Gay "marriage"

True. But, is this the head of the arguement? No. Equality. Love. That's what it's about. That's what's being fought over. Supposedly, anyway. I would have mentioned this in my previous post as well, but I'm only 20 posts in to my time on the forums, (as of this post), and I feel as if I've already written a novel in some cases.

I was just pointing out the removing the government from this debate is actually counterproductive. The post you quoted was originally meant for Kiamat

1. tax benefits - should be removed. Why should married people get tax breaks?
2. inheritance - should be decided by a will as I mentioned in my original post
3. medical benefits - should be decided by a living will as I mentioned in my original post
4. medical decisions - should be decided by a living will as I mentioned in my original post
5. you don't have to bear witness against your spouse - you're still married
6. citizenship to spouses - this will end people marrying terrorists for money. You want a shortcut to citizenship-join the military.

-Kiamat Dusk
...it's like I'm talking to myself...

Also true, though refering to my first post was just to help those that might be confused over views expressed through my opinion having seemingly 'left out' the things I quoted and mentioned in my second post. However, removing the government from the debate can be both counterproductive, as well as productive for the sake of discussion as well - it depends on your own personal views of a situation. Maybe, personally, one is in it for the retrospect of love? Maybe another one seeks total equality?

Let's say we remove the governmental prospects of marriage, and same sex joinings are allowed - merely for the sake of discussion. Now, this is not really all that productive in the same sense as just allowing it to begin with. In the end, if you get only half of the deal, you're pretty much assured that the battle isn't over. :3

you know my feelings on this matter, right?

1. tax benefits - should be removed. Why should married people get tax breaks?
and people with children shouldn't either?

2. inheritance - should be decided by a will as I mentioned in my original post
lets say that, zOMG Billybob died in a car crash at the age of 24. He didn't have a will because he was young, rakishly handsome (), in great health and had no serious health risks. What is going to happen to his belongings

3. medical benefits - should be decided by a living will as I mentioned in my original post
you don't understand this do you? You know that my wife is covered by my health insurance? That would be the medical benefits that I spoke of.

4. medical decisions - should be decided by a living will as I mentioned in my original post
see #2

5. you don't have to bear witness against your spouse - you're still married
WTF! of course you are still married but in a legal court of law spouses do not have to testify against each other. It is based on the 5th ammendment.

6. citizenship to spouses - this will end people marrying terrorists for money. You want a shortcut to citizenship-join the military.
So all those Vietnam vets who got married over there, their wives can't have US citizenship? If I had married someone I met while stationed overseas, she couldn't become a US citizen? seriously you can stop talking

No, I do not. And even if I did, how would this change my own feelings/opinions on the matter? It is a discussion, after all. They tend to get boring when everyone says the same thing.

my opinion on the matter is as follows

I think that the word marriage should never be in the government vocabulary. I think that the word marriage is too tied to religion. Government should have Civil Unions for whoever.

Now my original post about the fringe benefits of marriage was targetted towards those that want the government recognition of the institution of marriage removed. They often turn a blind eye to the other aspects of marriage, call it ignorance or being naieve(sp?)

Gotcha. My first post dealt with this initially, though, once again I mentioned that I had left out the governmental side of things in a successive post. If the fight is over a religious matter, implimenting a conceptual idea along the same order, (government included), minus the religious ties which seem to be the major focusing point for contestation, and calling it something different - such as a 'joining' or something simular would be a viable solution.

Unfortunately, even when one tries not to meddle in the marriage situation in this manner, those associated with the situation will meddle with anything simular to it.

And it's 'naive'. :) Trust me, that one drove me crazy for many years - along with 'freedom', which, for some reason, I always spelled as 'freedome'. Don't ask me why, but adding an E to the end of some words just looks right no matter how many times you write it down and think about it. Crazy English language and all of its confusing rules and exceptions, I tell you.

I thought that was how it was spelled but it didn't look right for some reason. OH well

Yup, I see it now...A moonlit night, a Spanish veranda. The beautiful ingenue steps from the outer archway just as the dashing young rogue leaps down beside her from the shadows. The music swells as they hold each other's arms, and she utters those passionate words, "Oh, Antonio, Antonio...I want to file joint returns and save up to 15% on my health insurance with you *so* much..."

Marriage is for love, defined by your faith. Civil unions are for benefits, defined by your government. The two can and should intersect, but should be totally separate, IMHO.

"Oh, Antonio, Antonio...I want to file joint returns and save up to 15% on my health insurance with you *so* much..."

were you on my honeymoon?


Now thats what I am saying, let your faith and your love be your marriage. BUT as far a government goes it should be something secular.

oh dear god. I agree with you

you saying oh dear god? isn't that kinda ironic?

Not really. I think mythical creatures make great exclamations.

Sometimes I say things like, "Great Zeus!" or "Od's Blood!"


Or my personal fave:


"Great Gorean Auction!"

another of my favorites is

oh, sweet nothingness

Nihilist Frenchie.

my glasses are thicker

Hey! I happen to wear big thick black glasses you hick!

I wear big thick glasses all the time, when I get home I'll post my snapshots (none on this computer)

1. tax benefits - should be removed. Why should married people get tax breaks?
and people with children shouldn't either?

-When a couple get married, generally, their income increases. Why add to it with taxes? And what sort of extra benefit is marriage to society anyway? Children on the other hand are a demonstrable benefit to society and cost a hell of a lot of money to raise.

2. inheritance - should be decided by a will as I mentioned in my original post
lets say that, zOMG Billybob died in a car crash at the age of 24. He didn't have a will because he was young, rakishly handsome (), in great health and had no serious health risks. What is going to happen to his belongings

-State will take them like it already does if he dies without a will.

3. medical benefits - should be decided by a living will as I mentioned in my original post
you don't understand this do you? You know that my wife is covered by my health insurance? That would be the medical benefits that I spoke of.

-Your company or your insurance company decides who is covered. It could decide to cover your wife-or anyone else of your choosing regardless of government oversight.

4. medical decisions - should be decided by a living will as I mentioned in my original post
see #2

-See #2

5. you don't have to bear witness against your spouse - you're still married
WTF! of course you are still married but in a legal court of law spouses do not have to testify against each other. It is based on the 5th ammendment.

-Again, this could still be enacted without the government controlling marriage. It could simply recognize the institution initiated by churches or other civil bodies.

6. citizenship to spouses - this will end people marrying terrorists for money. You want a shortcut to citizenship-join the military.
So all those Vietnam vets who got married over there, their wives can't have US citizenship? If I had married someone I met while stationed overseas, she couldn't become a US citizen? seriously you can stop talking

-She could still take the regular route to citizenship all the while living here as a permanent resident or some other such status until her citizenship came in.

"You can stop talking now" is what people say when they've lost an argument.

-Kiamat Dusk

It's also what people say to people who've lost arguments. So, as there's no distinction (and you're not aware of / capable of seeing the lack of distinction) present, I may safely classify you as a parrot - someone who has not examined even the grossest of their espoused opinions and merely recaps whatever seems to serve them.

I don't need to know your argument to know that I could get the same argument from someone else without the free helping of ignorant condescending attitude and personal preference and bigotry masquerading as universal principles.

Thank You, Have a Nice Day.

(That's what we say to people on their way out the door.)

Hawt <3

-When a couple get married, generally, their income increases. Why add to it with taxes? And what sort of extra benefit is marriage to society anyway? Children on the other hand are a demonstrable benefit to society and cost a hell of a lot of money to raise.

my wife doesn't work, so our income is less because I have to pay for everything.


-State will take them like it already does if he dies without a will.

the state doesn't take it, it reverts to the spouse

-Your company or your insurance company decides who is covered. It could decide to cover your wife-or anyone else of your choosing regardless of government oversight.

my insurance is from the government. /me is a state employee and a veteran

-Again, this could still be enacted without the government controlling marriage. It could simply recognize the institution initiated by churches or other civil bodies.

How? You are creating loopholes for criminals because, the way you see it a pair of bank robbers can get "married" right before trial, and then they can't be forced to testify against each other.

-She could still take the regular route to citizenship all the while living here as a permanent resident or some other such status until her citizenship came in.

the regular route? You know how hard it is to get all the correct visa's and such? seriously

"You can stop talking now" is what people say when they've lost an argument.

this is what people say to those who don't know what they are talking about.

"its better to keep ones mouth shut and be percieved a fool, than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt" Winston Churchill