Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61395 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Mar 28, 2013, titled Gay marriage. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering two controversial cases involving whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry: Proposition 8, California's 2008 ban on gay marriage, and the Defense of Marriage Act, which since 1996 has defined marriage for federal purposes as a union between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3170 May 10, 2013
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> I'm not talking about single couples, single people. So in order to be fair to everyone we have to "raise" everyones taxes? Ok whatever ,as long as its fair I guess, but I bet we could find a way to reward single people for being single. Something that might help decrease the surplus population. I'm tired of getting 200 some dollars taken out of my paychecks when I need that money. That's over 200 a week and they give me back 900 at the end of the year. Why should I have to pay all that when I could use it to plan my future, being a family or just early retirement? Why? Why? Why should I have too and why do couples ( gay or straight) deserve it more than me? Explain it without sounding discriminatory.
why do 49% of you fools not pay any FIT at all while for years and years i carried your asses? you are arguing tax reform, not marriage laws.
d pantz

United States

#3171 May 10, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>is there any reason to respect bigots? in fact, that would be a poor moral choice.
absolutely not. That's why in the next year we will find that single americans are the majority, and ssm is really a non issue to them because the gay community would be included in the fight for equal tax laws. http://m.youtube.com/watch... we understand that gays are discriminated against for the choice to be gay. We just don't understand the double standard for single people who made a free choice. Unless you like excluding people because of a choce they made.
Then the only people left on your side would be angry atheists who are hell bent on ending freedom of religion in the states, or on the other, zealots who hate freedom of expression. Either way most reasonable people will abandon the issue. Just my opinion based on facts I've read and not hatred for gays or religion, we will see.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#3172 May 10, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>is there any reason to respect bigots? in fact, that would be a poor moral choice.
No, I DON'T respect bigots who feel entitled to my tax dollars just for engaging in homosexuality.

It's not JUST bigoted. It is an offense to my entire system of values. The liberals will be beaten with a rolled up newspaper and put out in the backyard until I feel better, and that will likely take a very long time.

I'm still waiting on the "Big Brother" list of offenders. They're going to get cruel and unusual punishment!
d pantz

United States

#3173 May 10, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>why do 49% of you fools not pay any FIT at all while for years and years i carried your asses? you are arguing tax reform, not marriage laws.
oh yeah marriage laws have nothing to do with taxes. You idiot. Really its the only thing that makes this an issue to any reasonable person who respects the rights of others.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3174 May 10, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I DON'T respect bigots who feel entitled to my tax dollars just for engaging in homosexuality.
It's not JUST bigoted. It is an offense to my entire system of values. The liberals will be beaten with a rolled up newspaper and put out in the backyard until I feel better, and that will likely take a very long time.
I'm still waiting on the "Big Brother" list of offenders. They're going to get cruel and unusual punishment!
again, you argument is off topic, you pretend you have no beef with homosexuals, just the tax code. but here you are on the SSM thread and not the economics thread.

methinks you do protest too poorly...
d pantz

United States

#3175 May 10, 2013
If 40% of single "fools" don't pay federal income tax they must really be poor as the poverty line is only 11 thousand. Maybe those "fools" ( the ones who don't pay are probably mostly minorities) would like to eat and have a warm place to sleep. Ever think about that?
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#3176 May 10, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>why do 49% of you fools not pay any FIT at all while for years and years i carried your asses? you are arguing tax reform, not marriage laws.
Andi just WHAT did YOU do to carry anyone's anything? Nice photo-op but WHERE'S THE BEEF? This isn't a movie, Ground Chuckie!

You know, I put in several years in the military. I did it for the training, got that training and moved on. Nowadays, I'm bullied by the fat parents of fat kids who feel entitled to my job that they can't do. I also get idiot moms who want me to tell them that they did the right thing by kicking junior out of the house and into military service.

Now, I don't claim to be a hero. I was a vet, but never faced live fire. In some branches, the peacetime life isn't too remarkably different from wartime. But I served. The apartment I lived in when I could get away from the station was robbed by the locals while we were deployed during the Gulf War. I came home to a door busted open, and nobody ever reported anything.

I really would like to hear your poor, POOR story about how you've been giving your heart and soul to the community and don't get no respect!

Tell us all about it, Rodney!

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3177 May 10, 2013
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> oh yeah marriage laws have nothing to do with taxes. You idiot. Really its the only thing that makes this an issue to any reasonable person who respects the rights of others.
but you are attempting to argue for tax law change, that would have nothing to do with making SSM legal.

like Anonymous, you seem to be trying (unsuccessfully)to hide your bias on this issue in an economic issue that just isn't there.

try being honest with yourself. that is the only way you can change for the better.
d pantz

United States

#3178 May 10, 2013
Now poor singles are "fools"? Keep it up bigots, your true colors are showing now. "Those foolish poor people, we have to carry their weight" damn son you sound like a conservatard!
d pantz

United States

#3179 May 10, 2013
Really though, quoting the bible and stepping on poor people. Wow way to go ssmers.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#3180 May 10, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>again, you argument is off topic, you pretend you have no beef with homosexuals, just the tax code. but here you are on the SSM thread and not the economics thread.
methinks you do protest too poorly...
Methinks you're a looney for quoting McBeth!

As long as there IS discrimination against single people, I will gladly block any marriage entitlement.
anonymous

Barberton, OH

#3181 May 10, 2013
Or was that Hamlet? Meh! Either way, the irony of royalty caught doing dirty deeds!
d pantz

United States

#3182 May 10, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Andi just WHAT did YOU do to carry anyone's anything? Nice photo-op but WHERE'S THE BEEF? This isn't a movie, Ground Chuckie!
You know, I put in several years in the military. I did it for the training, got that training and moved on. Nowadays, I'm bullied by the fat parents of fat kids who feel entitled to my job that they can't do. I also get idiot moms who want me to tell them that they did the right thing by kicking junior out of the house and into military service.
Now, I don't claim to be a hero. I was a vet, but never faced live fire. In some branches, the peacetime life isn't too remarkably different from wartime. But I served. The apartment I lived in when I could get away from the station was robbed by the locals while we were deployed during the Gulf War. I came home to a door busted open, and nobody ever reported anything.
I really would like to hear your poor, POOR story about how you've been giving your heart and soul to the community and don't get no respect!
Tell us all about it, Rodney!
interesting story. All that to become a physical education teacher?
d pantz

United States

#3183 May 10, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>but you are attempting to argue for tax law change, that would have nothing to do with making SSM legal.
like Anonymous, you seem to be trying (unsuccessfully)to hide your bias on this issue in an economic issue that just isn't there.
try being honest with yourself. that is the only way you can change for the better.
well if you read the first amendment to the united states constitution it says the government sall honor no belief group over another. That includes honoring them wit tax benefits. So if the federal government would just butt out and make an equal tax code, and honor no "marriage" or civil union with unfair tax benefits, my ailments with ssm would be gone. I wouldn't care either way. Everything other aspect of the issue doesn't matter to me. I just want to be treated fairly.
d pantz

United States

#3184 May 10, 2013
Hey stickboy! Speaking of honesty, I honestly think you don't pay any taxes. Just be honest with us and admit you don't pay any tax except maybe sales tax. Lol. Bye I gotta go to court.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#3185 May 10, 2013
common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
Now now,no need to resort to name calling and having hissy fits as gay people usually do when confronted with the truth.
NO, no "hissy fit" necessary. Although, I do occasionally point out those that have no valid, rational, or legally substantiated argument, which is what happened here.

The fact remains that in the US our Constitution mandates states to provide ALL PERSONS within their jurisdiction equal protection of the laws, and the US Supreme Court (our final word in matters of law), has ruled that even constitutional rights may be infringed, if and only if doing so serves a legitimate state interest.

It appears that those on your side of this debate lack the ability to indicate any such state interest, or even a rational basis to deny equality under the law.

The reason that I say you are unintelligent and ignorant, is because you ARE unintelligent and ignorant. Remember, the truth is a valid defense against allegations of defamation. Name calling isn't really childlike name calling if it is true.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#3186 May 10, 2013
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> well if you read the first amendment to the united states constitution it says the government sall honor no belief group over another. That includes honoring them wit tax benefits. So if the federal government would just butt out and make an equal tax code, and honor no "marriage" or civil union with unfair tax benefits, my ailments with ssm would be gone. I wouldn't care either way. Everything other aspect of the issue doesn't matter to me. I just want to be treated fairly.
Watching you think is like watching a dog that has been fed peanut butter.

Taxation is inherently NOT respecting an establishment of religion, nor is allowing legal marriage. One needs to understand what the Amendment ACTUALLY says before they can intelligently comment upon it.

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#3187 May 10, 2013
Xavier Breath wrote:
<quoted text>
I can get married today, if I wanted to. Sort of makes you look stupid.
Then what are you complaining about???

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#3188 May 10, 2013
Keeping marriage as is, that's the conservative position. Redefining marriage is the radical extremist position, as would be criminalizing same sex behavior.

There's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality but that's no reason to redefine marriage.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#3189 May 10, 2013
Brian_G wrote:
Keeping marriage as is, that's the conservative position.
Yes it is. It lacks a basis in reason or logic, but it is the conservative position.
Brian_G wrote:
Redefining marriage is the radical extremist position, as would be criminalizing same sex behavior.
So, denying constitutionally guaranteed rights, like equal protection of the laws for all is NOT radical?

Face it, there is not a rational basis to deny same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry, so instead you put forward this hopelessly irrelevant argument about semantics. The reality remains that legal marriage exists in every state in the union, and there is no reason why same sex couples should be excluded from the LEGAL protections of marriage.
Brian_G wrote:
There's nothing wrong with homosexuals or homosexuality but that's no reason to redefine marriage.
So long as the constitution requires equal protection of the laws for all, and marriage is a protection of the law, and there isn't any legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry, there certainly IS a reason to redefine marriage.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Showdown in Houston over LGBT nondiscrimination... (Oct '15) 47 min private guy 412
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr Patti 34,441
News Mississippi Governor Signs Law Allowing Busines... 2 hr The Stealth 375
News North Carolina's rush to bigotry 2 hr Time again 2,215
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 2 hr Brian_G 10,702
News MomentumGAY Marriage Body Count 5 hr here 4
Maybe god is gay! (Dec '09) 5 hr June VanDerMark 9,822
News Young, gay and male: Suicide survey spotlights ... 8 hr PT Barnum 33
More from around the web