{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Edmi Wohusee:
2/23/2013 5:59:23 AM
28
Obama Administration - "Denying Same Sex Benefits Unconstitutional"
Sorry if this is old.
[quote]Washington (CNN) -- In a preview of a major constitutional showdown at the Supreme Court over same-sex marriage, the Obama administration said on Friday that a federal law denying financial benefits to legally wed gay and lesbian couples is unconstitutional.[/quote]
[url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/22/politics/supreme-court-marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t1]Full article here[/url]
I'm happy. This is a step in the right direction. How long do you think it will take until homosexuals have the same rights and benefits as heterosexual couples?
-
Edited by Kody: 11/23/2015 11:45:14 PMI can be gay if I want to. If you don't like it move elsewhere or deal with it. The only reason anyone could argue that it's wrong for me to be gay is because their religion says it is. Well in America your religion doesn't dictate my lifestyle.
-
2 RepliesAmerica is becoming more like N-azi Germany every day.
-
Interesting note, the company I currently work for has allowed same sex couples to share insurance for years simply by moving in with each other, of course because they couldn't get married. But since same sex marriage was made legal they said, you now have six months to get married or you lose the shared insurance. How's that for equal rights?
-
Interesting.
-
2 RepliesEdited by HurtfulTurkey: 2/24/2013 1:46:15 AMAt some point, lawmakers have to choose either to draw a line somewhere or not at all. I'm not asserting a slippery slope argument against LGBT marriage (in fact, I don't see why it isn't recognized already), but what about when the polygamist community speaks out? Or adult/minor couples? Are we going to say that the limit is two consenting adults of 18 years or older (or emancipated minors)?
-
1 ReplyI love how people continually claim that Marriage is a religious basis and that gay marriage would destroy the sanctity of marriage. Fact is, the union of couples has existed LONG before the start of the three big religions. Look at Ancient Greece - they had what amount to marriages - just a different name. The term marriage only came up with the rise of religions like Judaism and Christianity. Today, many people don't get married in churches. You see atheists getting married in ceremonies at City Halls, and nobody is up in arms about that. However, add the term "Gay" in, and suddenly, it's the end of the world. Fact is, the world is moving on from the text of an ancient book that is 2000 years old. Want to argue against it, fine. I don't want people to eat shrimp, shave, or wear mixed fabric clothing. Also, kill your wife if she sleeps with another man - after all, it's in the Bible. Sanctity of Marriage is surely being protected with only straight marriage. That near 50% divorce rate among Heterosexuals really shows the institution is working. Not to mention we get the 72 hour Spears wedding.
-
Took the US long enough to catch up.
-
3 RepliesSo if I applied for college and got less benefits (scholarships or aid) than someone else just because they are minority and I am not, should that be unconstitutional?
-
By the way, the DOMA is unconstitutional. Check out the Full Faith and Credit Clause. It should have been repealed sooner since it breaks the 14th amendment and the full faith and credit clause.
-
I still don't see why the government would give any benefits to any couple regardless of man-man, woman-woman, or man-woman. Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (90s law) and keep gov't away from all forms of marriage. Let private entities pick and choose how they each define marriage and if we disagree with a company, boycott them. But, I live in a fantasy land.
-
4 RepliesPersonally, I find that giving legal and economic benefits to ANY marriage--hetero or homo--who do not plan on having children as being stupid. The only reason the government should give benefits to a "married" couple is so that they will have children which will keep our nation's population steady and benefit us in the future. If they do not plan on having children, or at least adopting children (if they are sterile or homosexual), then I don't see why we should give them any benefits. They aren't helping the nation in any way.
-
Edited by Quantum: 2/27/2013 6:20:00 AMI for one enjoy this gay marriage debate more and more, I cannot wait for the climax when the bill (hopefully) passes and becomes cemented into law. This shall be the bane of all anti gay conservatives everywhere.
-
6 RepliesHaha, wow. They're giving unconstitutional benefits by invoking the Constitution. This is almost as idiotic as the people on welfare or food stamps saying drug testing is unconstitutional. Government shouldn't be involved in marriage at all. Period.
-
Good.
-
America is getting one step towards real equality. I hope that America will make a giant leap forward towards progress before I die.
-
2 RepliesEdited by ChickenWireLord: 2/23/2013 7:22:18 PMgod this generation is -blam!-ed. The whole country is just going down the drain
-
Edited by Circadian Wolf: 2/24/2013 6:48:42 PMI'm glad America is on the way to equality, but is it just me that feels all the constitution is now is an excuse for the American government to make/scrap laws? I swear it's quoted in every new law they promote.
-
That's one step in the right direction. It may be a small one but at least it's a step forward.
-
1 ReplyIt seems like there's a constant war between the bible and the constitution in your country
-
Edited by DarkSunnyboy: 2/23/2013 8:20:44 PM>2013 >First world countries still leaving civil rights to a vote I'm glad I live in Canada.
-
8 RepliesAll hail the words of Lord Obama, for he speaks only truth.
-
31 RepliesDenying Same Sex Benefits Unconstitutional I completely agree with them. However, Just give them the benefits and dont call it marriage.
-
Through the past year or two i've seen it become legal in states in America. Yet to see a reason why anybody should care enough to ban it.
-
2 Repliesgood, although the conservatives are doubtlessly railing on at this point about how Obama wan't to "destroy the family unit" whatever that means, and ban religion while turning america into a communist police state.
-
About damn time.
-
It's about time.
