Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

[Tickmeoff]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

Ever consider that same-sex marriage could be exploited? How many people would suddenly become "gay" just for the benefits and otherwise lead heterosexual lives? There's a catch to heterosexual marriage and why there are benefits - kids are usually a natural consequence.

Tax breaks.

there are a number of benefits for being married. lower taxes are one. You also gain additional legal rights, such as the ability to visit one another in hospitals. There are many other things which have benefits for married couples, such as insurance. Some places give discounts to married couples, or require you to be married to take advantage of something (such as hotels and travel deals).

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

As of 2007, California affords domestic partnerships all of the same rights and responsibilities as marriages under state law (Cal. Fam. Code §297.5). Among these:

• Making health care decisions for each other in certain circumstances
• Hospital and jail visitation rights that were previously reserved for family members related by blood, adoption or marriage to the sick, injured or incarcerated person.
• Access to family health insurance plans (Cal. Ins. Code §10121.7)
• Spousal insurance policies (auto, life, homeowners etc..), this applies to all forms of insurance through the California Insurance Equality Act (Cal. Ins. Code §381.5)
• Sick care and similar family leave
• Stepparent adoption procedures
• Presumption that both members of the partnership are the parents of a child born into the partnership
• Suing for wrongful death of a domestic partner
• Rights involving wills, intestate succession, conservatorships and trusts
• The same property tax provisions otherwise available only to married couples (Cal. R&T Code §62p)
• Access to some survivor pension benefits
• Supervision of the Superior Court of California over dissolution and nullity proceedings
• The obligation to file state tax returns as a married couple (260k) commencing with the 2007 tax year (Cal R&T Code §18521d)
• The right for either partner to take the other partner's surname after registration
• Community property rights and responsibilities previously only available to married spouses
• The right to request partner support (alimony) upon dissolution of the partnership (divorce)
• The same parental rights and responsibilities granted to and imposed upon spouses in a marriage

In California at least, domestic partners are already afforded the same rights as a married couple.

Not that I am in favor of Prop 8 though. I think anyone who voted Yes on that trash has to be a mindless church drone or a homphobe.

[Caspian]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

What about federal income tax returns?

[Feba]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

We weren't talking to BBQ. We were talking to the person who didn't know what benefits they got from being married.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

All this proves is that there is no non-religious basis to ban gay marriage.

Science tells me they can't possibly have kids.

Law tells me living in a home together and having kids are partly why the tax breaks exist.

Logic tells me that both kinds of marriages cannot be equal for the above reasons.

If we try to make them equal, we have to say the gay marriages may have a chance at being obligated to adopt a kid? But is it fair to force adoption? That's a whole other ethical can of worms to play with.

People are against gay marriage because the concept of it thus far demands to be treated equally when when the situation is not. There are a lot of other reasons to have benefits in a gay marriage, but kids are not a big part of them

Again, I'm not against it, I just see the problems behind it. Did you see any religious reasoning in any of what I've said?

Didn't think so.

Also, the angst toward religion here isn't showing you guys to be taking the higher ground, only that your're just as capable of being as ignorant and bigoted as those you dislike.

[Luna]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

We weren't talking to BBQ. We were talking to the person who didn't know what benefits they got from being married.

Yeah sorry I didnt really look into the benefits of getting married. That was not the reason I got married to begin with x.X

[Feba]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

Science tells me they can't possibly have kids.

Law tells me living in a home together and having kids are partly why the tax breaks exist.

Logic tells me there are plenty of infertile couples you could say the same thing about. Should they not be allowed to marry?

Also, if the tax breaks for marriage are for raising children, why do A- they not require you to actually have children, and B- we ALSO have tax credits for actually having children?

If we try to make them equal, we have to say the gay marriages may have a chance at being obligated to adopt a kid?

Again, logically speaking, should heterosexual marriages be forced to procreate? The OPTION of raising children is NOT a requirement for marriage, whether gay or straight.

Did you see any religious reasoning in any of what I've said?

Yes, I did. You have absolutely zero logical basis, but you're willing to think of paper thin excuses to ban something that you personally dislike. That's pretty much exactly what religious reasoning is.

Your 'non-religious' reasons for banning gay marriage are even worse than 'non-religious' reasons for creationism.

[Ameroth]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

Science tells me they can't possibly have kids.

Marriage exists for the sole purpose of procreation? Right. The uncountable amount of children born out of wedlock each year tells me otherwise.

If we try to make them equal, we have to say the gay marriages may have a chance at being obligated to adopt a kid? But is it fair to force adoption? That's a whole other ethical can of worms to play with.

Is there some secret clause on all marriage licenses that states a couple is obligated to bring children into this world and/or raise them to continue to be married? Last I checked, marriage was a commitment two people make to each other usually on the basis of love; not procreation.

Also, the angst toward religion here isn't showing you guys to be taking the higher ground, only that your're just as capable of being as ignorant and bigoted as those you dislike.

Like I already said, I do have 'angst' against most, if not all, organized religions around the globe. However, I'm not the intolerant bigot you make me out to be in that I believe in a person's right to choose whatever spiritual path they choose. A luxury those same people will not afford to another group of people.

[Caspian]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

Well, color me surprised

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

Well, color me surprised

Dunno what you're trying to say about that article, seemed like they were pointing out an obvious gap in coverage between Obama and McCain.

Then there was the tremendous gap in coverage between Biden and Palin... or was there really any coverage for Biden at all aside from the debate? Seriously, you couldn't get anything on this guy most of the time.

Black Candidate or non-Hillary Female candidate and the press ate that shit up. Hell, for the remainder of the election I was starting to wonder if coverage on McCain existed any more than coverage on Biden.

And as for coverage of the Libertarian presidential candidate?

Yeah, there actually was one, but you wouldn't have known it til you got to the polls last Tuesday. That's how awesome a job our media is doing.

[Caspian]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

Yeah, that was my point. I've talked to a few people who refused to acknowledge how biased reporters and the media at large were in this election.
I couldn't even remember the Libertarian's name until I saw it on the screen Tuesday afternoon. I had heard the name once in a quick tv spot for the news that night, then never heard it again. I'd love to see the day when its more than just Republicans and Dems getting press coverage and money. It might actually even things up.

[BurningPanther]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

I've talked to a few people who refused to acknowledge how biased reporters and the media at large were in this election.

You mean there are people that still don't get it?

That shit has been apparent to me since I was seven.

[Caspian]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

You mean there are people that still don't get it?

That shit has been apparent to me since I was seven.

Some people are just slow. Really slow.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

You mean there are people that still don't get it?

There are people so into the politics as usual you can't tear them away from the obvious trainwreck. We had people here arguing that there wasn't a liberal media for a while and that's just crazy. Just because Fox News exists doesn't mean the rest of the media turned non-partisan.

Good news is that the media is now suffering the same fate as music, magazines and games - the Internet will win out.

The only thing the Internet can't beat is the asthetic appeal of going to movie theatres, turning the pages of a novel or biography and things like going to a concert. In other words - actually being there for the sensory experience. Also, reading books off a monitor is murder on the eyes. Magazine article? Not so much.

[Lmnop]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

Sorry, guys. I have to bring this up.

Did you see any religious reasoning in any of what I've said?

Yes, I did. You have absolutely zero logical basis, but you're willing to think of paper thin excuses to ban something that you personally dislike. That's pretty much exactly what religious reasoning is.

Your 'non-religious' reasons for banning gay marriage are even worse than 'non-religious' reasons for creationism.

You're putting words in his mouth. You're interpreting his outlook based on what's convenient for you. Whether or not 'bbq is religious, he gave a reason where it could be exploited. Hell, even I don't agree it's reason enough to outlaw gay marriages, but that's not the point. It's just easier for you to assume he's being emotional and clinging to whatever he can for an advantage but honestly, that's you. You need him to be flawed so your argument can seem more sound.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Your Local Elections - are you paying attention to them?

You're putting words in his mouth. You're interpreting his outlook based on what's convenient for you. Whether or not 'bbq is religious, he gave a reason where it could be exploited. Hell, even I don't agree it's reason enough to outlaw gay marriages, but that's not the point. It's just easier for you to assume he's being emotional and clinging to whatever he can for an advantage but honestly, that's you. You need him to be flawed so your argument can seem more sound.

That's pretty much the size of it. Its also Feba in general, but particularly when he's coming down off of political highs. He's young, just starting to understand politics, but remains in world that's seen in black-and-white. He's not lived the grey areas yet.

I'd love to know where I stated that I was against gay marriage. I was pretty straight forward in saying that I was not against it at all. In fact, its one of the few times I've clearly stated my position on a political matter from the outset. I guess things like objectivity and being able to see the potentials of the other side make me overtly religious and therefore biased.

I actually like and prefer to be aloof on my political positions, because when I am, it frustrates people like Feba who want you to take a position and forces them to draw conclusions. It keeps them going and going until they're given something that conflicts with what they made themselves believe about you. Then they go pop.

Can one have a discussion about gay marriage without bringing religion into it? I do think that's possible, and yet, who brought religion into this discussion in the first place?

People looking for something to blame. And the target of blame is, unsurprisingly, a stereotypical target. Assumed "hatred" of gays is bad, but hatred of people believing in "imaginary people in the sky" is not.

Go, go "tolerance!" Because voting for a black guy or knowing a gay guy by six degrees totally prevents you from being a bigot in other departments.