Thanks for NOT sharing

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Chuck Anziulewicz — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:11:16 GMT

That Gay couples seek to marry is not an attack on marriage. If anything it is an ENDORSEMENT of marriage, an acknowledgment that it far better to encourage couples toward monogamy and commitment, rather than relegating them to lives of loneliness and promiscuity.

Ask any Straight couple why they choose to marry. Their answer will not be, "We want to get married so that we can have sex and make babies!" That would be absurd, since couples do not need to marry to make babies, nor is the desire to make babies a prerequisite for obtaining a marriage license.

No, the reason couples choose to marry is to make a solemn declaration, before friends and family members, that they wish to make a commitment to one another's happiness, health, and well-being, to the exclusion of all others. Those friends and family members will subsequently act as a force of encouragement for that couple to hold fast to their vows.

THAT'S what makes marriage a good thing. Gay couples recognize that and support that. And those that want to prohibit Gay couples from marrying do so only because they don't want to allow Gay couples the opportunity to PROVE that they are up to the task.

For those who suggest that the issue of marriage is best left up to the states, it's important to remember that the federal government has a vested interest in married couples for the purposes of income taxes and Social Security benefits. From the fed's point of view, it wouldn't do for a couple to be considered married in one state, then magically "UN-married" once they decide to move somewhere else.

The fact remains that the term "marriage" does not occur in the Constitution of the United States. There is technically no "right" for any couple, Gay or Straight, to get married. And that is why, ultimately, the Supreme Court will have to address the issue of what constitutes a marriage, much as I'm sure they would prefer NOT to.

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Rod — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 15:40:21 GMT

It has always been ADAM and EVE (not) Adam and Steve. Enough said,.

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

keywest2005 — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 00:18:36 GMT

I get so tired of hearing the adam and steve remark, According to your religon God made all living things. So were homosexuas hatched from mars. There will still be homosexuals in the world whether they are legally married or not. I know gay and lesbian couples that have been together for ten or more years, on the other hand my straight friends are swapping beds like clothes. That is adultry my friend and is also a sin. As is said dont throw stones if you live in a glass house.

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

tom walsh — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:11:15 GMT

The prime purposes of marriage are the procreation and education of children. Chuck A. above argues that couples do not need to marry to make babies. I beg to differ since the issue (legalese for children) would be illegitimate if born outside of wedlock.

the only reasons gays and lesbians want to "marry" is money. They want all the benefits such as Social security. just as heterosexual people don't need to marry for whatever purpose, homosexual people don't need to marry, either.

Going back to the prime purposes of marriage, since homosexuals cannot reproduce, why do they need marriage? the answer -- "It's the money, honey".

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Jim Pease — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 02:32:22 GMT

If the prime purposes of marriage are the procreation and education of children as Tom Walsh opines, then women men and women who can't have children for medical reasons should not be allowed to get married.

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Andy — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:51:04 GMT

So what if it IS the money? Not saying it is - but why SHOULDN'T they be entitled to the monetary benefits as everyone else? EQUAL rights.

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Kim — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:54:44 GMT

This kills me. The reason is money?? Do you know that Gay couples are considered to be of the highest income. Furthermore are you also aware that there is no money to be had with the Social Security Administration? Have any idea what a spouse gets when their loved one passes away?? Try $300 and some change. HOLY COW... I THINK I WANT TO MARRY SOMEONE RIGHT NOW SO I CAN GET MY $300 !!!! The arguement of gay marriage is a mute point. Not all gays want to be "Married," We just want to be recognized equally as a couple.

Example..... My partner is disabled and I am the primary income, we tried to get our daughter medicaid because health insurance was no longer affordable. When applying they asked us for our combined income and then denied because "WE" MAKE TOO MUCH AS A FAMILY. However, when we tried to finance a home they would not use our combined income because we are not a family !!!

If there is something in order, with guidelines, allowing us to be recognized as a family for all purposes and not just for the ones that are picked and chosen.

I could continue but I know my words would fall upon deaf ears.

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Tom — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:50:37 GMT

Right on Brendan.

Why change the constitution to prohibit something that is already not allowed?

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Yvonne — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:12:54 GMT

It is amazing to me that there are still people in the world whose personal success seems to rely on their ability to control others.

This is not about morals for anyone involved on the "Christian" side. It is about money...everyone knows that, right? If there is no evil to fight, people stop giving money to the types of churches that like to talk about "burning in hell" etc. Abortion repeal attempts haven't worked so now they are back to " the sin of homosexuality". There are mnay people using the doemstic partnership and family provisions so they can take care of each other who are not gay or lesbian. If not for each other, someone in these relationships would probably be without health insurance, a roof over their heads, or someone to visit them in the hospital. They would have to rely on governements and churches to maybe fill these needs. Is that what these "Christian" places want?

re: Thanks for NOT sharing

Yvonne — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 18:13:17 GMT