Speaking of Constitutional Amendments
|
|
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
jrjo
Gone Fishin
|
|
|
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 16451
Location: Lake Wobegon, MN
|
| Back to top
|
|
 Posted: 06/06/06 - 22:21 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | As I wrote in my blog the other day, let's have all the married heteros living in this country lose all the health, life, dental, and car insurance benefits that they currently enjoy b/c they're married. And all the retirement benefits. And all the tax benefits. And all the office wedding showers. Whoops, almost forgot automatic guardianship over a spouse. And to be really au courant, let’s make it difficult for my family to prove we’re a family so we can do exotic things like join a swim club. |
In other words, it is all about the money. Got it.
|
|
|
|
|
keltic63
the kilted one
|
|
|
Joined: 17 May 2002
Posts: 8574
Location: under the weather
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/06/06 - 23:17 Post subject:
| jrjo wrote: | | Gogirlgo wrote: | | As I wrote in my blog the other day, let's have all the married heteros living in this country lose all the health, life, dental, and car insurance benefits that they currently enjoy b/c they're married. And all the retirement benefits. And all the tax benefits. And all the office wedding showers. Whoops, almost forgot automatic guardianship over a spouse. And to be really au courant, let’s make it difficult for my family to prove we’re a family so we can do exotic things like join a swim club. |
In other words, it is all about the money. Got it. |
no, it's not about the money. it's about being able to see my SO in the hospital if he's in critical or intensive care, or even in the emergency room. It's about fulfilling his final wishes and placing his body to rest in the way that I know he desired. It's about him being able to live in the house we shared without having to pay exorbitant inheritance and estate taxes on the home that his income helped pay for. It's also about ending govt legislation that says my relationship is second class just because it is not heterosexual. And Finally, and most importantly, it's about love. No matter how hard heterosexuals try to paint it as something else, they just can't get over the fact that 2 men, or 2 women, could possibly fall in love. So whether we ever get the opportunity to have that recognized officially, it doesn't really matter, because we have what's important.
|
|
|
|
|
camelia bedelia
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 15 May 2002
Posts: 2808
Location: God's Country
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/06/06 - 23:30 Post subject:
jrjo - how does recognizing gay marriage impose or infringe on your religious convictions?
|
|
|
|
|
sonnylax
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 30 Sep 2003
Posts: 2942
Location: Living in a lollipop and unicorn world
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 08:21 Post subject:
| andydp wrote: | | Our Constitution is too precious to be used as a political tool. Leave it alone. Let the states handle this issue as they see fit. If New Mexico feels the need to allow it and South Dakota does not then so be it. |
So then, how is gay marriage any different then say abortion, gambling, prostitution, etc.? The Constitution is pretty clear on what the Federal Govt. can't do. All other rights are retained by the people. Why is this issue different?
If the folks in California, NY, and Mass. want to approve gay marriage - I say let them have it. But to mandate this from the federal/US Constitution level is silly/unnecessary.
|
|
|
|
|
keltic63
the kilted one
|
|
|
Joined: 17 May 2002
Posts: 8574
Location: under the weather
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 08:48 Post subject:
| sonnylax wrote: | | So then, how is gay marriage any different then say abortion, gambling, prostitution, etc.? The Constitution is pretty clear on what the Federal Govt. can't do. All other rights are retained by the people. Why is this issue different? |
so you're saying that wanting gay marriage, or being gay, is criminal?
|
|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 09:26 Post subject:
| jrjo wrote: | | Gogirlgo wrote: | | As I wrote in my blog the other day, let's have all the married heteros living in this country lose all the health, life, dental, and car insurance benefits that they currently enjoy b/c they're married. And all the retirement benefits. And all the tax benefits. And all the office wedding showers. Whoops, almost forgot automatic guardianship over a spouse. And to be really au courant, let’s make it difficult for my family to prove we’re a family so we can do exotic things like join a swim club. |
In other words, it is all about the money. Got it. |
Apparently, you truly don't get it.
But if it were just a question of economics, it would be easy to see how radically unfair the denial of those benefits are to a particular group of people. It is discrimination, there's no other word for it. But for their homosexuality, these people could enjoy the same benefits you do. Maybe if you don't get the benefits and have to live a more expensive life where you get no legal say about the love of your life, you'll think differently.
|
|
|
|
|
j1miller
Puppy Love!
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Jul 2002
Posts: 15447
Location: Lost on trail.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 09:26 Post subject:
| jrjo wrote: | | j1miller wrote: | | Marraige between siblings is a health issue, I belive. The genetic similarities make it dangerous. |
If I might parallel to gay marriage with this one. The 'dangerous genetics' come from what would happen with having children, right? So what if there was an agreement in "sibling marriages" that they couldn't have children? That'd be no different than gay marriage, no? So we take away the "health" issue of sibling marriage, then it should be allowed no different than gay marriage. So really, those supporting gay marriage should have no qualms with supporting childless-sibling marriage as I see it. |
Actually, you are right. IF there are no children able to be bourne, I don't have a problem with it. I think it's wrong, but, whatever. That's for them and God to work out.
|
|
|
|
|
gretriever
Hipster Doofus
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 19385
Location: A moving target in a firing range.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 09:31 Post subject:
Not pertaining to the topic (directly), but a question for you, Go:
Tax benefits for married couples? Where? It seems that one of the big features of the Republican efforts for tax reform is to do away with the "marriage penalty". If so, doesn't that indicate that married couples don't have an advantage over un-married couples in that aspect?
|
|
|
|
|
j1miller
Puppy Love!
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Jul 2002
Posts: 15447
Location: Lost on trail.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 09:33 Post subject:
| Quote: | | I do think it's interesting that people who usually protest any and all forms of government interference don't seem to mind it when they think the government will legislate morality. |
I'm Libertarian, and hate government intervention on just about any level. I am behind an ammendment limiting the government's ability to ban gay marraige. I guess I'm an exception to that.
|
|
|
|
|
j1miller
Puppy Love!
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Jul 2002
Posts: 15447
Location: Lost on trail.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 09:44 Post subject:
| gretriever wrote: | Not pertaining to the topic (directly), but a question for you, Go:
Tax benefits for married couples? Where? It seems that one of the big features of the Republican efforts for tax reform is to do away with the "marriage penalty". If so, doesn't that indicate that married couples don't have an advantage over un-married couples in that aspect? |
ok, I'm not Go, but I think she means more of the Social Security benefits that come into play for spouses upon the death of the other spouse.
There are a lot of financial benefits to being married. Joint filing of taxes is not one of them, but that does not preclude the others.
|
|
|
|
|
robp
Pyromaniac
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Jul 2002
Posts: 16242
Location: Waiting in line at the beer store...
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 10:08 Post subject:
| keltic63 wrote: | | sonnylax wrote: | | So then, how is gay marriage any different then say abortion, gambling, prostitution, etc.? The Constitution is pretty clear on what the Federal Govt. can't do. All other rights are retained by the people. Why is this issue different? |
so you're saying that wanting gay marriage, or being gay, is criminal? |
Since when is abortion and gambling criminal? And prostitution is legal in a few places where it is regulated by the state.
|
|
|
|
|
MechEngDropout
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 10474
Location: Off the grid
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 10:18 Post subject:
| robp wrote: | | keltic63 wrote: | | sonnylax wrote: | | So then, how is gay marriage any different then say abortion, gambling, prostitution, etc.? The Constitution is pretty clear on what the Federal Govt. can't do. All other rights are retained by the people. Why is this issue different? |
so you're saying that wanting gay marriage, or being gay, is criminal? |
Since when is abortion and gambling criminal? And prostitution is legal in a few places where it is regulated by the state. |
|
|
|
|
|
Gogirlgo
Member
|
|
|
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 4777
Location: No deal, stalker.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 10:58 Post subject:
| j1miller wrote: | | gretriever wrote: | Not pertaining to the topic (directly), but a question for you, Go:
Tax benefits for married couples? Where? It seems that one of the big features of the Republican efforts for tax reform is to do away with the "marriage penalty". If so, doesn't that indicate that married couples don't have an advantage over un-married couples in that aspect? |
ok, I'm not Go, but I think she means more of the Social Security benefits that come into play for spouses upon the death of the other spouse.
There are a lot of financial benefits to being married. Joint filing of taxes is not one of them, but that does not preclude the others. |
Well, how about if my spouse and I own property together and file jointly, we can write off the interest on the mortgage as a deduction that benefits both of us, whereas if someone like Kelt and his SO live together, they can't get the same benefit jointly?
Another is: if I'm married and there are children, we claim them as a deduction jointly. If we're not married, we can't enjoy the deduction jointly. There are indeed tax benefits to being married.
|
|
|
|
|
j1miller
Puppy Love!
|
|
|
Joined: 07 Jul 2002
Posts: 15447
Location: Lost on trail.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 11:04 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | j1miller wrote: | | gretriever wrote: | Not pertaining to the topic (directly), but a question for you, Go:
Tax benefits for married couples? Where? It seems that one of the big features of the Republican efforts for tax reform is to do away with the "marriage penalty". If so, doesn't that indicate that married couples don't have an advantage over un-married couples in that aspect? |
ok, I'm not Go, but I think she means more of the Social Security benefits that come into play for spouses upon the death of the other spouse.
There are a lot of financial benefits to being married. Joint filing of taxes is not one of them, but that does not preclude the others. |
Well, how about if my spouse and I own property together and file jointly, we can write off the interest on the mortgage as a deduction that benefits both of us, whereas if someone like Kelt and his SO live together, they can't get the same benefit jointly?
Another is: if I'm married and there are children, we claim them as a deduction jointly. If we're not married, we can't enjoy the deduction jointly. There are indeed tax benefits to being married. |
I see your line of thought. ALthough, the mortgage interest is still deducted in full, jut by one party, and the kids are both claimed, just seperately.... I'm not a tax expert, but don't married couples pay at a higher tax rate?
I do agree with Go that being married has a lot of financial benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
gretriever
Hipster Doofus
|
|
|
Joined: 16 Jul 2003
Posts: 19385
Location: A moving target in a firing range.
|
| Back to top
|
|
Posted: 06/07/06 - 13:10 Post subject:
| Gogirlgo wrote: | | Well, how about if my spouse and I own property together and file jointly, we can write off the interest on the mortgage as a deduction that benefits both of us, whereas if someone like Kelt and his SO live together, they can't get the same benefit jointly? |
I don't think you have to be married to have two person's names appear on the title to property (real estate). But I'm not sure.
| Quote: | | Another is: if I'm married and there are children, we claim them as a deduction jointly. If we're not married, we can't enjoy the deduction jointly. There are indeed tax benefits to being married. |
The IRS does not recognize common-law marriages? Social Security does (it depends, though, on a state-by-state basis) .If that's how you meant the above, obviously someone like Keltic and SO still would not benefit. If you meant not married as in separated/divorced then again I have to plead not being cognizant of the tax laws.
|
|
|
|
| |
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
|
|
|
