Same-sex partners to get fed benefits

[poppy]

Or beating up on people who think it shouldn't be allowed.....:boxing:

There was time not long ago when people didn't think women should be allowed to vote or own property---right or wrong?

 

[30ashopper]

I wonder what will constitute a "same-sex couple?" Will they be required to have legal documents or the same physical address or just sign up? Isn't it biased against unmarried "opposite-sex couples" unless the same benefits are offered to them?

For petes sake, they should just make some type of same-sex union legal in all of the United States and be done with it. It's too complicated otherwise.

Yes it is, there are legal implications for married couples that same sex couples will be exempt from, yet they'll still get the benefits.

This is a classic case of whack-a-mole. Politicians in Washington are all lackeys, they create more problems than they solve because none of them are willing to step up and take a stand.

 

[Blair]

There was time not long ago when people didn't think women should be allowed to vote or own property---right or wrong?

right....I'm not sure how to equate that with gay marriage though

 

[tsutcli]

Just OB pandering to the gay community after he pulled back on his campaign promise regarding "Don't ask, don't tell". Just your average flip-floping politician - change?

 

[tsutcli]

Yes, they should.

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.

 

[poppy]

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.

Maybe not, but it would certainly put a stop to the countless millions who have died trying to prove who has the toughest imaginary friend.:angry:

 

[Blair]

Maybe not, but it would certainly put a stop to the countless millions who have died trying to prove who has the toughest imaginary friend.:angry:

They'd just find something else to fight about since their faith is imaginary.....

 

[Winnie]

I wouldn't think so because opposite sex couples are allowed to marry unlike same sex couples.One day soon I hope we can stop discriminating against people based simply on the way they have sex with willing adult partners.

Being allowed to marry can't really be a qualifier.

Consider this: If you are in a same-"gender" relationship in a state where it is legal to marry and you choose not to, then you aren't eligible for the benefits. But if you live in a state where same-"gender" marriage isn't legal you are automatically eligible. That is just taking for granted that everyone in a committed relationship would marry if they could. It isn't true for opposite-"gender" couples. It isn't true for same-"gender" couples either. There isn't a way to do this fairly in the current climate.

 

[Winnie]

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.

I don't understand why neither those for nor against same sex union can tolerate a legal "civil-union" instead of a church marriage. After all, it is essentially a business contract. It could afford the same rights, privileges, and burdens of marriage without infringing on religious practice.

 

[scooterbug44]

No matter how much you fuss, people aren't going to stop being gay, so why can't we just treat gay people as equals? Homosexuality has been around for millennia, it isn't some passing fad that will go away if you are mean to them or treat them as second class citizens.

BTW, just because I don't hate gay people doesn't mean I have no religious faith. Many Christian sects have openly gay clergy - and all of them have closeted gay clergy. And most heterosexuals don't exactly limit themselves to procreation only by the Bible sex.