Gay Marriage thread

[Debonair]

Its seven pages & still nobody know what to do about
Hermaphrodites

[eskimo2]

I just want to know why Hermaphrodites  perfectly matches your avatar color?

[Debonair]

Originally posted by pole dancing sheep 'tard guy
I just want to know why Hermaphrodites  perfectly matches your avatar color?

hermaphrodite happinstance?
chicks-with-d**ks chance?
gynadromorph good luck?

[Masherbrum]

Originally posted by Debonair
hermaphrodite happinstance?
chicks-with-d**ks chance?
gynadromorph good luck?

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Debonair
Its seven pages & still nobody know what to do about
Hermaphrodites

LMAO

Hey......................they can go screw themselves ....................literaly.
Don`t see them complaining do ya?

[lazs2]

well.... why should hermos be left out?  

lazs

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
curval.... if it is community property then there is no need to marry.... any contract would work and "regestered relationship" could have that as part of it.

most health benifiets today are a package... you get so much... you can spend it or not.  it is usually some portion or all of what it would cost to insure a "family"... if you are single you get the balance to in cash or 451's say... that is something everyone should be pushing for in a health plan... not some kind of gay marriage...  gay marriage only helps gays with this.

children?   why would it make it easier for them to adopt than say a "regestered relationship"?   I would not want them to adopt in any case but.... If that is their agenda it seems weak.... regestered relationship would mean the same thing for all legal contracts.

Sooo...  I don't think any of those reasons are valid or, if nothing else... worth destroying a current institution or marginalizing it.

Some say that incestuous couples shouldn't be allowed to marry because.... well... there aren't that many of em?  what is the numbers cut off for human rights?    There are enough gays (or are there?) who want to get married so... they made the cutoff point and their rights are worthwhile?   incest, polygamy and all the other various forbidden groups don't have enough numbers?

Is there some other point to this that I am not being told about?   What is wrong with finlands solution?

lazs

I still need to read up on Finland's registered relationship concept.  I haven't had time yet, but it is an interesting concept by the sounds of it.

I'm not understanding the health benefits you speak of, can you be a bit more specific?  You get cash for what exactly?  To pay doctor's bills?  Who gives this to people the insurance companies, govt. or employers?

Here we have no govt. sponsored health benefits.  You need to either pay your own bills, buy private health insurance, in which case you make a claim and they reimburse you, or you have health insurance through your workplace.  Generally the employee and employer split the premium, or the employer decides to pay the whole thing.

Is a 415 some sort of investment plan?

I fail to see how gay marriage would ONLY benefit from this.  If I have an insurance plan that covers my spouse and kids, then they are covered.  If a gay couple only has one insured party but the plan could potentially benefit the partner if they were considered married then surely the current situation is biased against gay couples.  Right?  

As far as the children issue goes, I already stated I do not have enough knowledge about registered relationships to determine if this would make it easier to adopt or not.  If so then perhaps you are right...the idea should be explored as an alternative to gay marriage.  The fact is there is no such "registered relationship" in law in the US, as far as I know, so gay couples remain at a disadvantage right now in this regard.

I don't personally think gay marriage does destroy or marginalise hetero marriages, but perhaps the registered relationship thing is a valid alternative.  But, I think certain people on this BBS would fight just as hard against that as they are willing to do so against gay marriage.  To many of them the issue really isn't about gay marriage at all....they simply think gays don't deserve to exist.  This is patently clear in one particular poster's small mind.

[lazs2]

curval... sorry for not being clear.   Say everyone gets $800 a month to spend on their health benifiets package...  that is the amount that it would reasonably cost to insure an entire family.

If you don't use that money because you are single or have other insurance (many do) then you can put that money in a retirement plan.   it does not matter if you are married or not.

It doesn't matter what is involved with finlands "regestered relationship"  to me.  it only matters that people who should be excluded from heterosexual marriage have their own program.   What they do with it is up to them.

The adoption issue has nothing to do with it.  the regestered relationship would be a contract that would make a gay couple.... if gay couples could adopt through conventional marriage then it would be no more or less difficult through "regestered relationship"   A relationship by any other name.... with community propety and such it would be the same so far as adoption agencies go but...  Other factors would make a gay marriage or "relationship" so different that adoption would still be far more complex even if it were allowed...  

for instance... in a normal marriage... if it breaks up it is allmost a given that the female get's the child....  How would you resolve custody where there is no female or.... two or more of em?  

So really... what else is there?  what is the point to it?  what do they really want?

lazs

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by lazs2
for instance... in a normal marriage... if it breaks up it is allmost a given that the female get's the child....  How would you resolve custody where there is no female or.... two or more of em?
lazs

Is that really the best argument you can make?  Do you honestly believe that the female getting the child usually is right?

Your argument is based on the soundness of the mother always getting the child, no matter how unsuited for parenting she is?!

Of ALL the people, I'm shocked that YOU, lazs, would hold THAT discrimination up as an example of how great the system works.

The answer, of course, is that the parent who is best able to raise the children takes custody.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by lazs2
well.... why should hermos be left out?  

lazs

If you start enacting laws such as being discussed they certainly won`t be left out. Along with every other group that exists now or can come up with some name for themselves in the future to jump on the "human rights" bandwagon.
A wacko in this county is in love with his dog. ( I think it had something to do with the wood grain alcohol incident.) If "special" laws are passed based upon it being human rights how could people like him be expected to be left out?
Would the dog be allowed to wear white at the wedding ceremony since it is a preconsumated affair?

[Curval]

Originally posted by lazs2
curval... sorry for not being clear.   Say everyone gets $800 a month to spend on their health benifiets package...  that is the amount that it would reasonably cost to insure an entire family.

If you don't use that money because you are single or have other insurance (many do) then you can put that money in a retirement plan.   it does not matter if you are married or not.

It doesn't matter what is involved with finlands "regestered relationship"  to me.  it only matters that people who should be excluded from heterosexual marriage have their own program.   What they do with it is up to them.

The adoption issue has nothing to do with it.  the regestered relationship would be a contract that would make a gay couple.... if gay couples could adopt through conventional marriage then it would be no more or less difficult through "regestered relationship"   A relationship by any other name.... with community propety and such it would be the same so far as adoption agencies go but...  Other factors would make a gay marriage or "relationship" so different that adoption would still be far more complex even if it were allowed...  

for instance... in a normal marriage... if it breaks up it is allmost a given that the female get's the child....  How would you resolve custody where there is no female or.... two or more of em?  

So really... what else is there?  what is the point to it?  what do they really want?

lazs

It is kind of refreshing to actually have a civil discussion with you lazs.

I'm not trying to be podantic, but I'm still a bit unclear on these health benefits.  Does everyone in the US get a certain amount of money to put towards health care?  That seems a bit socialist to me (not a jab, just an observation)...is this the case?  

You still haven't answered the tax question.  Is there a tax advantage to be gained by being married over being single?  If so, what exactly are they...is there a deduction, a tax credit...what?

Chairboy answered the adoption question.  While I agree that it is normally the case that a woman gets custody surely you would have to admit that this is unfair and in some cases completely unjustifiable.  In a gay marriage (or registered relationship) it would actually work they way it should...the one who is better capable to raise the child gets custody.

As to the idea of "what is the point" I would have to ask the same question with respect to hetero marriages.  You know yourself that normal marraiges don't always work, haven't you been married twice?  Why did you get married?  What "benefits" were there in your mind?

In my particaular case I got married because my girlfriend became pregnant and I was not going to let my child be brought up without having a father and a mother.  Most people that get married do so....because they love each other and to get married is the ultimate expression of that love.  I know that is probably a whimpy sort of view in your mind, possibly a "metrosexual" outlook  lol....but I think that it is reality.  I would think that is the MAIN reason gays want to marry.  Sappy, maybe...but I think it is the truth.