Homosexual Marriage

[MarisaKirisame]

The only problem with that is that people sometimes view homosexuality as if it's always a choice.

Being black is not a choice.

I'm not saying that means people will be unwilling to change their opinions on it, I'm just saying that it'll probably be more difficult.

[Snapps]

I'm coming in to voice my opinion. If it's already been said, then you're wrong since it wasn't spoken by me.

Marriage is just signing legal documents. Ceremonial services are slightly religious based, but mostly just custom and not many people think of it as religious.

I personally think gays should be able to marry, since it's just a legal statement binding two people together for legal reasons like status, sharing opportunities, and such.

[Snowcrafta]

To put things really into perspective, this is about money.

Everything is about money, any issue that makes news is about money. If it wasn't about money, our government would give less than a **** about it.

The issue more than anything is the marriage penalty tax law. When two heterosexual people are married, they're taxed differently than if they were two single heteros.

Copy/paste from wikipedia to look smart

The marriage penalty in the United States refers to the higher taxes required from some married couples, where spouses are making approximately the same taxable income, filing one tax return ("married filing jointly") than for the same two people filing two separate tax returns (as single, not "married filing separately"). The percentage of couples affected has varied over the years, depending on shifts in tax rates.

The source of this increase in taxes has its roots in the progressive tax-rate structure in income-tax laws, that is, a higher income pays a higher rate of tax. In such a context income averaging is advantageous to the taxpayer. E.g. two persons, one making $80,000 and the other making $20,000 in a particular year, will pay a larger combined tax than they would if both had an income of $50,000 in the same year.

Married couples normally combine their income which, when the spouses' monetary incomes are disparate, affords them the advantage of this income averaging. To compensate for this somewhat, the U.S. income tax law provides for somewhat higher tax rates on that averaged income (married couples pay more than twice the tax of a single person making half of the income) for the "married filing jointly" taxpayer class. So although couples with disparate incomes (which is the case for a stay-at-home spouse married to a "breadwinner") will gain a tax advantage from the income averaging, married couples having roughly equal personal incomes gain nothing from such income averaging yet remain subject to the higher tax bracket (for "married filing jointly") and thus pay more total tax than they would as two single persons.

Occasionally, this "marriage penalty" has become a campaign issue for various candidates and there have been piecemeal laws enacted to reduce it, none completely successfully

Gay people have always had the ability to get married from the religious point. If you wanted to, you could get married to a daffy duck rubber raft. All you need to do is find a preacher, give the vows, wala. You're married.

[devonin]

So...to address the disparity in tax rates, married couples are taxed -MORE- but gays can't be legally married because of money? That makes no sense.

[jewpinthethird]

Originally Posted by devonin

So...to address the disparity in tax rates, married couples are taxed -MORE- but gays can't be legally married because of money? That makes no sense.

Well, it make sense from the perspective that it should be more costly to be in a homosexual relationship...you know, to weed out those people who are just doing it to be hip and cool.

[MarisaKirisame]

Originally Posted by jewpinthethird

you know, to weed out those people who are just doing it to be hip and cool.

I probably shouldn't've laughed as much as I did at this.

With you, not at you, of course.

[devonin]

Originally Posted by jewpinthethird

Well, it make sense from the perspective that it should be more costly to be in a homosexual relationship...you know, to weed out those people who are just doing it to be hip and cool.

But as everyone knows, its only gay -women- who do it to be hip and cool, and as everyone also knows, even the most homophobic man only has a problem with gay men, gay women are "hot"

[hayatewillown]

1. America was founded under Christianity. I'm sure any history book will tell you that.
2. I hate the damn liberals and democrats trying to twist and change the constitution so a bunch of gays can get married and act like a married couple.
3. You work to get what you want in America. If you want to be gay, fine, thats your choice, but stay the hell away from the constitution.
4. I don't hate gays, but if a ****** ever touches me, I'm going to kick his ass.

The only problem with that is that people sometimes view homosexuality as if it's always a choice.

Being black is not a choice.

I'm not saying that means people will be unwilling to change their opinions on it, I'm just saying that it'll probably be more difficult.

You're comparing race and sexuality to one another. Bad idea. You can be black, and choose to be gay. With race, you don't get to choose. People cannot "scientifically" be gay. They choose it. Thats what I'm always going to think, and if some idiot tells me otherwise, screw him.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by hayatewillown

4. I don't hate gays, but if a ****** ever touches me, I'm going to kick his ass.

Thats what I'm always going to think, and if some idiot tells me otherwise, screw him.

I'm going to have to ask you to never post in CT again until you revise these sentiments and start thinking like a rational person.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[devonin]

Originally Posted by hayatewillown

1. America was founded under Christianity. I'm sure any history book will tell you that.

Many of the founding fathers were very blatantly deists and agnostics. Any review of the primary documents they produced will tell you that.

2. I hate the damn liberals and democrats trying to twist and change the constitution so a bunch of gays can get married and act like a married couple.

Easy there killer. Any change to the constitution requires a sufficient majority vote -twice- followed by the approval of the elected president. If such a change gets through, your country in the majority -wanted- it. If that is such a huge issue for you, emigrate. There are plenty ofmore strictly conservative countries out there.

3. You work to get what you want in America. If you want to be gay, fine, thats your choice, but stay the hell away from the constitution.

Actually, a huge pile of evidence suggests that it is -not- their choice at all. Homosexuality is at -least- as much genetic as it is societal, and it is incredibly ignorant to suggest that every homosexual just up and decided one day "Knowing there are guys like hayatewillown out there, who will "kick my ass" if I so much as touch them, I'll just start being gay now."

4. I don't hate gays, but if a ****** ever touches me, I'm going to kick his ass.

EDIT: Request for CT ban removed, Guido is ten ninjas.

You're comparing race and sexuality to one another. Bad idea. You can be black, and choose to be gay. With race, you don't get to choose. People cannot "scientifically" be gay. They choose it. Thats what I'm always going to think, and if some idiot tells me otherwise, screw him.

Yeah, the entire scientifici community certainly qualifies as "some idiot" You -can- choose to be gay, but the point is that the vast VAST majority of homosexuals and bisexuals have been that way their entire life. And as for not being able to choose race, go read 'Black Like Me' some time.

[Kilgamayan]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

I'm going to have to ask you to never post in CT again until you revise these sentiments and start thinking like a rational person.

Frankly, given his CT posting history, I'm surprised you haven't asked this before.

[kommisar[os]]

Go watch chuck and larry. Then you'll see why the government doesn't want gay marriage.

90% of the time it isn't accepted because of religion. I'm not going to get into why their decisions are often incredibly foolish, but i will say that loving someone is the same in all forms, weather it be homosexual or heterosexual. The old mentality of last century still has influences on today's society and this is a great example.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

Frankly, given his CT posting history, I'm surprised you haven't asked this before.

According to devonin, I have, but since I couldn't remember doing so I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and just watch him more closely.

Clearly, I made the wrong choice.

Originally Posted by kommisar[os

]but i will say that loving someone is the same in all forms, weather it be homosexual or heterosexual.

Given the religious nature of the first half of the sentence, I'm reading this from a religious point of view, and from there, I'm going to say that you're very, very wrong.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[devonin]

According to devonin, I have

Yeah, that was actually Jewp, but he did it as an "In after lock" on your lock, so I got confused.

[devilsdeviousdancer]

Ok, I understand that gay marriage makes some people uneasy, or goes against religious beleifs, but it's not your choice what others do, you can't tell them that they aren't allowed to be attracted to a person of the same sex. Why should we take away the freedom of these people to express their sexuallity? Do we have the right to do this, since not long ago these homosexual people had the right to be married in this way? I have been part of many homosexual weddings, I have countless friends who are homosexual. Yes, I am hetrosexual and yes it does make me slightly uncomfortable to be near them but do I go over and tell them to stop being the way they are? No, becuase that was the choice those two made, and they are truly in love. I am also proud to say that my friends are homosexual. It should be allowed I don't understand why people can't realize that these homosexual couples do have children just not in the traditional way, they either adopt children or they get AI. When they adopt they are taken this child from a possibly bad future, accidental teenage pregnancy, which might not end up surviving in a good home or from over in Africa or somewhere in an orphanage. It's a great idea to keeps homosexual marriage and I'm proud that I have worked at around 5 in the past year.

[Kilgamayan]

Just out of curiosity, what does a marriage offer that a civil union doesn't?

[devonin]

Originally Posted by Kilgamayan

Just out of curiosity, what does a marriage offer that a civil union doesn't?

For those places that -offer- civil unions, they have many of the same benefits and resonsibilities, but do differ in several of the more important aspects like the guardianship of children, inheritance of estates and so forth. For amusement sake, I also believe that spousal priviledge doesn't apply to those in commonlaw or civil unions, so you could actually be made to testify against your partner in legal proceedings (I find this quite amusing)

The issue is that since "marriage" is both the religious -and- secular name for it in most places, it is very difficult to get people to see and comprehend the differnece.

[Professor Raine]

But what really gets me mad about banning two people of the same gender to be recognized by the U.S. that they are together forever is that it really is just the opinion of how people feel that prevents this. And the only religion that says homosexuality is a sin is Christianity, that's really it. It's affect on the world has been quite devastating (where some African nations execute homosexuals for who they are). I'll take into example the movie Fire. If you never heard of it, it's a movie about two Hindu woman in India see to each other through their forced relationships in each other. The movie never aired in India, despite the screening was going to be held in New Delhi. Now, I know that Hinduism allows homosexuality, but it sounds like India has a problem with it. Why? Opinion. If you force your opinion on those and it would be against their rights, IT'S WRONG. I'm moving from America in a while cause this place needs help, badly.

[devonin]

You live in a democracy. Popular opinion is -supposed- to determine these things.

[Kilroy_x]

Not in it's entirety, otherwise the judiciary wouldn't have been designed to operate independently of public opinion and representative government would have no place in our system. Anyways, the ways things are doesn't always equal up to the way things ought to be.