North Carolina gay marriage foes have a slight lead ahead of Tuesday vote

[logroller]

That makes for a nice soundbite, but it doesn't address the issue.

You were given a list of so called 'benefits' that the fed/state govts. recognize for married couples.

These are real issues, that have govt. oversight.

Until/unless you plan to change the entire tax/estate law, your comment doesn't add any remedy to this issue.


It wasn't that long ago that interracial marriage was still illegal in some states.

Heres the thing though, neither will marriage. What they want is social acceptance, not legal rights. and though interracial hyperbole also make for a nice sound bite, the truth is there's still racial animus; from all races too. Homosexuality has been around a long time without having marriage be an issue. Whys that? I'll tell you what I think. Gays have always felt different than mainstream society; it angers some of them them to be different so they feel that some air of legitimacy might assuage the social pressure to assimilate. They are freaky perves that want the world to accept perversion as normal. Not gonna happen. I know some gays and about half of them were good people despite their perversions; probably only slightly worse than the straights. Here's my sound bite: The sooner this movement dies the aids infected death its destined for, the better off our society will be.

[Wind Song]

Yep, another day and another attitude. I simply asked an innocent question. I'm not dealing with your mood swings, maybe a rock will come in behind me and try to discuss things with you.

Fine. Ignore me then.

[Howard Roark]

Heres the thing though, neither will marriage. What they want is social acceptance, not legal rights.

Disagree. How do you force social acceptance? They want the same perks that other married people have. If you read the thread, you'll notice that there is a big difference. In my opinion, getting your spouse's pension after death is huge.

and though interracial hyperbole also make for a nice sound bite, the truth is there's still racial animus

Not a soundbite at all. There were still states that outlawed interracial marriage in the '60s. That's a fact. You are the one arguing (incorrectly) about animus, and social perception. This is about marriage.


.

Homosexuality has been around a long time without having marriage be an issue. Whys that?

It's only recently that homosexuality has been accepted by those who are intelligent enough to do so. Socially, it's been very secretive throughout history. The time has to come to move forward from social issues, to legal issues.

I'll tell you what I think. Gays have always felt different than mainstream society; it angers some of them them to be different so they feel that some air of legitimacy might assuage the social pressure to assimilate. They are freaky perves that want the world to accept perversion as normal. Not gonna happen. I know some gays and about half of them were good people despite their perversions; probably only slightly worse than the straights. Here's my sound bite: The sooner this movement dies the aids infected death its destined for, the better off our society will be.

Your warped perceptions notwithstanding, this is about the legal right to enjoy the same status as other couples.

[fj1200]

That makes for a nice soundbite, but it doesn't address the issue.

You were given a list of so called 'benefits' that the fed/state govts. recognize for married couples.

These are real issues, that have govt. oversight.

Until/unless you plan to change the entire tax/estate law, your comment doesn't add any remedy to this issue.

It wasn't that long ago that interracial marriage was still illegal in some states.

Are you going to ignore everything I've said about the issue as well? I would change the entire tax/estate law, plus SS, plus Medicare, plus, plus, plus... I put EVERYONE on equal footing.

Nice interracial straw man because it's a non-issue as everyone would be equal in my view.

You have a problem with pensions, estate taxes, social security benefits, miltary benefits, immigration law, etc?

The country is set up to favor families, and some folks want the gays and lesbians to remain second class citizens. We're not settliing for less than you have.

Our marriages and families are just as valid and deserving as yours are.

WHY do you insist on creating issues where there are none?

[Wind Song]

Disagree. How do you force social acceptance? They want the same perks that other married people have. If you read the thread, you'll notice that there is a big difference. In my opinion, getting your spouse's pension after death is huge.




Not a soundbite at all. There were still states that outlawed interracial marriage in the '60s. That's a fact. You are the one arguing (incorrectly) about animus, and social perception. This is about marriage.


.

It's only recently that homosexuality has been accepted by those who are intelligent enough to do so. Socially, it's been very secretive throughout history. The time has to come to move forward from social issues, to legal issues.






Your warped perceptions notwithstanding, this is about the legal right to enjoy the same status as other couples.

I don't know where you came from but bless you, for this post!

[Howard Roark]

Are you going to ignore everything I've said about the issue as well? I would change the entire tax/estate law, plus SS, plus Medicare, plus, plus, plus... I put EVERYONE on equal footing.

That's very noble of you. How many years do you think that will take? In the meantime, a simple change in state laws will suffice.

Nice interracial straw man because it's a non-issue as everyone would be equal in my view.

It's a non issue to those who didn't wish to marry out of their own race. Just like gay marriage is a non issue to those who aren't gay. I'm impressed with your view, but that does nothing to change existing law.

[Howard Roark]

I don't know where you came from but bless you, for this post!

Watch the youtube I posted to you a few pages back. He nails it.

[fj1200]

That's very noble of you. How many years do you think that will take? In the meantime, a simple change in state laws will suffice.

Doesn't matter and there is nothing stopping the states right now.

It's a non issue to those who didn't wish to marry out of their own race. Just like gay marriage is a non issue to those who aren't gay. I'm impressed with your view, but that does nothing to change existing law.

You must still not be aware of my position. WS "wanting it" doesn't change existing law either, she has a position and I have a position.

[logroller]

Disagree. How do you force social acceptance? They want the same perks that other married people have. If you read the thread, you'll notice that there is a big difference. In my opinion, getting your spouse's pension after death is huge.




Not a soundbite at all. There were still states that outlawed interracial marriage in the '60s. That's a fact. You are the one arguing (incorrectly) about animus, and social perception. This is about marriage.


.

It's only recently that homosexuality has been accepted by those who are intelligent enough to do so. Socially, it's been very secretive throughout history. The time has to come to move forward from social issues, to legal issues.






Your warped perceptions notwithstanding, this is about the legal right to enjoy the same status as other couples.

hey thanks for the history lesson. My warped perceptions just happen to be share by the majority of the voting public; so whos warped; really. Answer: funkin queeeers( in my best Boston accent) You know gayness was well documented in ancient times, often men took young male lovers as sort of an apprenticeship. I'm talking about the cultures which form the foundations of western thought. Buthise big mean evil prudent Christians put the kibosh on that fun little practice. But thankfully we've intelligent people, like those at penn state, who can still embrace such things.
Hey look I don't give two shits if they get married, or not. I'm just sick of all the victim talk. I'm quite intelligent, go look at my posts, I've thousands. I voted against prop 8 in California and have nothing but respect for the lifestyle choices of others. That said, God hates queers.

[jimnyc]

I don't know where you came from but bless you, for this post!

Oh, I see, you CAN be nice, and reasonable with people you post with - I just hadn't realized it meant the other person needed to share your same point of view.

[DragonStryk72]

of course you don't; but sure as hell act like your entitled to something you know nothing about.
The immunity from being compelled to testify is a privilege which exists outside of matrimony; thus, you can't say marriage alone gives you that privilege.

The only thing that I can possibly see that married people can do, which others cannot, is file their taxes jointly-- that is it. But seeing as how our tax code is fucked 8 ways from Sunday, I'd like to see a plethora of changes there anyways. If that's one of them, fine by me. Quite frankly, now that dependents need their own tax ID anyways, the purpose for married filings lacks foundation. It should just be household, as I don't see how the tax burden would differ between married persons or two cohabitants. If me and FJ want to move in together and share financial resources, regardless of whether we're lovers, it should be a financial decision the two of us should be free to enter into on a contractual basis.

See, I can go with this, and I believe that Jim, my most ardent opponent on gay marriage, could go along with this too. The problem is the rhetoric, and from how you've been writing in this thread, I see you know what I'm talking about. The fact the you are in favor of equal rights for gays, and having to defend your stance from those very people says a lot about where the fight is right now.

You know, it's funny, but the thing about gay marriage is, for those who are actually proponents of it for the right reasons, they're fighting for the right for them not to be noticed. Think about it, when was the last time anyone was surprised to see a black military officer? Seventy years ago, we didn't have that, and now, it's become the norm, not the exception. The best thing that gays can hope for is to eventually be treated with, "uh huh, moving on." That's the end game, to have acceptance on a normal basis, which means to be ignored entirely by the populace at large.

[tailfins]

Yep, another day and another attitude. I simply asked an innocent question. I'm not dealing with your mood swings, maybe a rock will come in behind me and try to discuss things with you.

[logroller]

I don't know what DS72 read into in my post but let me set the records straight. I'm a simpleminded trigger happy homophobic bigot that blames women for getting pregnant.

[tailfins]

I don't know what DS72 read into in my post but let me set the records straight. I'm a simpleminded trigger happy homophobic bigot that blames women for getting pregnant.

Should we start a "simpleminded trigger happy homophobic bigot that blames women for getting pregnant" club and go sit on the Group W bench?

[DragonStryk72]

I don't know what DS72 read into in my post but let me set the records straight. I'm a simpleminded trigger happy homophobic bigot that blames women for getting pregnant.

Lol, amazing how many of us there are, that are campaigning for equal rights? I think our movement needs a better strategy.