Minneapolis Courts Chicago's Same-Sex Couples

Sep 7, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: National Public Radio

Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak took to a Chicago rooftop on Thursday to attract the city's gay and lesbian community to spend their wedding dollars in Minnesota.

Comments
41 - 47 of 47 Comments Last updated Sep 24, 2013
First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Scooby Slew

Inver Grove Heights, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#64
Sep 16, 2013
 
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>yet these Chicago people will bring million$ to the twin cities area and the state...
So what you are saying is that net we will only be behind hundreds of millions in the exchange when calculating past costs into the equation.

Let 'em come over and get gayrried, as long as they don't stay to collect state welfare dollars.

I don't have any problem with gay people getting the same benefits as straight; my issue lies in re-defining a word previously only used as straight, marriage, largely to make the gay community feel better about themselves. If they aren't happy in who they are, using the word "married" or "marriage" isn't going to do it for them either. If the law had specified a different word, garriage, civil union, etc., it would have gotten a lot more acceptance than it has.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65
Sep 16, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Scooby Slew wrote:
<quoted text>So what you are saying is that net we will only be behind hundreds of millions in the exchange when calculating past costs into the equation.
Let 'em come over and get gayrried, as long as they don't stay to collect state welfare dollars.
I don't have any problem with gay people getting the same benefits as straight; my issue lies in re-defining a word previously only used as straight, marriage, largely to make the gay community feel better about themselves. If they aren't happy in who they are, using the word "married" or "marriage" isn't going to do it for them either. If the law had specified a different word, garriage, civil union, etc., it would have gotten a lot more acceptance than it has.
Apparently marriage for same-sex couples got ENOUGH acceptance in Minnesota to survive a ballot vote and be passed by the legislature.

I'm married whether you like it or not.
Scooby Slew

Inver Grove Heights, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
Sep 24, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently marriage for same-sex couples got ENOUGH acceptance in Minnesota to survive a ballot vote and be passed by the legislature.
I'm married whether you like it or not.
You are married in Minnesota? I can hardly wait until you have to start paying palimony.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#69
Sep 24, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Scooby Slew wrote:
<quoted text>So what you are saying is that net we will only be behind hundreds of millions in the exchange when calculating past costs into the equation.
Let 'em come over and get gayrried, as long as they don't stay to collect state welfare dollars.
I don't have any problem with gay people getting the same benefits as straight; my issue lies in re-defining a word previously only used as straight, marriage, largely to make the gay community feel better about themselves. If they aren't happy in who they are, using the word "married" or "marriage" isn't going to do it for them either. If the law had specified a different word, garriage, civil union, etc., it would have gotten a lot more acceptance than it has.
According to IRS rules; it must be called 'marriage'
.
The stakes are high
.
There is a $467,562 lifetime difference between 'married' and 'not married' in IRS mandate
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/03/your-money/... ;
Not good

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
Sep 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Rainbow Kid wrote:
<quoted text>
According to IRS rules; it must be called 'marriage'
.
The stakes are high
.
There is a $467,562 lifetime difference between 'married' and 'not married' in IRS mandate
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/03/your-money/... ;
The study is a bunch of BS!

They conviently use females for a gay couple. If males were used instead they would not live to collect any SS.

They have the gay couple move to another state for adoption and pay for artificial insemination when most lesbos just have a one nighter with a male to get PG.

And the big assumption is that NO hetrosexuals have to pay for some of the same services that gays do, like artificial insemination.

If gays don't like being gay they can simply choose a hetrosexual life style. Oh you say not possible, BS there are many "people" who are bisexual. So much for being born gay..

Life is full of choices, you choose and live it and pay for consequences.
Not good

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71
Sep 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

All this "poor me" BS from gays is pure BS!!!!
Not good

Saint Paul, MN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
Sep 24, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Title of this threa is BS, Minnesota is not courting gays The goofy mayor of Mpls is courting gays.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••