Same-sex partners to get fed benefits

[Kayak Fish]

So those with a moral problem with same sex marriage should just capitulate and abandon their convictions because you think it is too complicated? Maybe the other side should just give up instead - how about that? Progressives apparently always hold the high ground and the rest of us are just an uninformed group of ignorant masses. Perhaps you think a totally amoral, atheistic society is where we ought to be.

If you have a moral problem with same sex marriage don't marry anyone who is the same sex. Problem solved.

 

[poppy]

If you have a moral problem with same sex marriage don't marry anyone who is the same sex. Problem solved.

I've always wondered if the bible said "thou shalt sleep with the same sex" would those who use the bible in their anti-gay arguments do so?

 

[Winnie]

If you have a moral problem with same sex marriage don't marry anyone who is the same sex. Problem solved.

You know, that would also make the argument for gun rights, school vouchers, and capital punishment. If it offends your sensibilities, don't own a gun, don't use school vouchers, and don't give lethal injections. Problems solved.

 

[30ashopper]

In all the reporting I watched yesterday on this none of the news networks actually took the time to explain who would qualify and what were the qualifying factors. Has anybody read / seen / heard this? I wonder if qualifying partners need to be legally married in their state of residence? That doesn't seem to make much sense as I would think most federal employees are in D.C.? Or am I missing something?

Overall though this was a very small step, DOMA apparently restricts the FEDs from respecting same sex civil unions so very few benefits were actually extended.

 

[Winnie]

In all the reporting I watched yesterday on this none of the news networks actually took the time to explain who would qualify and what were the qualifying factors. Has anybody read / seen / heard this? I wonder if qualifying partners need to be legally married in their state of residence? That doesn't seem to make much sense as I would think most federal employees are in D.C.? Or am I missing something?

Overall though this was a very small step, DOMA apparently restricts the FEDs from respecting same sex civil unions so very few benefits were actually extended.

The closest definition I could find was from a letter included in an article on AMERICAblog News @ AMERICAblog News| A great nation deserves the truth: Is Obama giving federal agencies a right they already have?:

2) During the Clinton administration -- guidance was requested about whether sick leave could be used to take care of same-sex partners and/children. The answer came back that a federal employee could use their sick leave to take care of, attend doctor appointments, or even attend funerals for anyone who had the "close approximation of family". This was a guidance memo -- not policy -- but it has been available since the mid 1990's.

I misunderstood what President Obama was proposing when I first read about it. I had thought he was going to offer health insurance benefits. He still has work to do I guess.

 

[LuciferSam]

So those with a moral problem with same sex marriage should just capitulate and abandon their convictions because you think it is too complicated? Maybe the other side should just give up instead - how about that? Progressives apparently always hold the high ground and the rest of us are just an uninformed group of ignorant masses. Perhaps you think a totally amoral, atheistic society is where we ought to be.

There is a biblical precedent:

 

[Winnie]

I've always wondered if the bible said "thou shalt sleep with the same sex" would those who use the bible in their anti-gay arguments do so?

I've been giving this post some thought.

First, of course they would.
Second, aren't you satisfied to know the reason that they have objections? I mean, it is our right in this country to object to anything for absolutely no reason, a very bad reason, just any reason - good or otherwise.

There are things I object to for personal reasons I would be hesitant to share at all. I, personally, don't object to Christian nor to LGBT communities.

 

[Kayak Fish]

You know, that would also make the argument for gun rights, school vouchers, and capital punishment. If it offends your sensibilities, don't own a gun, don't use school vouchers, and don't give lethal injections. Problems solved.

I don't believe in capital punishment, but I strongly believe in the right to bear arms and in school vouchers. I also believe in the equal protection clause of the constitution. Since our government has seen the need to socially engineer this country by encouraging marriage through tax incentives (which I oppose completely), gay people should have the right to enter into these arrangements as well.

 

[poppy]

I've been giving this post some thought.

First, of course they would.
Second, aren't you satisfied to know the reason that they have objections? I mean, it is our right in this country to object to anything for absolutely no reason, a very bad reason, just any reason - good or otherwise.

There are things I object to for personal reasons I would be hesitant to share at all. I, personally, don't object to Christian nor to LGBT communities.

First, I don't think they would. Why would you engage in an activity that is just not in your nature? You are saying that even though Christians are not aroused by their same gender they would engage in sex with their gender because the bible says they should. Do you believe they support any of the following? of course not.

• DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
  If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
• DEUTERONOMY 22:22
  If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
• MARK 10:1-12
  Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
• LEVITICUS 18:19
  The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
• MARK 12:18-27
  If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
• DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
  If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.

Second, yes we can object or be offended by anything we wish, no one says we can't. I object to many things but I live with them, I don't ask that laws be passed to restrict someones rights because I disagree with their lifestyle, I just ask that laws that have discriminated unfairly be ammended.

I don't object to Christian or LGBT communities either, it just seems that Christians sometimes feel they have an inherited right not to be offended.

 

[Blair]

First, I don't think they would. Why would you engage in an activity that is just not in your nature? You are saying that even though Christians are not aroused by their same gender they would engage in sex with their gender because the bible says they should. Do you believe they support any of the following? of course not.

• DEUTERONOMY 22:13-21
  If it is discovered that a bride is not a virgin, the Bible demands that she be executed by stoning immediately.
• DEUTERONOMY 22:22
  If a married person has sex with someone else's husband or wife, the Bible commands that both adulterers be stoned to death.
• MARK 10:1-12
  Divorce is strictly forbidden in both Testaments, as is remarriage of anyone who has been divorced.
• LEVITICUS 18:19
  The Bible forbids a married couple from having sexual intercourse during a woman's period. If they disobey, both shall be executed.
• MARK 12:18-27
  If a man dies childless, his widow is ordered by biblical law to have intercourse with each of his brothers in turn until she bears her deceased husband a male heir.
• DEUTERONOMY 25:11-12
  If a man gets into a fight with another man and his wife seeks to rescue her husband by grabbing the enemy's genitals, her hand shall be cut off and no pity shall be shown her.

Second, yes we can object or be offended by anything we wish, no one says we can't. I object to many things but I live with them, I don't ask that laws be passed to restrict someones rights because I disagree with their lifestyle, I just ask that laws that have discriminated unfairly be ammended.

I don't object to Christian or LGBT communities either, it just seems that Christians sometimes feel they have an inherited right not to be offended.[/QUOTE]

Yeah that makes sense.....Christians get slammed more than any other "community" I can think of. Why are you comparing these two anyway?
Who do LGBT's worship????