Proposition 8 discussion continued - Page 19 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-15-2008, 12:01 AM   #271
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,237
Local Time: 08:03 AM
Their civil union rights do not give them the same rights as a marriage would give them.
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 12:09 AM   #272
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
they assumed they had access to a right
There was no assumption; it was a right. People were legally married.
__________________

__________________
martha is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 01:15 AM   #273
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 07:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
Their civil union rights do not give them the same rights as a marriage would give them.
How so?

Can they still own a home together?
Is that right *now* being yanked from them?
Can they still have medical insurance together? Is that right *now* being yanked from them?
Can they still own a car together?
Can they bequeath their estate to their marital companion(s)? Is that right being yanked from them?
Can they still visit sick spouses in hospitals? Is that now being yanked from them?
If they adopted kids, are the kids being *now* yanked from them?
Have any kids been yanked from them?

Because Prop 8 passed are all of these things now null and void?

Of course the answer is no to all of the above questions.

At the very most, certificates will be changed on what type of matrimonal relationship or civil union they entered into designating what the realtionships actually are: every other legal aspect should and will remain in tact.

If anything changes are made other than that: let me know.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 01:17 AM   #274
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 07:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by martha View Post
There was no assumption; it was a right. People were legally married.

The majority of the people who voted in Calif. for Prop 8 feel Mayor Newsom and a few judges misinterpreted the law.

They also feel that with the passing of Prop 8-that misinterpretation has now been corrected.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 01:49 AM   #275
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 07:03 AM
Simple question: how would you feel if you had been denied the right to marry your wife, the woman you love? Can you just imagine that for a moment? Have you ever tried? Why wasn't a civil union enough for you?
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 03:30 AM   #276
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 08:03 AM
Irvy and Melon, who patronizes you the most?

And does it bother you?

If you answer incorrectly, I will freeze you in Carbonite with Han Solo,
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 03:32 AM   #277
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 08:03 AM
Why is this not a Civil rights issue in terms of Constitutionality?

If the States are meant to choose, then the 'argument' towards the Constitution is flawed.

Should it not be made a question of right over privilege?
The States will always be meant to judge the merits of "marriage"

You have to make the argument about rights, first and foremost.
You've got to make the argument about rights instead of marriage.
Separate the rights from the legal description.

How is this not a SC issue?
Is it because the context is all wrong?

Why did Luke kiss Leia?
Who is the final Cylon?
It will never make sense.

Seriously, though.
Shouldn't the whole argument be parsed differently?
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 04:44 AM   #278
WCF
The Fly
 
WCF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 258
Local Time: 06:03 AM
So a law is passed violating a group's civil rights, and people don't expect them to get angry about it? Yes, there will always be a few rotten apples to ruin the rest, but these people have the right to be protesting; in my opinion, they ought to be protesting such a big step backwards in social equality. The gay rights side is no more evil than the Pro-Prop 8 side, I'm tired of people trying to imply this. I know this sounds cliche, but an American ideal ingrained into our heads is that "freedom comes at a price." When someone's rights are violated, they have the right, even the duty, to protest. There are cases here and there about gay rights activists crossing the line, but don't let this minority damage the whole. Imagine if Prop 8 had failed; I'm sure there would have been some rotten apples on their side too.

Quote:
How so?

Can they still own a home together?
Is that right *now* being yanked from them?
Can they still have medical insurance together? Is that right *now* being yanked from them?
Can they still own a car together?
Can they bequeath their estate to their marital companion(s)? Is that right being yanked from them?
Can they still visit sick spouses in hospitals? Is that now being yanked from them?
If they adopted kids, are the kids being *now* yanked from them?
Have any kids been yanked from them?
As I said in my earlier post, civil unions are degrading and inherently unequal. Don't tell me that if you yourself were in a civil union, that you would feel it equal to marriage. Marriage has a higher position in society, and by preventing gays from marrying, you are preventing them from having this position. Wait a minute, we're preventing Americans from achieving a higher social status - in America! There's your American Dream for you. Instead, you give them marriage's ugly cousin, this "civil union," based upon a religious, outdated ("traditional"), and narrow-minded definition of marriage.


Now, the way I see it, religious people are imposing their beliefs on people who don't believe in the same things. Imagine if, magically, the majority of California became Hindu and they passed a Proposition banning the consumption of cows. They cite that cows are sacred and that they're disgusting anyway. You'd be pretty mad that someone else's beliefs, beliefs you find to be ridiculous, have just been imposed on you. Well, this is what happened here. They took the religious definition of marriage and jammed it into our state Constitution.

If not religious beliefs are being imposed on us, than ignorance is. Many people simply find gay marriage simply disgusting, and I find it disgusting that many people voted based solely on that.

My point is that, yes, the majority of California spoke (the whole 52% majority...), but what did they speak from? To put it bluntly, I think this only means that the majority of California seems to be brainwashed and ignorant. Ultimately, it was religion that brought blacks and Hispanics in favor of Prop. 8. It's also been speculated that the massive Pro-8 ad campaign was the decider in this election. But look at those "Yes on 8" ads, the ones saying children will be taught gay marriage in schools. It is, by far, the most ridiculous claim I have ever heard throughout this whole election, just a big load of fearmongering scare tactics. I actually felt like our intelligence was being insulted. But they were actually effective in getting the public in an uproar against gay marriage. And this is where I lost faith in the people's judgement.

But of course, this last bit of my rambling is just the way I see it.
__________________
WCF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 06:45 AM   #279
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,237
Local Time: 08:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
How so?
There were several replies to this earlier in the thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAW View Post
I don't know each and every difference, but the main one that comes to mind is that unlike marriage, domestic partnerships are only recognized in the state where the papers are filed. And they are not recognized at all on a federal level, so you can't file a join tax return as domestic partners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by corianderstem View Post
To tack onto that as a "for instance," I know that if your employer provides health benefits for a domestic partnership, you get taxed on that benefit because the federal government doesn't recognize the partnership. It's called "imputed income."
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
Rights and responsibilities of marriages in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This Wikipedia entry provides a partial listing of what marriage entails at the federal level in the US. Note, from the introduction:

Quote:
According to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are over a thousand federal laws that treat married people differently from single people. It should be noted that these rights and responsibilities apply only to male-female married couples, as the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defines marriage as between a man and a woman and thus bars same-sex couples from receiving any federal recognition of same sex marriage or conveyance of marriage benefits to same sex couples through federal marriage law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
That's right; they'd only be valid in the individual states that recognize them (and then only in terms of state law).
So as you can see, they do not have equal rights as it stands right now.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 07:49 AM   #280
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,290
Local Time: 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
The majority of the people who voted in Calif. for Prop 8 feel ..... a few judges misinterpreted the law.
Yes, we usually let the legally uneducated public decide on the correct interpretation of the law.
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:27 AM   #281
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 07:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Yes, we usually let the legally uneducated public decide on the correct interpretation of the law.

snide comment wreaking w liberal consternation.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:29 AM   #282
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Yes, we usually let the legally uneducated public decide on the correct interpretation of the law.
Apparently we do in California.
__________________
martha is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:30 AM   #283
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 07:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
There were several replies to this earlier in the thread:









So as you can see, they do not have equal rights as it stands right now.


So, address and fix those items for SS couples on a federal level legally and not by activists judges.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:31 AM   #284
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,335
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
The majority of the people who voted in Calif. for Prop 8 feel Mayor Newsom and a few judges misinterpreted the law.
So, even though my state's Constitution has an equal protection clause, gay couples shouldn't expect equal protection under the law in my state? The laws don't apply to them equally?
__________________
martha is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2008, 08:36 AM   #285
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 07:03 AM
Are gays being hunted and persecuted, or there a few items such as filing joint tax returns, taxes oh healt benefits etc that need to be addressed and correct?

I say fix them legally.

Btw who signed the Defense of Marrige Act anyway?

<>
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com