| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:40:30 PM |
When you say benefits, people will assume that you are saying benefits.
Just fyi.
Odd how other people reading the posts immediately managed to grasp what I was saying...I suspect it's that Commie ESP that I'm told lefties have...
You assumed. Others read. You misunderstood...others didn't. You have it wrong. Others don't.
Noticing the pattern? I can provide a quick spacial recognition web link if you'd like... | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 177 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:41:35 PM | Well, state reconized marraige is not a right.
Let's go back in time to when goverment was first formed. If the goverment decides that it's useful and fruitful to recognize marraige, then the powers that be can decide to do that.
They do not *have* to. They are not *obligated* to. It is a -benefit- extended by the goverment.
It's not a right for anyone, heterosexual, or otherwise. | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 178 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:43:02 PM |
You assumed. Others read. You misunderstood...others didn't. You have it wrong. Others don't.
Sorry. If you don't say what you mean, but you're on the same wavelength with others, I can't do anything about it.
You have to be precise in your meaning, or many people will assume that you are an idiot. | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:44:40 PM | | Very well then, Loukus. Please explain why everyone else can enjoy this 'benefit', but homosexuals cannot. | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 180 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:45:56 PM | | Homosexuals can. It is extended to anyone who wishes to fulfill the requirements for a state reconized marraige. | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:47:56 PM | 1) Which states are homosexuals allowed to marry in?
2) What are the benefits of a marriage not recognized by the federal government? | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 182 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:50:09 PM |
1) Which states are homosexuals allowed to marry in?
All of them
2) What are the benefits of a marriage not recognized by the federal government?
I don't know what you mean. | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:55:36 PM |
Homosexuals can. It is extended to anyone who wishes to fulfill the requirements for a state reconized marraige. .
This is an example of Loukus being precise...which is strange as even with such precision, I'm pretty sure you're running the risk of being thought of as an idiot...
It's like saying that anyone can enjoy the benefits of tax cuts, it is extended to anyone who is wealthy enough for the tax cuts to supercede the added costs of government services that are cut to pay for said tax cuts.
Or anyone can enjoy the benefits of being an orange, so long as they fulfill the requirements of being an orange.
The state's requirements are unconstitutional and go against human rights and freedoms that are enshrined into the law. The state's requirements are called statute and are established currently because no one challenged the precedent. States had laws on the books establishing the right for restaurant owners to refuse service to blacks in the sixties. They remained on the books until someone challenges them on the grounds that they are unlawful.
Another example...keep reading...I'm being precise here. Some states had it in their law books that it was illegal to practice homosexual intercourse. It was a criminal offense and stayed on the books for decades. Then some moron in the attorney's office for the state decides to prosecute some poor gay couple for having sex...and as a result the law was deemed unconstitutional and the case thrown out of court (allowing, I'm sure, continued extra-marital lovefests to continue unabated, in an abomination against the lord, bless his prudish little soul).
Getting the point?
At what point did you stop reading this time? | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 6:59:43 PM | Loukus, as I understand it, the only state homosexuals can get married in is Massachusetts. Has that changed in the last couple of weeks?
And a state marriage is only recognized in that state. A homosexual couple married in Massachusetts are not considered to be lawfully wedded anywhere else in the US. | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 185 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:02:06 PM |
The state's requirements are unconstitutional and go against human rights and freedoms that are enshrined into the law.
I don't see how. The state recognizes the obvious benefits (to the state) that come from heterosexual relationships, in the context of the family unit. That is why they extend the benefit of state recognized marraige.
And yes, I read your entire post. You didn't have any glaring fallacies. | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 186 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:03:43 PM |
Loukus, as I understand it, the only state homosexuals can get married in is Massachusetts. Has that changed in the last couple of weeks?
You are mistaken. Homosexuals can find someone willing to enter a state reconized marraige and do so, just like heterosexuals. | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:04:10 PM | The little fella means that any homosexual can get married in any state, so long as he marries a woman (if he's a male homosexual) or a man (if she's a lesbian).
Cunning, ain't he?
The point, of course, went sailing way over his head a while back but he's falling back on what amounts to the same argument that says that children have equal rights to adults, as long as they don't mind waiting until they're 18 or 21 years old to receive them. | |
|
mauser
|
Joined: 1/3/2005
Msg: 188 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:05:45 PM | Am I the only one in here that thinks that this issue should remain a state issue.
lets be honest here gay marrage will never work in the midwest and I dont think it will work in the south either. On both coasts and in particular the New England area it seems to be pretty popular.
Now I will be the first to admit that I trust my state legistlature more than the federal government. Living through 8 years of bill clinton put a sour taist in my mouth for the federal government.
Whay cant this issue be like gun control and the death penality. I have no problem with states that pas laws that promote the moral values of there individual citizens | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 189 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:10:15 PM | Yeah, Im rather in favor of making it a state issue.
Anyway.
The point, of course, went sailing way over his head a while back but he's falling back on what amounts to the same argument that says that children have equal rights to adults, as long as they don't mind waiting until they're 18 or 21 years old to receive them.
Well, that's true. So... how is that you're right? | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:18:15 PM | So then, Loukus, that is what you were arguing, that homosexuals have the freedom to marry someone of the opposite sex? When you knew full well that I was talking about the freedom for a homosexual to marry someone they would actually want to marry?
Weak, very weak. And also cowardly, to not confront the actual issue.
Tell me, would you be happy being married to someone you are not attracted to, physically, mentally, or emotionally? | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:18:18 PM | | hello..i think that the american government and maybe the riches 5 percent of america have some definite issues with evil...for the most part people in the states are just like everyone else in the world except they never say thank you or your welcome..so if you ever find yourself hating a certain people..i definetely reccomend hating their government instead as it is usually the government or blood sucking evil rich people that are behind it all..much like on scooby doo :) | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 192 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:22:16 PM |
So then, Loukus, that is what you were arguing, that homosexuals have the freedom to marry someone of the opposite sex? When you knew full well that I was talking about the freedom for a homosexual to marry someone they would actually want to marry?
Weak, very weak. And also cowardly, to not confront the actual issue.
I thought I was being pretty obvious. Anyway, that's the only issue, equal treatment.
Tell me, would you be happy being married to someone you are not attracted to, physically, mentally, or emotionally?
Now that. That. Right there. *That* is not confronting the issue. | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:42:15 PM |
Anyway, that's the only issue, equal treatment.
You have the opportunity to get married to someone you want to marry. Homosexuals don't have that opportunity. That is not equal treatment. | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 194 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:47:58 PM |
You have the opportunity to get married to someone you want to marry. Homosexuals don't have that opportunity. That is not equal treatment.
Homosexual couples can have a marraige ceremony, and call themselves married. It just won't be state recognized, niether is the state obliged to to recognize it.
The state recognizes heterosexual marraige. Homosexual individuals may still enter into such a marraige and recieve the same benefits that a heterosexual would, ergo, heterosexual individuals, and homosexual individuals, are treated equally. | |
|
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:53:43 PM | "The state recognizes heterosexual marraige. Homosexual individuals may still enter into such a marraige and recieve the same benefits that a heterosexual would, ergo, heterosexual individuals, and homosexual individuals, are treated equally."
That is simply untrue.
They can not file joint tax returns.
They have no leg to stand on with inheritance without a will, and even that can be contested.
If the couple are both raising a child, only the biological parent can make decisions regarding health, even in emergencies, by law.
There are quite a few other things that need to be dealt with. | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 196 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 7:55:10 PM | | as in, they can enter into a marraige as defined by how a state recognizes it. Which is certainly true. | |
|
| |
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 198 | |
| |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 8:03:44 PM |
Homosexual couples can have a marraige ceremony, and call themselves married. It just won't be state recognized, niether is the state obliged to to recognize it.
The state recognizes heterosexual marraige. Homosexual individuals may still enter into such a marraige and recieve the same benefits that a heterosexual would, ergo, heterosexual individuals, and homosexual individuals, are treated equally.
In neither scenario do homosexuals have all the same rights and benefits that everyone else gets to enjoy.
It is not equal treatment. | |
|
Loukus
|
Joined: 2/15/2004
Msg: 200 | |
| Are the U.S. misunderstood?
Posted: 1/6/2005 8:05:26 PM |
In neither scenario do homosexuals have all the same rights and benefits that everyone else gets to enjoy.
It is not equal treatment.
They are not entitled to the same benefits under different circumstances. But the benefits that are offered, are offered equally. | |
|
Home
login 
