• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxnews.

Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

laugh all you want but as usual you are clueless and factually wrong
yep not a liberal and yes i am definitely not a conservative and would never want to be, Im an independent and always will be. IMO its the only way to be, im not a sheep and if i did identify under any party i would be some type of moderate because i dont follow just to follow.

remind me again how this changes the fact you are wrong? oh thats right it doesnt, just another deflection that failed.

Independent means you are independent of a party, that does NOT mean you are not liberal. :lamo
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Independent means you are independent of a party, that does NOT mean you are not liberal. :lamo

yet the fact remains im not a liberal, so post that cool laughing emoticon again that makes you post an even bigger fail, since you are wrong . . . . again

wow its so funny completely owning you
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

You actually didn't address my point. Moving them off-base due to a new military stupid regulation IS the bullying for a special interest group.

Because you've missed the point:

There is no right to have the Federal government sponsor your discrimination. The government isn't allowed to do that.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Because you've missed the point:

There is no right to have the Federal government sponsor your discrimination. The government isn't allowed to do that.

If it was in fact valid discrimination based on an unchangeable trait such as race.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

yet the fact remains im not a liberal, so post that cool laughing emoticon again that makes you post an even bigger fail, since you are wrong . . . . again

wow its so funny completely owning you

Please explain how you are NOT liberal. :roll:
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

If it was in fact valid discrimination based on an unchangeable trait such as race.

It doesn't matter, they aren't allowed to descriminate against a LEGAL thing like homosexuality. A point that escapes you again.

It gives me great pleasure knowing that you can't do anything about this. Deal with it and thump your bible all you want, it's doing no good. They still will be doing this.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Please explain how you are NOT liberal. :roll:

simple im not, no explanation needed. See honest unbiased adults dont think in stereotypes. I know lots of conservatives that are pro-choice and pro equal rights for gays, should i go tell them they arent conservatives because YOU said so? lol just like i know liberals that are not pro-choice etc.

sorry this is just exposing more of your own issues. Some how you think you get to tell people what they are but like nearly everything you do here its a compete failure.

you are welcome to your opinion but its wrong
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

If it was in fact valid discrimination based on an unchangeable trait such as race.


Discrimination has nothing to do with an "unchangeable trait" to be valid or invalid. Discrimination is a decision made along categorical lines instead of based on the individual, valid or invalid discrimination is not depended on an "unchangeable trait". From a government standpoint valid or invalid discrimination is based on a compelling government interest in treating members of a group differently.

Such clubs cannot discriminate based on religion with is not an "unchallengeable trait". Such clubs cannot discriminate against spouses based on the number of children which is not an "unchangeable trait". They cannot discriminate based on their citizenship status which is not an "unchangeable trait".


>>>>
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

It doesn't matter, they aren't allowed to descriminate against a LEGAL thing like homosexuality. A point that escapes you again.

It gives me great pleasure knowing that you can't do anything about this. Deal with it and thump your bible all you want, it's doing no good. They still will be doing this.

Good thing it is not legal in my state. Whew.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

simple im not, no explanation needed. See honest unbiased adults dont think in stereotypes. I know lots of conservatives that are pro-choice and pro equal rights for gays, should i go tell them they arent conservatives because YOU said so? lol just like i know liberals that are not pro-choice etc.

sorry this is just exposing more of your own issues. Some how you think you get to tell people what they are but like nearly everything you do here its a compete failure.

you are welcome to your opinion but its wrong

Way to dodge the question.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Discrimination has nothing to do with an "unchangeable trait" to be valid or invalid. Discrimination is a decision made along categorical lines instead of based on the individual, valid or invalid discrimination is not depended on an "unchangeable trait". From a government standpoint valid or invalid discrimination is based on a compelling government interest in treating members of a group differently.

Such clubs cannot discriminate based on religion with is not an "unchallengeable trait". Such clubs cannot discriminate against spouses based on the number of children which is not an "unchangeable trait". They cannot discriminate based on their citizenship status which is not an "unchangeable trait".


>>>>

Religion is protected by the Constitution, Homosexuality is not.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Good thing it is not legal in my state. Whew.

Not yet, but it will be. Then what are you gonna do?
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Good thing it is not legal in my state. Whew.


Actually it is legal in South Carolina, it's just that South Carolina doesn't recognize it. There is nothing "illegal" about a couple getting Civilly Married in another state and returning to South Carolina - they are still married. Just SC doesn't recognize it.


>>>>
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Way to dodge the question.

didnt dodge it at all, way to post another failed lie lol
let me know when you can address my answer and not continuously fail. Its cute that you think you ever win.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Actually it is legal in South Carolina, it's just that South Carolina doesn't recognize it. There is nothing "illegal" about a couple getting Civilly Married in another state and returning to South Carolina - they are still married. Just SC doesn't recognize it.


>>>>

yep they will be factually married and can get federal benefits and where they work has to also give them marriage benefits. Equality is winning.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Discrimination has nothing to do with an "unchangeable trait" to be valid or invalid. Discrimination is a decision made along categorical lines instead of based on the individual, valid or invalid discrimination is not depended on an "unchangeable trait". From a government standpoint valid or invalid discrimination is based on a compelling government interest in treating members of a group differently.

Such clubs cannot discriminate based on religion with is not an "unchallengeable trait". Such clubs cannot discriminate against spouses based on the number of children which is not an "unchangeable trait". They cannot discriminate based on their citizenship status which is not an "unchangeable trait".


>>>>
Religion is protected by the Constitution, Homosexuality is not.


Wow, did you miss the point of the post. Here let me try again, whether a trait is "changeable" or "unchangeable" is irrelevant.

In this case, military spouse groups receiving command sponsorship only if they have non-discrimination practicies based on race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation, is protected.

Then of course we have Prop 8 which targeted homosexuals being overturned.

Then of course we have Romer v. Evans that overturned a Colorado anti-homosexual initiative.



The idea that homosexuals are protected because, in your opinion, it's not an "unchangeable trait" is incorrect. ALL citizens have an inherent right to equal treatment by the government embodied in Article V (Federal Due Process) and the 14th Amendment (States).



>>>>
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Good thing it is not legal in my state. Whew.

For now, but there is already a case in the lines that challenges the states constitutional ban. We'll see how that turns out.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

yep they will be factually married and can get federal benefits and where they work has to also give them marriage benefits. Equality is winning.


Regarding the bold, that I believe is a stretch if you are talking about private employers. Benefit packages (insurance for example) are defined by State law not Federal law. The Federal government, because of the overturning of DOMA Section 3, will be extending benefits to Federal employees in Same-sex Civil Marriages. That does not mean that State employees will be receiving those benefits nor does it mean that employees of private entities will be receiving those benefits.



>>>
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Actually it is legal in South Carolina, it's just that South Carolina doesn't recognize it. There is nothing "illegal" about a couple getting Civilly Married in another state and returning to South Carolina - they are still married. Just SC doesn't recognize it.


>>>>

SC doesn't support, condone or recognize, SSM, that is enough.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

didnt dodge it at all, way to post another failed lie lol
let me know when you can address my answer and not continuously fail. Its cute that you think you ever win.

If you didn't dodge, please show me your explanation of how you are not a liberal. Oh wait, it isn't there because you dodged.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

Regarding the bold, that I believe is a stretch if you are talking about private employers. Benefit packages (insurance for example) are defined by State law not Federal law. The Federal government, because of the overturning of DOMA Section 3, will be extending benefits to Federal employees in Same-sex Civil Marriages. That does not mean that State employees will be receiving those benefits nor does it mean that employees of private entities will be receiving those benefits.



>>>

well yes you are right, i need to be more specific anythign federal must be given and a lot of times it is 401Ks and health plans

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...ept-same-sex-spouses-have-benefit-rights.html
Labor Dept.: Same-Sex Spouses Have Benefit Rights - ABC News
Labor Dept.: Same-sex spouses have employee benefit rights regardless of residence - The Washington Post
Labor Dept: same-sex spouses can participate in benefit plans | Reuters
Labor Department: Gay Married Couples Have Benefit Plan Rights

Labor Dept.: Same-Sex Spouses Have Benefit Rights

WASHINGTON September 18, 2013 (AP)
By SAM HANANEL Associated Press






Legally married same-sex couples have the right to participate in employee benefit plans even if they live in states that don't recognize their union, the Labor Department said Wednesday.
The new guidance means gay spouses enjoy the same federal rights as other married couples when it comes to pensions, 401Ks, health plans and other similar benefits.
It is the latest effort by the Obama administration to clarify questions left unanswered after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in June which invalidated part of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act. The interpretation is consistent with a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service last month that legally married gay couples can file joint federal tax returns even if they reside in states that do not recognize same-sex marriages.
"This decision represents a historic step toward equality for all American families, and I have directed the department's agency heads to ensure that they are implementing the decision in a way that provides maximum protection for workers and their families," said Labor Secretary Thomas Perez.
The agency said the terms "spouse" and "marriage" in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act should be read to include same-sex couples regardless of where they currently reside. That means a gay couple that marries legally in Minnesota or New York can still participate equally in retirement and other federal employee benefits if they move to Florida, where gay marriage is not legal.
The interpretation "provides a uniform rule of recognition that can be applied with certainty by stakeholders, including employers, plan administrators, participants, and beneficiaries," the agency said.
Groups that represent large employers welcomed the guidance, saying it makes it easier for companies operating across the country to have uniform rules to follow when it comes to issues like spousal consent on distribution of benefits and survivorship rights. Gay marriage is currently legal in 13 states and the District of Columbia. The new guidance extends federal employee benefit rights to married same-sex couples in the other 37 states — even those that have laws refusing to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

For now, but there is already a case in the lines that challenges the states constitutional ban. We'll see how that turns out.

Hopefully it will turn out the same way that Prop 8 did as far as the Federal Government staying out of state business.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

SC doesn't support, condone or recognize, SSM, that is enough.

and yet tomorrow a gay couple could move in next to your parents house and they could be factually married.
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

SC doesn't support, condone or recognize, SSM, that is enough.


For now, they will come around eventually. SC was one of the 18 states that had to have the SCOTUS tell them that it was not OK to bar Civil Marriage based on the color of their skin also.



>>>>
 
Re: Marines tell spouses clubs to admit same-sex spouses Read more: http://www.foxne

If you didn't dodge, please show me your explanation of how you are not a liberal. Oh wait, it isn't there because you dodged.

translation: you posted another lie and you still cant address what i said. thats what i thought.

thanks for playing facts defeat you again
 
Back
Top Bottom