind of Avenging Angel.

Bound and obliged to smite hip and thigh, those whom dare to disagree with your position.

I will confess, however, to a growing amusement with your ankle-biting.

 

[Bfgrn]

Stop freaking out about who says what about homosexuals. That is not the issue here.

The issue is FREEDOM. Nazi liberals do not have the right to force someone into their views. If you want to serve the gay community wedding cakes, then get up off of your lazy ass open up your own fucking bakery. But you have zero right to force someone else who did just that to bend to your will just because you're too lazy to open your own bakery. That is the issue...

Trying to paint people as "homophobes" to justify your Nazi position is pure idiocy. Whether they are or not is not the issue.

Yes, the issue IS FREEDOM. Which of these FREEDOMS would YOU be willing to give up?


Get the Facts! Because, Marriage Matters...
FACT = something that actually exists, reality, truth.

Marriage equality is an issue that often sparks intense emotions, both in those who are working for equality, and in those who oppose it. The institution of marriage is also surrounded by a great deal of assumption and mythology. It behooves us all to Get the Facts before discussing marriage equality. We hope that reading through Get the Facts will prove useful and answer your questions.

Marriage offers many legal benefits and responsibilities that protect families. It also provides societal status and emotional benefits. Here are just a fraction of the reasons why marriage matters to couples who choose/desire to marry.

The Practical

Marriage offers 1,138 Federal benefits and responsibilities, not including hundreds more offered by every state.

• In times of crisis, spouses have hospital visitation rights and can make medical decisions in event of illness or disability of their spouse.

• Employers offer spouses sick leave, bereavement leave, access to health insurance and pension

• The law provides certain automatic rights to a person's spouse regardless of whether or not a will exists.

• Married couples in elderly care facilities are generally not separated unless one spouse's health dictates hospitalization or special care.

• The dissolution of a marriage requires a determination of property distribution, award of child custody and support and spousal support. Absent divorce, there is no uniform system for sorting out the ending of a relationship.

The Financial

Financial issues are complex and challenging, no matter the couple. When home ownership, kids and other assets are a part of the equation, planning for the present and especially the future is even more critical for greater security.

• Married couples are permitted to give an unlimited amount of gifts to each other without being taxed.

• The law presumes that a married couple with both names on the title to their home owns the property as "tenants by the entirety."

• A married couple, by statute, has creditor protection of their marital home.

• Many married people are entitled to financial benefits relating to their spouses, such as disability, pension and social security benefits.

• With marriage, a couple has the right to be treated as an economic unit and to file joint tax returns (and pay the marriage penalty), and obtain joint health, home and auto insurance policies.

• When a spouse dies, there is no need to prove ownership of every item in the household for taxable purposes.

Protecting Children

• A child who grows up with married parents benefits from the fact that his or her parents' relationship is recognized by law and receives legal protections.

• Spouses are generally entitled to joint child custody and visitation upon divorce (and bear an obligation to pay child support).

• The mark of a strong family and healthy children is having parents who are nurturing, caring, and loving. Parents should be judged on their ability to parent, not by their age, race, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity.

A study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, entitled The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children found that:

• Same-gender couples live in 99.3% of all US counties.

• Same-gender couples are raising children in at least 96% of all US counties.

• Nearly one quarter of all same-gender couples are raising children.

• Nationwide, 34.3% of lesbian couples are raising children, and 22.3% of gay male couples are raising children (compared with 45.6% of married heterosexual and 43.1% of unmarried heterosexual couples raising children).

• Vermont has the largest aggregation of same gender-couples (~1% of all households) followed by California, Washington, Massachusetts, and Oregon.

According to this 2006 study Census 2000 and related demographic research make it clear that parenting by same-gender couples is an established and growing part of the diverse structure of families in the United States. Public policies that aim to promote family stability and security typically are established without consideration for same-gender parents and their children, and they place these families at a disadvantage, as they do heterosexual unmarried parents, single parents, and extended-family caregivers. Public policy designed to promote the family as the basic building block of society has at its core the protection of children's health and well-being. Children's well being relies in large part on a complex blend of their own legal rights and the rights derived, under law, from their parents. Children of same-gender parents often experience economic, legal, and familial insecurity as a result of the absence of legal recognition of their bonds to their nonbiological parents. Current public-policy trends, with notable exceptions, favor limiting or prohibiting the availability of civil marriage and limiting rights and protections to same-gender couples.

The Healthy Advantage

Studies show that people who are married tend to live longer and lead healthier lives.

• For adults, a stable, happy marriage is the best protector against illness and premature death. Decades of research have clearly established these links. (Burman & Margolin, 1992; Dawson, 1991; Verbrugge, 1979).

• Studies on marriages have found that married people live longer, have higher incomes and wealth, engage less in risky behaviors, eat healthier, and have fewer psychological problems than unmarried people. (Waite, Linda J. Why Marriage Matters Strengthening Marriage Roundtable. Washington, DC, June 1997)

• Research shows that unmarried couples have lower levels of happiness and well-being than married couples. (Popenoe, David and Dafoe Whitehead, Barbara, USA Today, July, 2000)

• A recent study shows that denying same-sex couples the right to marry has a negative impact on their mental health - I Do, But I can't: The impact of marriage denial on the mental health of sexual citizenship of Lesbians and Gay Men in the United States (Herdt, G. & Kertzner, R. 2006).

In typical greedy liberal fashion, these are not FREEDOMS. These are perks and benefits. Apparently the only thing you shallow, materialistic, greedy liberals can focus on.

The fact that you can't see the difference between perks/benefits/handouts and freedoms speaks volumes.

Then lets take them away from YOU and we'll see if you still consider them merely 'perks'.

You and Kondor are the biggest threat to this nation. YOU and Kondor are the ones who want to engage in social engineering with ZERO regard for another individual's rights. YOU and he want a whole nation to CONFORM to YOUR values, YOUR beliefs and YOUR egocentric world view.

 

[Bfgrn]

I voluntarily serve-up an honest rendering of my own personal circumstances in this context, as an aid to conversation, when prompted by a curious and sincere adversarial colleague, and find myself pilloried for it? What I volunteered was neither creepy nor narcissistic. It was an open-air information piece, describing my experiences, the outcomes of such discussions with some of my work-environment colleagues over time, and the feedback they gave me. Your personal opinion about the truthfulness or validity of all that is a matter of relative indifference to me.

YOU are the center of the universe.

Hardly.

Merely highly active, for a few fleeting moments, in the shared conversation.

Although it is fast becoming clear that you see yourself as some kind of Avenging Angel.

Bound and obliged to smite hip and thigh, those whom dare to disagree with your position.

I will confess, however, to a growing amusement with your ankle-biting.

There is a lot of rot in our society, and in the history of mankind. You represent the worst kind of rot. The fact that you are totally oblivious to it is not surprising. Hitler truly believed he was doing God's work.

 

[P@triot]

Stop freaking out about who says what about homosexuals. That is not the issue here.

The issue is FREEDOM. Nazi liberals do not have the right to force someone into their views. If you want to serve the gay community wedding cakes, then get up off of your lazy ass open up your own fucking bakery. But you have zero right to force someone else who did just that to bend to your will just because you're too lazy to open your own bakery. That is the issue...

Trying to paint people as "homophobes" to justify your Nazi position is pure idiocy. Whether they are or not is not the issue.

Yes, the issue IS FREEDOM. Which of these FREEDOMS would YOU be willing to give up?


Get the Facts! Because, Marriage Matters...
FACT = something that actually exists, reality, truth.

Marriage equality is an issue that often sparks intense emotions, both in those who are working for equality, and in those who oppose it. The institution of marriage is also surrounded by a great deal of assumption and mythology. It behooves us all to Get the Facts before discussing marriage equality. We hope that reading through Get the Facts will prove useful and answer your questions.

Marriage offers many legal benefits and responsibilities that protect families. It also provides societal status and emotional benefits. Here are just a fraction of the reasons why marriage matters to couples who choose/desire to marry.

The Practical

Marriage offers 1,138 Federal benefits and responsibilities, not including hundreds more offered by every state.

• In times of crisis, spouses have hospital visitation rights and can make medical decisions in event of illness or disability of their spouse.

• Employers offer spouses sick leave, bereavement leave, access to health insurance and pension

• The law provides certain automatic rights to a person's spouse regardless of whether or not a will exists.

• Married couples in elderly care facilities are generally not separated unless one spouse's health dictates hospitalization or special care.

• The dissolution of a marriage requires a determination of property distribution, award of child custody and support and spousal support. Absent divorce, there is no uniform system for sorting out the ending of a relationship.

The Financial

Financial issues are complex and challenging, no matter the couple. When home ownership, kids and other assets are a part of the equation, planning for the present and especially the future is even more critical for greater security.

• Married couples are permitted to give an unlimited amount of gifts to each other without being taxed.

• The law presumes that a married couple with both names on the title to their home owns the property as "tenants by the entirety."

• A married couple, by statute, has creditor protection of their marital home.

• Many married people are entitled to financial benefits relating to their spouses, such as disability, pension and social security benefits.

• With marriage, a couple has the right to be treated as an economic unit and to file joint tax returns (and pay the marriage penalty), and obtain joint health, home and auto insurance policies.

• When a spouse dies, there is no need to prove ownership of every item in the household for taxable purposes.

Protecting Children

• A child who grows up with married parents benefits from the fact that his or her parents' relationship is recognized by law and receives legal protections.

• Spouses are generally entitled to joint child custody and visitation upon divorce (and bear an obligation to pay child support).

• The mark of a strong family and healthy children is having parents who are nurturing, caring, and loving. Parents should be judged on their ability to parent, not by their age, race, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity.

A study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, entitled The Effects of Marriage, Civil Union, and Domestic Partnership Laws on the Health and Well-being of Children found that:

• Same-gender couples live in 99.3% of all US counties.

• Same-gender couples are raising children in at least 96% of all US counties.

• Nearly one quarter of all same-gender couples are raising children.

• Nationwide, 34.3% of lesbian couples are raising children, and 22.3% of gay male couples are raising children (compared with 45.6% of married heterosexual and 43.1% of unmarried heterosexual couples raising children).

• Vermont has the largest aggregation of same gender-couples (~1% of all households) followed by California, Washington, Massachusetts, and Oregon.

According to this 2006 study Census 2000 and related demographic research make it clear that parenting by same-gender couples is an established and growing part of the diverse structure of families in the United States. Public policies that aim to promote family stability and security typically are established without consideration for same-gender parents and their children, and they place these families at a disadvantage, as they do heterosexual unmarried parents, single parents, and extended-family caregivers. Public policy designed to promote the family as the basic building block of society has at its core the protection of children's health and well-being. Children's well being relies in large part on a complex blend of their own legal rights and the rights derived, under law, from their parents. Children of same-gender parents often experience economic, legal, and familial insecurity as a result of the absence of legal recognition of their bonds to their nonbiological parents. Current public-policy trends, with notable exceptions, favor limiting or prohibiting the availability of civil marriage and limiting rights and protections to same-gender couples.

The Healthy Advantage

Studies show that people who are married tend to live longer and lead healthier lives.

• For adults, a stable, happy marriage is the best protector against illness and premature death. Decades of research have clearly established these links. (Burman & Margolin, 1992; Dawson, 1991; Verbrugge, 1979).

• Studies on marriages have found that married people live longer, have higher incomes and wealth, engage less in risky behaviors, eat healthier, and have fewer psychological problems than unmarried people. (Waite, Linda J. Why Marriage Matters Strengthening Marriage Roundtable. Washington, DC, June 1997)

• Research shows that unmarried couples have lower levels of happiness and well-being than married couples. (Popenoe, David and Dafoe Whitehead, Barbara, USA Today, July, 2000)

• A recent study shows that denying same-sex couples the right to marry has a negative impact on their mental health - I Do, But I can't: The impact of marriage denial on the mental health of sexual citizenship of Lesbians and Gay Men in the United States (Herdt, G. & Kertzner, R. 2006).

In typical greedy liberal fashion, these are not FREEDOMS. These are perks and benefits. Apparently the only thing you shallow, materialistic, greedy liberals can focus on.

The fact that you can't see the difference between perks/benefits/handouts and freedoms speaks volumes.

Also [MENTION=19018]Bfgrn[/MENTION], what you posted here is about marriage. At no point did we discuss whether gay marriage should be legal. You're in such a tizzy - and so unable to defend your absurd position - that you are just throwing shit at the wall and hoping against all hope that something sticks.

If you want to discuss whether gay marriage should be legal or not, start a new thread and I will weigh in. But this thread is about the fact that a private business owner on private property has the right to refuse service to anyone they choose. Please try to stay on topic, you shallow, materialistic, greedy Nazi-liberal.

 

[Kondor3]

There is a lot of rot in our society, and in the history of mankind. You represent the worst kind of rot. The fact that you are totally oblivious to it is not surprising. Hitler truly believed he was doing God's work.

Yes, yes, yes... very nice, I'm sure... now, run along, Junior, you're bothering the grown-ups.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The fact that you can't see the difference between perks/benefits/handouts and freedoms speaks volumes.

This issue is about Equality Before the Law my little cat toy. That's all. If more people end up treating gay people as people instead of demons, that is a side benefit.

Less homophobia, more marriage, all good.