| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:47 Aegraen wrote: I addressed this, gay couples have the same benefits as married couples. What 'rights' do they not have? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal What a novel idea! | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
I stand corrected, do you have any more incidents? No one should condone any of this behavior. | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:50 Archerofaiur wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal What a novel idea! The only thing that is seperate is the name. Just goes to show how fervant those who want marriage to be defined as between the same sex goes. Equating this to either womans suffrage, or the civil rights movement, is absurd in the extreme of your position. No one is stopping anyone from being together. They have the exact same benefits as those who are married. Just because their union is called 'Civil' and not 'marriage' and is not tied to the church means they are somehow losing some ephemeral 'rights'? Please... | ||
|
Diomedes
464 Posts
WTF Ban me if he isn't a troll. | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
So you want to force the churches to do something that is a sin in their religion? What happened to freedom of religion? | ||
|
koOl
Canada254 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:55 Aegraen wrote: So you want to force the churches to do something that is a sin in their religion? What happened to freedom of religion? churches would NOT be forced to perform same sex marriages...that is purely propaganda | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:54 Diomedes wrote: Wait, Aegraen is calling those who want to lift bans on gay marriage oppressive like the gestapo? WTF? I thought he meant the other way around? WTF Ban me if he isn't a troll. Nope, not at all. I'm calling those who employ coercive, violent, and strongarm tactics as comparable to exactly what the Gestapo did. The majority of anti prop 8, supported these, and employed these tactics once they lost, and even beforehand. | ||
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:51 Aegraen wrote: I stand corrected, do you have any more incidents? No one should condone any of this behavior. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/29/state/n064853D35.DTL http://vodpod.com/watch/1218422-skinhead-ordered-to-stand-trial-for-anti-gay-yes-on-8-hate-crime-span-classsourcetowleroadspan http://www.independent.com/news/2008/dec/18/anti-gay-graffiti-scrawled-clearview-home/ http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2008/11/syracuse_police_identify_shoot.html Come to think of it, because all anti-gay hate crime perpetrators would probably vote Yes on 8, I think your position that Proposition 8's opponents are more "like the Gestapo" looks even sillier. And wait, you're saying that a majority of Prop 8 opponents used violent tactics? Um...please don't generalize anecdotal evidence. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
The only thing seperating a white fountain from a colored fountain is the name. You know It would be nice if people would just learn from history once so we dont have to keep repeating it. | ||
|
Idle
Korea (South)124 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:55 Aegraen wrote: So you want to force the churches to do something that is a sin in their religion? What happened to freedom of religion? Nobody wants the churches to do anything. The issue is that the government is the one refusing to grant marriages, and the government shouldn't get to exclude people. | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:56 koOl wrote: churches would NOT be forced to perform same sex marriages...that is purely propaganda What do you think marriage is? Do you know who marries couples? I'm sorry, but going to the local judicial services and getting your 'paper' is not marriage. Sure, you get your state derived benefits, that is associated with marriage and civil unions, but then you just want that called marriage, and not a civil union? | ||
|
Aegraen
United States1225 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:57 Idle wrote: Nobody wants the churches to do anything. The issue is that the government is the one refusing to grant marriages, and the government shouldn't get to exclude people. The government grants the same benefits to gay couples as it does to straight couples. Try again. | ||
|
koOl
Canada254 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:58 Aegraen wrote: What do you think marriage is? Do you know who marries couples? I'm sorry, but going to the local judicial services and getting your 'paper' is not marriage. Sure, you get your state derived benefits, that is associated with marriage and civil unions, but then you just want that called marriage, and not a civil union? your point being?? that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that churches wouldnt be forced to perform same sex marriages, ones that choose to do it could | ||
|
JWD
United States12607 Posts
a) claims "Gay couples HAVE THE SAME BENEFITS DERIVED FROM THE STATE AS THOSE MARRIED?" when in fact many states do not even recognize same-sex civil unions b) believes legalizing gay marriage will involve "forcing churches to do something that is a sin in their religion" | ||
|
JWD
United States12607 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:59 Aegraen wrote: The government grants the same benefits to gay couples as it does to straight couples. Try again. ...except the benefit of being able to marry. And please, stop ignoring the fact that many states do not even recognize same-sex civil unions. I already posted a link to a wikipedia map that will illustrate this for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Samesex_marriage_in_USA.svg | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
But that certainly is not the issue at hand. | ||
|
Archerofaiur
United States4101 Posts
On May 30 2009 10:00 JWD wrote: I think Aegraen, while he has good intentions, has illustrated pretty effectively that he has very little grasp of the issue at hand: a) claims "Gay couples HAVE THE SAME BENEFITS DERIVED FROM THE STATE AS THOSE MARRIED?" when in fact many states do not even recognize same-sex civil unions b) believes legalizing gay marriage will involve "forcing churches to do something that is a sin in their religion" Yah I was just going to pull an article that NYTimes had recently about how civil unions cant get health care for partners. and then of course theres the fact that even IF civil unions had exactly the same federal benifits it would still be "seperate but equal" rationalizing and it would be just as wrong as when it was applied to blacks. | ||
|
Diomedes
464 Posts
So surely you are wrong. Main problem is his intentions. I suspect he is some enbittered far left wing 'liberal' trying to make 'his opponents' look bad. | ||
|
Idle
Korea (South)124 Posts
On May 30 2009 09:59 Aegraen wrote: The government grants the same benefits to gay couples as it does to straight couples. Try again. No, actually it doesn't. You keep stating this but its completely false. Only 8 states grant civil unions or domestic partnerships which similar rights to marriage, and 5 more grant some of the same rights. Since this thread is specifically on prop 8 in california, domestic partnership differs in the following ways: # Couples seeking domestic partnership must already share a residence, married couples may be married without living together. # Couples seeking domestic partnership must be 18 or older, minors can be married before the age of 18 with the consent of their parents. # California permits married couples the option of confidential marriage, there is no equivalent institution for domestic partnerships. In confidential marriages, no witnesses are required and the marriage license is not a matter of public record. # Married partners of state employees are eligible for the CalPERS long-term care insurance plan, domestic partners are not. # There is, at least according to one appellate ruling, no equivalent of the Putative Spouse Doctrine for domestic partnerships. | ||
| ||
|
|
|
EPT
