Comments on: Obama To Extend Benefits To Gay Partners
Partners Of Federal Employees To Receive Health Care, Other Benefits
Add a Comment See all 96 Comments
- by CLoverNYC1 June 17, 2009 1:42 PM PDT
Therein lies the dilemma: all marriages are civil unions but not all civil unions are marriages.
================
Screw the term "marriage"... just forget it. It's quite obvious people are VERY caught up on that single word.
You also mention:
"by CLoverNYC1 June 17, 2009 1:25 PM PDT
How about a "special" Homosexual Civil Union Act that would make that happen. Homosexuals would have the preferential treatment they so desperately crave, and marriage would be left to the normal people. "
================
This also isn't about "preferential treatment"... It's about our rights as American citizens being protected as any other citizen. As it sits now we don't have that.
As with the recent deal came out with DOMA essentially supporting incestuious or "under age" marriages... or to put it in less volitile terms... Civil Unions.
We as don't even have that chopice to be able to enter into this. You, as heterosexual... Do. - Reply to this comment
- So CLover, in other words you are saying that since there aren't that many of us it doesn't matter that we aren't being treated fairly. Let's see, black people make up around 14% of the population. Do you also believe that since they are such a small group compared to the white population they don't deserve equality either?
- Reply to this comment
- Just like the people in the south should have been able to vote on the rights of black people, right? What do you suppose would have been the outcome of that vote? Where would we be today if what was truly right hadn't been forced on those who were wrong, but believed they were right?
- Reply to this comment
- Therein lies the dilemma: all marriages are civil unions but not all civil unions are marriages.
It's not a matter of religion but natural and moral law.
Government for the people, by the people... yeah right.
If the people had been allowed to vote, instead of liberal-left wing radical judges legislating from the bench, we would not be discussing this non-issue. - Reply to this comment
-
- Just like the people in the south should have been able to vote on the rights of black people, right? What do you suppose would have been the outcome of that vote? Where would we be today if what was truly right hadn't been forced on those who were wrong, but believed they were right?
- by CLoverNYC1 June 17, 2009 1:42 PM PDT
Therein lies the dilemma: all marriages are civil unions but not all civil unions are marriages.
================
Screw the term "marriage"... just forget it. It's quite obvious people are VERY caught up on that single word.
You also mention:
"by CLoverNYC1 June 17, 2009 1:25 PM PDT
How about a "special" Homosexual Civil Union Act that would make that happen. Homosexuals would have the preferential treatment they so desperately crave, and marriage would be left to the normal people. "
================
This also isn't about "preferential treatment"... It's about our rights as American citizens being protected as any other citizen. As it sits now we don't have that.
As with the recent deal came out with DOMA essentially supporting incestuious or "under age" marriages... or to put it in less volitile terms... Civil Unions.
We as don't even have that chopice to be able to enter into this. You, as heterosexual... Do.
- I have stated something familiar... in fact I have said the goverment should get out of the buisness of marriage all together (seperation of church and state) and provide for Civil Unions for EVERYBODY... gay or straight.
Then yeah.. all people can be truely equal in the eyes of the government. Leave the religious decisions of "marriage" to the churches.
But unfortunately, I don't honestly see that happening. There are far to many unwilling to give up their precious bible thumping when it comes to a free government of the people. - Reply to this comment
- by Yeah-Me June 17, 2009 1:09 PM PDT
The same goes for pertners who have even gone through "proper legal channels" of setting up living walls and power of attourney papers so that their significant other has some say in their health and well being... Oonly to have a family come in and have to torn away from them, because of who they are.
----------------------------
Yeah,
Respectfully, we agree on the point that every American has the right to legally transfer wealth and resources to a partner of their own choosing. No argument there.
How about a "special" Homosexual Civil Union Act that would make that happen. Homosexuals would have the preferential treatment they so desperately crave, and marriage would be left to the normal people.
Whatever it is homosexuals want to accomplish in this nation, it's NOT marriage. Read my lips. It ain't marriage, k? - Reply to this comment
-
- I have stated something familiar... in fact I have said the goverment should get out of the buisness of marriage all together (seperation of church and state) and provide for Civil Unions for EVERYBODY... gay or straight.
Then yeah.. all people can be truely equal in the eyes of the government. Leave the religious decisions of "marriage" to the churches.
But unfortunately, I don't honestly see that happening. There are far to many unwilling to give up their precious bible thumping when it comes to a free government of the people.
- I have stated something familiar... in fact I have said the goverment should get out of the buisness of marriage all together (seperation of church and state) and provide for Civil Unions for EVERYBODY... gay or straight.
- Called the "N"word... no...
But it individuals like these a$$hats (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28358244/) that keeps us moving forward toward basic protections and ability to be who we are without fear of reprisals.
And the funny thing is... there are still states who would refuse to call this a hate crime directed agains homosexuals. Despite the fact people are targeted for being so. Go figure.
The same goes for pertners who have even gone through "proper legal channels" of setting up living walls and power of attourney papers so that their significant other has some say in their health and well being... Oonly to have a family come in and have to torn away from them, because of who they are.
That is why we want equal protection against dsicrimanation, hate related crimes and the benefit that go with being a FULL citizen of the US.
So when you so blithly ask question about sitting at the back of the bus... I'll point you to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", where we are told by the government and the armed forces that it isn't OK to be who you truely are. - Reply to this comment
- by caeric June 17, 2009 8:23 AM PDT
2%? It's more like 8% to 10% ... There are similarities between the civil rights movement and the struggle gays now face.
----------------------
One, unlike you I've done the research. The number is 2%. Face it. Homosexuals are and always will be in the minority.
Two, please cite one instance where homosexuals were lynched, hosed, called the "n word", made to sit in the back of the bus, or generally had problems getting a cab in NY.
To equate the so-called 'struggle' of a group who define themselves by aberrant intimate practices to the black civil rights movement is nauseatingly arrogant and does a great disrespect to what black people endured in this country.
Get real. - Reply to this comment
-
- Called the "N"word... no...
But it individuals like these a$$hats (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28358244/) that keeps us moving forward toward basic protections and ability to be who we are without fear of reprisals.
And the funny thing is... there are still states who would refuse to call this a hate crime directed agains homosexuals. Despite the fact people are targeted for being so. Go figure.
The same goes for pertners who have even gone through "proper legal channels" of setting up living walls and power of attourney papers so that their significant other has some say in their health and well being... Oonly to have a family come in and have to torn away from them, because of who they are.
That is why we want equal protection against dsicrimanation, hate related crimes and the benefit that go with being a FULL citizen of the US.
So when you so blithly ask question about sitting at the back of the bus... I'll point you to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", where we are told by the government and the armed forces that it isn't OK to be who you truely are.
- CLover, unlike you I've looked at more than one study. The fact is that it's difficult to truly gauge the % of any population that is homosexual. Studies range everywhere from the low you report to a high of around 15%. It's difficult because of the way society handles the subject and the general stigma attached to it due to socialization and religious conditioning. It becomes even more difficult when one realizes that sexuality exits on a continuum rather than being fixed.
Besides, it doesn't really matter what the percentage is. No minority group should be just brushed aside as irrelevant just because they aren't a sizeable group.
BTW, gays generally aren't called the "N" word, unless they're black. They're usually called the "F" word, and that one is used far too often to count. We may not have been forced to sit at the back of the bus or with getting a cab, but we have been forced out of jobs, homes, denied the right to see our dying partners in the hospital, beaten and killed.
And we don't define ourselves by 'aberrant intimate practices'. You do, in your lack of understanding and simple human compassion. We define ourselves as regular, ordinary people who happen to find comfort and love with others of our own gender.
The only thing that is nauseatingly arrogant is your attempt to belittle us, our struggle, and the difficulties that we face.
Until you know prejudice, you have no solid foundation upon which to make your claims. If you truly knew prejudice, you wouldn't be making them.
- Called the "N"word... no...
- Once the liberal government put its imprimatur on deviant immoral behavior to satisfy a small segment of society, the floodgates were opened.
Politicians respond to votes. Sign those petitions!
Let your voice be heard. - Reply to this comment
- Chi,
You cannot deny that homosexuals are a mere pittance of the population relative to the rest of us, unless you are deluded and a liar.
The push for 'marriage' for homosexuals has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with a stranglehold on the media and $$$. - Reply to this comment
