Looks like my ladt comment was not sent... Grr phone foruming.
I think freedom should be priority. Freedom of religion, freedom to marry who we want. Let people make their own choices especially for personal stuff like this.
Been watching Fox news here. Wow it's terrible. One show The Five was basically one democrat being bashed by four republicans. Yet the one dem actually was sticking to facts way better, it made the reps look bad, at least to someone who understands logic. Jocks bullying the smart kid.
Regarding Civil Unions, I'll quickly outline the major differences. First, they aren't federally recognized. That means no immigration for your spouse, no tax benefits, no power of attorney, etc. Second, they are matters of individual state law and therefore don't cross borders. If you get married in Nevada and move to New York, you are married in New York under the Full Faith and Credit clause of the constitution. Not so for civil unions. If you move out of the state you got your union in, it's as if you didn't get one at all. This has all sorts of problems for things like inheritance or medical visitation rights. Lastly, and this is not really a difference between the two but it's worth pointing out anyways, if you try to make Civil Unions exactly like marriage but not marriage, and give it to homosexuals, you run face first into a rather famous case called Brown v. Board of Education which found separate but equal to be unconstitutional. Thus it really is marriage or nothing.
The supreme court could smack it all down at once if they wanted to. I think you're right in thinking that probably won't happen though.Originally Posted by Erring Ryft
For the most part, everything you just listed is something people don't actually get to vote on. The only part they do is the sexual orientation bit.Originally Posted by Lensor
By the way Bristol Palin responded to Obama's opinion on Facebook, which was hilarious. Obama basically said he had a talk with his own kids, who have friends with same sex parents, and came to his new view on the matter. This was Bristol's response:
Well first of all, I think it is down right hilarious that someone like Bristol Palin, the unwed girl that got knocked up, gives the president of the United States parenting advise."While it’s great to listen to your kids’ ideas, there’s also a time when dads simply need to be dads," says the 21-year-old spawn of Sarah.
"In this case, it would’ve been helpful for him to explain to Malia and Sasha that while her friends parents are no doubt lovely people, that’s not a reason to change thousands of years of thinking about marriage."
"As great as her friends may be – we know that in general kids do better growing up in a mother/father home. Ideally, fathers help shape their kids’ worldview."
"I guess we can be glad that Malia and Sasha aren’t younger," she goes on, "Or perhaps today’s press conference might have been about appointing Dora the Explorer as Attorney General because of her success in stopping Swiper the Fox."
"Dads should lead their family in the right ways of thinking. In this case, it would’ve been nice if the President would’ve helped shape their thoughts instead of merely reflecting what many teenagers think after one too many episodes of Glee."
But of course, we also know that what she says about same sex couples raising children is completely untrue. Kids do not grow up better in a mother/father home. In fact, my own parents are divorced, and I turned out fine. There are tons of families that don't have a father, or don't have a mother. And having two mothers or two fathers really doesn't make any difference.
Also, regarding marriage, the concept of marriage has constantly changed over the many years it exists. It wasn't originally a Christian tradition at all, and has many versions across the globe. But I wouldn't expect Bristol Palin to ever read a history book. For that you would need to read first.
And apparently watching Glee makes you homosexual.
Last edited by Rob Van Der Sloot; 12-05-2012 at 13:36.
@David: then the question is why discriminating based on sex orientation ok? And consider how gender discrimination used to be ok even recently.
@Rob: Glee comment betrays her lack of maturity and understanding of the subject.
Sry double post, no edit button on phone.
I think it's fine if given churches don't marry gaays. Some other churches will, and the mariage has to have legal status.
Btw, why is gaay mariage being same but different a legal problem in the Brown case?
Legally, there's a fairly simple fix for most of the differences between civil unions and marriage, and I personally don't care about terminology that much. I'd like to see the standard be civil unions with 'marriage' being recognized as endowing the exact same rights, since I'd prefer a more secular system, but I'd be fine with marriage being the standard term and 'civil union' being linked for the exact same federal benefits (and forcing cross state recognition).