equality blooms with spring, pt. II - Page 9 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-16-2009, 11:28 AM   #121
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you realize how insane this sounds, and how this is the most homophobic position you've yet
If there are no government incentives for marriage - why do I need the government to "sanction" my marriage?
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 11:32 AM   #122
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 08:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Do lawyers handle prenuptials? Divorce? Wills? I imagine with a divorce rate above 50 percent, you haven't lacked clients.
Well if you think that domestic contracts are more common than not, then you imagine wrong.

Obviously it depends on your jurisdiction, but generally speaking, divorce and family law legislation currently dictates the means of calculating net family property and splitting it up on a separation event. The vast majority of people do not have domestic contracts because they a) can't afford them, b) aren't legally savvy, c) don't think they need them.

When you take away marriage-related legislation, then what law will govern when a couple splits?

I don't have time right now to get into the nitty gritty, but as I said earlier, your proposal is totally unworkable, and really to me sounds like little more than cutting off your nose to spite your face.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 11-16-2009, 11:40 AM   #123
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

if that's your position, fine. i find it surprising that same-sex marriage led you to this conclusion.
It falls in line with my preference for small government and the protection of the church from the state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
fortunately, most people don't agree with you.
That can be debated by the evidence of recent gay marriage defeats in very liberal states.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you seem to have been backed into a corner defending an indefensible position...
To a certain degree you are actually correct. The more I researched and posted - the more I realized I was actually advocating the state should define marriage when I actually desire that the state be as little involved in people's lives as possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
i think you should start by refusing your tax breaks and getting separate medical insurance.
The tax breaks are minimal, at best. We already have separate medical insurance...
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 11:43 AM   #124
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post

When you take away marriage-related legislation, then what law will govern when a couple splits?
What law currently governs when any non-married couple living together splits?
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 11:48 AM   #125
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 08:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
What law currently governs when any non-married couple living together splits?
Again, depends on the jurisdiction because it depends on whether they are seen as common-law partners or not (defined differently based on where you live). Usually there is a family law statute that addresses CL couples, of course this is not extended to same-sex couples unless you live in a place where the legislation has been amended.

So you'd have to address that point either way.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 11-16-2009, 11:54 AM   #126
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
It falls in line with my preference for small government and the protection of the church from the state.

so now you've adopted the position that marriage is only for sexual satisfaction and society has no interest in helping people create families. as with most faux-libertarian positions, this will wind up hurting the poor who would benefit most from the advantages of marriage and often need to blend incomes in order to stay out of poverty.

but so long as the homos don't marry, then i guess this is worth it?




Quote:
That can be debated by the evidence of recent gay marriage defeats in very liberal states.

you've really tripped yourself up here. none of these states have voted to eradicate any and all social recognition of marriage, the new position you're advocating today. all that's happened is that a vote was held on whether or not to allow gay people to marry (in states that already have strong anti-discrimination laws and civil union-type structures already i place.

i should point out that this is (at least) the second false dichotomy you've set up.

again, you're just adding fuel to the theory that you're ready to eradicate marriage just to keep the homos out.



Quote:
The tax breaks are minimal, at best.


does $400k over the course of a lifetime sound minimal to you?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/03/yo...y/03money.html
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 12:59 PM   #127
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
so now you've adopted the position that marriage is only for sexual satisfaction
My opinion on marriage, and the beauty and importance of it, has not changed. The state should have no jurisdiction over it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
and society has no interest in helping people create families.
How has this been working out the last fifty-odd years? What the state helps is usually what it hurts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you've really tripped yourself up here. none of these states have voted to eradicate any and all social recognition of marriage, the new position you're advocating today.
I thought you were referring to my personal opinion on marriage, and whether or not it was popular. My apologies. I agree, the voters would not have supported removing the incentives for marriage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
again, you're just adding fuel to the theory that you're ready to eradicate marriage just to keep the homos out.
Where have I called for the eradication of marriage? Religious organizations or any secular group wishing to perform marriages are free to do so.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

does $400k over the course of a lifetime sound minimal to you?
Man, then I need a new accountant...well, I guess it is better for society to have that $400k back and fix the bridges.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 01:00 PM   #128
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,999
Local Time: 08:10 AM
Pretty simple, and pretty good case for what marriage is supposed to be about...



In their first interview as a married couple since they tied the knot in August of last year at their home in Los Angeles, Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi talk about making their marriage official and the joy of wedded bliss on 'Oprah Winfrey.'

"The thing about being a gay couple is that in the past you referred to your wife and there were quotation marks around it, and there was always that chance that people would kind of snigger about it, but now it's fact. It's law," de Rossi said. "She's my wife. I get to say that she's my wife. That's just the way it is. It's fact."

Clearly, Ellen is enjoying married life and looks forward to a long union with de Rossi, who she dated from December 2004. "Anybody who's married knows that there is a difference. It feels like you're home. There's an anchor. There's a safety," she told Oprah. "I'm going to be with her until the day I die, and I know that."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 11-16-2009, 02:01 PM   #129
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
My opinion on marriage, and the beauty and importance of it, has not changed. The state should have no jurisdiction over it.

How has this been working out the last fifty-odd years? What the state helps is usually what it hurts.

I thought you were referring to my personal opinion on marriage, and whether or not it was popular. My apologies. I agree, the voters would not have supported removing the incentives for marriage.

Where have I called for the eradication of marriage? Religious organizations or any secular group wishing to perform marriages are free to do so.


Man, then I need a new accountant...well, I guess it is better for society to have that $400k back and fix the bridges.



so i take it you've given up?

can you at least agree, that under the current law regarding civil marriage, there is no logical reason to bar gay couples from the institution.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 02:02 PM   #130
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by INDY500 View Post
* Definition of forward is not subject to debate, dissent or vote

the definition of the word "faggot" has changed enormously over time.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 02:12 PM   #131
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
the definition of the word "faggot" has changed enormously over time.
Great point, Irvine. And eventually, if a word changes enough, it loses its original meaning. And if the word eventually compiles too many definitions, it actually becomes "meaning"-less.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 02:32 PM   #132
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
so i take it you've given up?
No, I am adopting the more libertarian view that states should not be authorized to decree marital status.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
can you at least agree, that under the current law regarding civil marriage, there is no logical reason to bar gay couples from the institution.
see above
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 02:37 PM   #133
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 08:10 AM
why is a marriage between two women meaningless to you?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 02:55 PM   #134
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 08:10 AM
So, because I'm leaving the Catholic Church, I'm not allowed to get married anymore?

You're trying to make marriage into an exclusive, religion-only activity. I mean, this is stiflingly stupid. I actually can't believe it.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 11-16-2009, 03:12 PM   #135
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 02:10 PM
No, as long as you marry a vag... a woman it's okay. Even I can do that and even though I don't believe it, and wouldn't do it in such a setting, the spirit would be with me.
But the spirit stays out when it's to pen... men or two vag... women getting married. And that's why that cannot happen.
__________________

__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
 

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Random Risque U2 Pictures (PT II) FallingStar PLEBA Archive 147 07-28-2003 03:01 PM
MERGED --> When will Cleveland II be? + Rock Hall Celebration (Spring) CMM Interference Gatherings 80 04-14-2003 10:02 PM
Getcher Classical on! Psst...Dieman. Johnny Swallow Lemonade Stand Archive 8 03-07-2003 04:53 PM
the Europe photos pt. II (including interferencers!!!) sulawesigirl4 Lemonade Stand Archive 61 01-05-2003 03:29 PM
When hormones go bad Pt. II: MacPhisto WildHonee PLEBA Archive 9 11-02-2001 07:36 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:10 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