Check out some similar questions!

talaniman · Jan 5, 2009, 09:48 AM

When you get married you get a tax break, but if you can't, you don't. Its one thing to have that option, and not use it, but its another thing to not be afforded the option. That's not fair.

And a greenie for New Years Starby, for standing up to hypocrisy,

starbuck8 · Jan 5, 2009, 10:13 AM

Thanks Tal! :D

I said I wasn't going to get involved in this after my comment, but hey you guys know me! Haha! It's not only the tax break issue that bothers me. I was watching a show on TV just last week. An unmarried gay couple had been together for I believe it was 15 yrs. They had adopted a child, and they were a very "normal" and well adjusted family. They had a beautiful home in a nice neighbourhood, they provided well for their 10 yr old child, they were well respected in their community, and in their neighbourhood.

Well, one of them was in a terrible accident. Neither the partner, nor the child were allowed in the hospital room. That person died without being able to say goodbye to the people that they loved the most.

Then the family of the deceased stepped in. They took everything, including the child! They left the grieving partner without their child, and took everything that the three had shared over the yrs. All of their assets and possesions, and the child was no longer allowed to see the surviving parent.

Now someone tell me how this is fair, or for that matter, HUMANE! And all because they were not ALLOWED to be married.

It burns me up!

Alty · Jan 5, 2009, 10:38 PM

A greenie from me too Starby, that was very well said, and very true.

It's sad that some people care more about some words in a book then they do about the human beings on this planet.

If this continues, I don't see the peace everyone claims to want. It won't happen, and it's so in everyone's power to make it happen.

Okay, clunk, off my soap box. ;)

JoeCanada76 · Jan 6, 2009, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by Synnen

Like I've said before in this thread: marriage has been defined in several different ways over the centuries. 1 man and as many women as he can support is STILL acceptable in some cultures.

Like I've ALSO said before: the only way to make this fair is to have EVERYONE have to have 2 ceremonies. One for the state, for the legal stuff, and one for the church for the religious stuff.

No, you can't make a church accept gay marriages, but you CAN make the state say they will not recognize legally any union that is ONLY done in a church and not through the state as well.

Very good points. I know I did not read through the whole thread. I really like your last point the best.

Take care.

JoeCanada76 · Jan 6, 2009, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello Joe:

Happy New Year to you....

Nobody here is arguing with you or your church about how YOU define marriage. The problem comes when the GOVERNMENT starts to define it, by denying rights to those who THEY think shouldn't be married.

You do agree, that the government shouldn't take the position of the church, don't you? You DO agree, that they're NOT the same thing, that they don't serve the same constituency, and that government should abide by ITS principals instead of the CHURCH'S?

excon

Yes, Excon that is true.

JoeCanada76 · Jan 6, 2009, 12:25 PM

Originally Posted by starbuck8

Thanks Tal! :D

I said I wasn't going to get involved in this after my comment, but hey you guys know me! Haha! It's not only the tax break issue that bothers me. I was watching a show on TV just last week. An unmarried gay couple had been together for I believe it was 15 yrs. They had adopted a child, and they were a very "normal" and well adjusted family. They had a beautiful home in a nice neighbourhood, they provided well for their 10 yr old child, they were well respected in their community, and in their neighbourhood.

Well, one of them was in a terrible accident. Neither the partner, nor the child were allowed in the hospital room. That person died without being able to say goodbye to the people that they loved the most.

Then the family of the deceased stepped in. They took everything, including the child! They left the grieving partner without their child, and took everything that the three had shared over the yrs. All of their assets and possesions, and the child was no longer allowed to see the surviving parent.

Now someone tell me how this is fair, or for that matter, HUMANE! And all because they were not ALLOWED to be married.

It burns me up!

No, That is not fair at all.

tomder55 · Jan 6, 2009, 12:47 PM

Well, one of them was in a terrible accident. Neither the partner, nor the child were allowed in the hospital room. That person died without being able to say goodbye to the people that they loved the most.

That's why legal recognition of domestic partnership is a must.

Synnen · Jan 6, 2009, 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by tomder55

that's why legal recognition of domestic partnership is a must.

Absolutely! Both straight AND gay partnerships!

starbuck8 · Jan 6, 2009, 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by Synnen

Absolutely! Both straight AND gay partnerships!

That needs to happen to protect people. Especially innocent children that don't have a say in this. Those two loving parents were not both legally able to adopt that child. So one of them had to, and that just happened to be the one that died. Shame on the family members that allowed this to happen in this little innocent child's life. I'm sure that the child is hurting enough losing one parent. Why cause her to lose two at the same time? :(

Dare81 · Jan 7, 2009, 01:25 AM

Originally Posted by starbuck8

That needs to happen to protect people. Especially innocent children that don't have a say in this. Those two loving parents were not both legally able to adopt that child. So one of them had to, and that just happened to be the one that died. Shame on the family members that allowed this to happen in this little innocent childs life. I'm sure that the child is hurting enough losing one parent. Why cause her to lose two at the same time?? :(

When this couple adopted the child didn't they know there was possibility that this could happen?? Little irresponsible on the part of the parents too wouldn't you agree

excon · Jan 7, 2009, 04:30 AM

Originally Posted by Dare81

Little irresponsible on the part of the parents too wouldn't you agree

Hello Dare:

Yeah, blaming the victim is an old right wing trick... But, we got you figured out...

excon

Dare81 · Jan 7, 2009, 04:36 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello Dare:

Yeah, blaming the victim is an old right wing trick.... But, we got you figured out....

excon

It's a valid question, no need to get all riled up. I just wanted to see what people think about it
For your information I am for gay marriages.

v1033 · Jan 7, 2009, 06:18 AM

Dave what else you think they could have done?

starbuck8 · Jan 7, 2009, 09:22 AM

Originally Posted by Dare81

When this couple adopted the child didn't they know there was possibility that this could happen??? Little irresponsible on the part of the parents too wouldn't you agree

Actually, I can't remember all of the details of the story, but from my understanding the couple thought that they had their I's dotted and their T's crossed. But as the way things often happen, their was obviously a glitch in the system somewhere that failed them. So the relatives that had frowned upon their gay union, found the loopholes I assume.

Synnen · Jan 7, 2009, 09:49 AM

Because in a homosexual relationship, the relationship is not deemed "legal", the family, who DOES have legal recourse, can overturn things like wills and stated child custody preferences.

Basically, there is no legal protection for the surviving partner in a gay relationship if the family of the deceased contests his or her wishes. Because the family DOES have a legal connection to the deceased (next of kin), they can contest any legal document the deceased has--like a will--for their own benefit.

THAT is why gay marriage needs to be allowed. They should be allowed to have the SAME legal rights as any other spouse in the country if something happens.

starbuck8 · Jan 7, 2009, 09:59 AM

So true! Can you imagine how many other things like that happen to these couples all of the time? Everything from legalities concerning children, to banking, healthcare, legal dealings, insurance policies, and the list goes on. I can't even imagine being in a situation like that, where you are treated as less than person. And still people think that being gay is a choice. Who would choose this?

SammyWammy · Feb 10, 2009, 01:56 AM

I'm not gay but I'm all for gay marriage
Its what will make some people happy
There isn't nothing wrong with that

earl237 · Feb 27, 2009, 07:29 PM

I support civil unions.

liz28 · Feb 27, 2009, 07:51 PM

I thought we live in the land of the free. Freedom of speech and to marry whoever we choice whether if it is the same sex.

Fr_Chuck · Feb 27, 2009, 08:01 PM

Lots of freedom in the US Constitution, but there is actually no "right" to marry at all listed,
Marriage was a state law to be regulated by the state. At 16 some states allow you to marry, others don't, at 16 some states allow you to have sex, others don't,
And there can not nor should there be "complete" freedom from morality, since there has to be a limit at some point