What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

I used to think that "civil unions" were the way to go too .. but only if "marriage" was taken out of the government realm entirely and EVERYONE who was married, gay or straight, got a "civil union" license. Taking "marriage" out of the government realm entirely would require making changes to the tax code and to things such as how social security benefits work. It would be easier, and it would be right, to just let gay people get married already. WITH the full rights and benefits that all married people get, such as being able to receive social security benefits when their spouse dies, being able to be on their spouse's health insurance plan without getting taxed for it, and being able to visit their spouse in the hospital.

Bottom line: 'separate but equal' is ugly, and civil unions/domestic partnerships isn't really 'equal' anyways.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

In before the lock.

They're only getting married for tax purposes. If you don't like them, be patient as they die out. They can't reproduce, anyway.
 
Re: The 2nd Term - Round 2 - Amensty for Some, Miniature AR-15s for Others...

UND92UMNLaw99 said:
I used to think that "civil unions" were the way to go too .. but only if "marriage" was taken out of the government realm entirely and EVERYONE who was married, gay or straight, got a "civil union" license.
Click to expand...
yes

UND92UMNLaw99 said:
Taking "marriage" out of the government realm entirely would require making changes to the tax code and to things such as how social security benefits work....WITH the full rights and benefits that all people [in civil unions] get, such as being able to receive social security benefits when their spouse dies, being able to be on their spouse's health insurance plan without getting taxed for it, and being able to visit their spouse in the hospital.
Click to expand...
yes.

It also neatly sidesteps all the "separation of church and state" issues as well. Can the state force churches to recognize a same-sex marriage? Can gay men now sue churches who refuse to marry them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top