Same sex weddings could be economic boon?

[lazs2]

ah... so you would keep the parts about only two people and the parts where sex is required and the parts where no close relatives could marry?

How is that fair?   Wouldn't my girlfriend and her grown daughter who live together and depend on each other be being treated unfairly if it is about the bennies?    They could use the tax break and medical too.

What about polygamy?  why not them?    Why do you not press one for spanish and not 2-200 for all the other languages?

What benifet is it for the rest of us to have gay couples get the bennies over all other forms of relationships?

What is "fair" about your definition?   

What is the purpose of having a marriage?   Why do we support it.

I say that it has all to do with the fact that we think it is good for us.  that it makes it more likely that our children will be raised in the best way known to man.. a married couple consisting of a man and a woman.

lazs

[midnight Target]

It has to do with the fact that we should not discriminate based on gender, religion, race or disability. Maybe I missed something there, but you get the point. This isn't some slippery slope leading to goat sex lazs. The law is in place, the definition is in place, just stop decriminating based on gender and we are all being treated equally under the existing law... simple.

[VonMessa]

<Snip>

   Why do you not press one for spanish and not 2-200 for all the other languages?


lazs

Lazs,

You might get a kick out of this guy.  He owns a restaurant in Pittsburgh.

http://www.casadice.com/

Click the link on the left for "Our Famous Signs"

[Torque]

well... gay couples certainly deserve a fair kick at the can... i don't think they could do more damage to the institution of marriage than the heterosexual have done already.

if you're going to force gays to subsidize hetero marriages and their children's education... then maybe a check box on their tax forms to defer.

as for all the animal and incest remarks... they seem to be more of a self confession... i'm guessing if you checked the caches on these peoples machines the links will be there.

as for them be lazy leeches... looks like gays put more effort into attaining equal rights then most divorced heteros did to save their marriages.

[Elfie]

Take the current defenition and delete any reference to sex. Easy lazs.

Why does the current definition need to be changed to make a small group of people happy when this current definition has served mankind very well for thousands of years?

[myelo]

Why does the current definition need to be changed to make a small group of people happy when this current definition has served mankind very well for thousands of years?

Why not?

If the government is going to tell someone they can't do something they want to do, the government needs a good reason. There's no good reason for the government to interfere here.

[lazs2]

MT..  you think that discrimination is fine so long as it does not have to do with race creed or gender?   Why gender over other types?   

Gays support hetro marriage..  asexual people support hetro marriage..  single people who never want to get married support it..   they all do and they all get something from it.   they all get the same thing from their support.. they get the benifiet of the country raising kids in the best way possible. 

If you start adding groups then gays should be the last..   take my girlfriend and her daughter for instance... or even me as a single... My girlfriend and her daughter are doing the raising of her grand daughter.. the parents are not doing a good job..  I am helping my ex raise my grand daughter... 

It would make far more sense to give us the bennies of a marriage than to give them to gays.

Typical liberal feelgood crap on your part.  Think with your heart instead of your head and mess things all up because of it... help a few feel good but be unfair to  millions.   

Your definition of marriage is just as unfair as the old one.. no..  it is much more unfair.. now you really are discriminating against any other relationship.  you now only condone one that is conventional and works for everyone and...   now....  you pick one worthless feel good one and add that. 

It would have been much more fair to have made polygamy the new exception.. they at least are not lazy leeches and they at least give kids a parent from each gender and... they have fought a lot harder for their belief than any gay couple ever has.  They have been hunted and hounded and imprisoned and even killed for their belief.

lazs

[Elfie]

Why not?

If the government is going to tell someone they can't do something they want to do, the government needs a good reason. There's no good reason for the government to interfere here.

By changing the definition of marriage, the gov't is intervening. I agree, there is no good reason for the gov't to intere here.

[CAP1]

Perhaps it is because the politicians have bigger fish to fry (passing laws) such as teaching Floridians how to vote without being confusedy? Or speak english? or allowing unlimited "Depends" purchases?

Or as the Roman's say, "When in Rome..."

(Image removed from quote.)

isee this thread being locked because of this pic?

[Getback]

A man and woman make a marriage. Not 2 women and a turkey baster.

I will always believe that marriage is between a man and woman. Will I treat a homosexual couple with contempt? Not at all. I treat human beings as human beings. I don't think the bible says any different. In fact I always say God will judge them like he will me. However that does not mean I have to condone that behavior. We've had abortion laws for what, over 30 years, and I don't condone that at all.

Perhaps, the best solution is to get government out of marriage all together. On tax forms and everything else.

A man and a woman were meant to raise children.

I will find it facinating at the divorce rate since homosexuals have way more sexual encounters than the average heterosexual. Will they all have to go back to California to get divorced. Extra expense there. Might be a great time to be a divorce attorney. Uh if you don't mind holding the same sexes hand. 

[CAP1]

I can say that I don't necessarily agree with, or condone homosexuality or same sex "marriage".  Am I an avid anti gay marriage activist?  Absolutely not.  It really isn't a big deal to me.   But.............

As far as an economic boon (that's what this post began about, right?) I would have to say yes.  To me, at least.

My DJ company does about 25-50 wedding receptions a year.  We have even performed at a few "same sex" ceremony receptions.  Because I don't agree with or condone it as a personal opinion does that mean I will refuse their patronage?  Hell no!

Will I, in the service of the almighty dollar, keep taking their money because it is the same color green as everyone else's, and spends just the same

You're damn skippy! 

well said sir!!
i think that's what this post was originated to find out. i own my own auto repair shop in cherry hill......and your Golly-gee straight that i'll be all too happy to take their business.  they're the same as you and me. if we don't pry into their lives then they won't bother us. period. they use credit cards just like us. they write checks just like us. they spend cash just like us. when they do the marriage thing, they'll get to experience the joys of divorce eventually too, just like us. it's their business, not ours.  who are we to tell them they can't do this? by some of the posts here, that would mean that me having a black girlfriend is bad.

anyway..wtg VM<<S>>

[Elfie]

by some of the posts here, that would mean that me having a black girlfriend is bad.

I've only seen a strawman argument brought up that would suggest that. No one is seriously suggesting that interracial marriages are something that should be forbidden. After all, as long as they involve a male and a female, they fit the definition of marriage.

[CAP1]

MT..  you think that discrimination is fine so long as it does not have to do with race creed or gender?   Why gender over other types?   

 

If you start adding groups then gays should be the last.. 
It would make far more sense to give us the bennies of a marriage than to give them to gays.  

soooo..you're saying gays can't raise kids?

[Getback]

soooo..you're saying gays can't raise kids?

People use to think that a single female or male could raise a kid. It's be proven that doesn't work out so well.
My logic is yeah they can raise a child but overall 2 of the same sex aren't going to do a very good job.

Especially boys, Boys do not listen to their mom like they do their dad. I've seen it over and over. My wife would tell the kids a hundred times to do something. I just had to say it once.

[crockett]

I have nothing against gays getting married..  they always could.. they just needed to follow the rules and marry someone of the opposite gender.

What they are trying to do is horn in on something that is already established with it's own rules.

I really don't understand why they didn't work to make their own form of marriage.. just lazy leeches I guess.

It will be a boon for lawyers and skip chasers but it will clog the courts... the burden of increased benifiets for this new "marriage" will of course.. come down to us.   

So.. what are the rules now?   Isn't multiple partner marriages discrimination?   Don't they love each other and.. at least they can provide a family with both genders.    Why not sexless marriage?  marriage between close relatives to get the tax and other bennies?

They, the gays,  are just lazy leeches and whiners to me.  they don't want the wedding gown.. they want the money.

lazs

Off topic a little bit, but if there is a god, a gay mixed race couple will move in next to you Larz.