Why people say Gay marrage is just the tip of the iceberg

[Bob Hubbard]

But the thing is, the content of the legislation was analyzed by constitutional experts and brought to our Supreme Court to ensure that the language and intent would survive a challenge.

Not how it works in the US. Here lobbyists write complex bills that we the citizens aren't allowed to know the contents of until after out paid for representatives vote on it. Hell, most of them don't even know what's in them as who reads anything before signing it these days. So they vote based on bullet point summaries provided by the actual authors of the bill which may or may not be accurate.
Then it's like Christmas in that they open the bill to see just how badly "We The People" have been ****ed. Even former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi insisted they had to pass bills before we could find out what was in them. Several senators are on record of not caring if the bills were even legal, they just needed to be passed. Ironically, the Confederate States had a clause in their Constitution that said all bills before their congress must validate against their Constitution prior to being brought to a vote. They lost that argument and war.

 

[CanuckMA]

Oh, most of the time our politicians pass stupid **** too. They just wanted to make sure that one was iron-clad.

 

[ballen0351]

So other then the name what's the difference between marriage and civil union? If they ate lehally identical then the fight is just over the word marriage?

 

[CanuckMA]

So other then the name what's the difference between marriage bill and civil union? If they ate lehally identical then the fight is just over the word marriage?

That is exactly what the proponent of civil union contend. It would be exactly the same, just not use the word marriage. Of course that means that every legal document that references marriage has to be ammended, and voted on to also include civil union. And that moving forward making sure that both marriage and civil union are referenced. That is absolute lunacy. How many laws and statutes use marriage? How much time would be wasted in rewriting them all? how much would it cost? Remember that you can't just add 'and civil union' wherever marriage is used and call it a day. The ammended law has to go through the process all over again.

The alternative is to amend the definition of marriage from 'one man and one woman' to 'two adults'. One change that automatically changes everything.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

So other then the name what's the difference between marriage and civil union? If they ate lehally identical then the fight is just over the word marriage?

Not exactly. There are some rights and privileges that only attach to a husband-wife relationship. For example, a spouse cannot be compelled to testify against their partner. Not true of civil unions that I'm aware of. A spouse doesn't have to go through probate or pay inheritance taxes etc when their partner passes away. There are other things too.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Here's a "few"
Number of Legal Benefits:

• Marriage: Over 1,049 federal and state level benefits (see list)
• Civil Unions: Over 300 state level benefits. *No federal protection (see benefit example)

Tax Relief:

• Marriage: Couples can file both federal and state tax returns jointly.
• Civil Unions: Couples can only file jointly in the state of civil registration.

Medical Decisions:

• Marriage: Partners can make emergency medical decisions.
• Civil Unions: Partners can only make medical decisions in the registered state. Partners may not be able to make decisions out of state.

Gifts:

• Marriage: Partners can transfer gifts to each other without tax penalty.
• Civil Unions: Partners do not pay state taxes, but are required to report federal taxes.

Death Benefits:

• Marriage: In the case of a partner's death, the spouse receives any earned Social Security or veteran benefits.
• Civil Unions: Partners do not receive Social Security or any other government benefits in case of death. In the case of the death of former Congressman Gerry Studds, his partner of 15 years was denied the government pension that would have gone to a legally recognized spouse.

Child/Spousal Support:

• Marriage: In case of divorce, individuals may have a legally-binding financial obligation to spouses and children.
• Civil Unions: In the case of dissolution , no such spousal or child benefits are guaranteed or required out of state.

Immigration Rights:

• Marriage: U.S. citizens and legal residents can sponsor their spouses and family members for immigration.
• Civil Unions: U.S. citizens and legal residents cannot sponsor non-legal spouses or family members. (more on gay immigration rights)

http://gaylife.about.com/od/samesexmarriage/f/civilmarriage.htm

 

[granfire]

Here's a "few"
Number of Legal Benefits:

• Marriage: Over 1,049 federal and state level benefits (see list)
• Civil Unions: Over 300 state level benefits. *No federal protection (see benefit example)

Tax Relief:

• Marriage: Couples can file both federal and state tax returns jointly.
• Civil Unions: Couples can only file jointly in the state of civil registration.

Medical Decisions:

• Marriage: Partners can make emergency medical decisions.
• Civil Unions: Partners can only make medical decisions in the registered state. Partners may not be able to make decisions out of state.

Gifts:

• Marriage: Partners can transfer gifts to each other without tax penalty.
• Civil Unions: Partners do not pay state taxes, but are required to report federal taxes.

Death Benefits:

• Marriage: In the case of a partner's death, the spouse receives any earned Social Security or veteran benefits.
• Civil Unions: Partners do not receive Social Security or any other government benefits in case of death. In the case of the death of former Congressman Gerry Studds, his partner of 15 years was denied the government pension that would have gone to a legally recognized spouse.

Child/Spousal Support:

• Marriage: In case of divorce, individuals may have a legally-binding financial obligation to spouses and children.
• Civil Unions: In the case of dissolution , no such spousal or child benefits are guaranteed or required out of state.

Immigration Rights:

• Marriage: U.S. citizens and legal residents can sponsor their spouses and family members for immigration.
• Civil Unions: U.S. citizens and legal residents cannot sponsor non-legal spouses or family members. (more on gay immigration rights)

http://gaylife.about.com/od/samesexmarriage/f/civilmarriage.htm

So in other words the civil Union is just another screw job?

 

[Steve]

The bottom of my post didn't post for some reason. So to answer if I think gay marriage should be the line then no I don't. I could care less if gays want to marry I say spread the misery around its not fair only straight guys get to suffer. Im more upset about the way its getting passed and how the people are being ignored. If it were put up for a vote here which it may the Governor wants a gay marriage bill soon. Id vote it down unless there was a provision in the law allowing clergy the right to refuse to preform the ceremony then I would consider it.

I think that a clear delineation should be made between a religious ceremony and a civil one. Although for the record, that line already exists. There are many churches in States that do not recognize gay marriage performing ceremonies for gay couples. They're free to do so in any State. The question isn't legality of the ceremony. It's whether or not the union is recognized as a marriage for legal purposes.

Simply put, churches are already free to choose whether or not to recognize gay marriage, independent of the legal rulings in the State. Why would that change, and do we need another law (or a rider on a law) to allow something that is already allowed?

 

[Steve]

So other then the name what's the difference between marriage and civil union? If they ate lehally identical then the fight is just over the word marriage?

While there are some notable differences outlined by others, that's the real question. Isn't it? If States are willing to grant gay couples a civil union that is "the same as" a marriage, then what's the problem? If people who are vehemently opposed to "gay marriage" are okay with the idea of a civil union that grants identical rights, again, then what's the problem?

The answer to your question is, I think on both sides, yes. The issue is whether or not gay people can be "married."

 

[ballen0351]

Great points on both sides. And thank you all for having an adult conversation on a topic that can easily turn nasty at the drop of a hat.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

If 2 gay men or women marry....

How does it effect you?

Doesn't effect me, good or bad.

 

[ballen0351]

If 2 gay men or women marry....

How does it effect you?

Doesn't effect me, good or bad.

It does not effect me. My worry is what's next and where do we as a society say enough is enough. Apparently most polls show society says this is too far. I don't think gay marriage will end society but I can see people pushing the envelope. I don't really know where I stand right now if it were put up to a vote. It does not effect me but I also don't see a reason to change it. I have seen some very good arguments as to why it should be changed and I've seen some on why it shouldn't. I think when it comes up for a vote ill have to see how its written. If churches are not required to marry anyone I may vote for it. But after seeing how churches are going to be forced to pay healthcare costs for birth control I don't know if I trust the govt not to go after churches

 

[CanuckMA]

My understanding was that the healthcare was for a hospital, which may not be a religious institution, regardless of who runs it.

 

[ballen0351]

My understanding was that the healthcare was for a hospital, which may not be a religious institution, regardless of who runs it.

Thats what I ment Church run Hospitals I was on a cell phone.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

It does not effect me. My worry is what's next and where do we as a society say enough is enough. Apparently most polls show society says this is too far. I don't think gay marriage will end society but I can see people pushing the envelope. I don't really know where I stand right now if it were put up to a vote. It does not effect me but I also don't see a reason to change it. I have seen some very good arguments as to why it should be changed and I've seen some on why it shouldn't. I think when it comes up for a vote ill have to see how its written. If churches are not required to marry anyone I may vote for it. But after seeing how churches are going to be forced to pay healthcare costs for birth control I don't know if I trust the govt not to go after churches

If a guy or gal wants to marry the toaster.

How does that effect you?

Doesn't effect me either way.

 

[ballen0351]

If a guy or gal wants to marry the toaster.

How does that effect you?

Doesn't effect me either way.

for starters I took a vow before god to love and honor my wife and for some guy to make a mockery of that by trying to marry a toaster would bother me.
2nd what does it say about our society when we condone that behavior. That arguement can be applied to anything who cares if a guy smokes crack it don't effect you. We have rules for a society to work and we can't make exceptions for every group that decides they are a victim. Some things are not equal no matter how hard people try to make you believe it is

 

[ballen0351]

If a guy or gal wants to marry the toaster.

How does that effect you?

Doesn't effect me either way.

how does it effect you if they outlaw gay marriage
it does not effect me so why should I vote to change it

 

[Steve]

for starters I took a vow before god to love and honor my wife and for some guy to make a mockery of that by trying to marry a toaster would bother me.
2nd what does it say about our society when we condone that behavior. That arguement can be applied to anything who cares if a guy smokes crack it don't effect you. We have rules for a society to work and we can't make exceptions for every group that decides they are a victim. Some things are not equal no matter how hard people try to make you believe it is

So. You're saying that you would love and honor your wife less?

2nd, while the hyperbolic toaster thing is easy to argue against, let's keep it real. We are still talking about two adults who want to get married. We are even still talking about real marriage. Love, honor... Respect. Til death do they part.

While it is gay marriage, it's not toasters or dolphins.


Sent using Tapatalk. Please ignore typos.

 

[ballen0351]

Marriage means something to me. Its important to me. The best way I can explain it is like this
the American flag means something to me. I swore to protect it, I tear yo when its brought out during football games, I lost friends who defended it. And it bothers me to see protesters crap on it. Does it effect me no its not my flag and im not even there to see it but it does bother me.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

for starters I took a vow before god to love and honor my wife and for some guy to make a mockery of that by trying to marry a toaster would bother me.
2nd what does it say about our society when we condone that behavior. That arguement can be applied to anything who cares if a guy smokes crack it don't effect you. We have rules for a society to work and we can't make exceptions for every group that decides they are a victim. Some things are not equal no matter how hard people try to make you believe it is

Some people don't believe in your god. His rules don't apply to them.