• 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!

DC City Council votes to legalize gay marriage

Redress said:
Depends on the income of the married couple and how they file. At no time does a married couple have to pay more(they can file separately, but they can frequently pay less.
Click to expand...

It depends on a whole hell of a lot...I mean, it's the frig'n tax code....kindly allow me some latitude not to have to be extremely precise :2wave: I'm not Allen Greenspan.
 
Jerry said:
Neither am I, but neither of us were referring to SCOTUS rulings on the purpose of gay-marriage. I was referring to the purpose of marriage per-se and you reflected an understanding of that when you quoted me...so idk where SCOTUS rulings on gay-marriage come into the discussion...:confused:
Click to expand...

SCOTUS has ruled on the purpose of marriage?
 
Jerry said:
It depends on a whole hell of a lot...I mean, it's the frig'n tax code....kindly allow me some latitude not to have to be extremely precise :2wave: I'm not Allen Greenspan.
Click to expand...

Most people pay less tax by being married. Your imprecision made you 100 % wrong.
 
windovervocalcords said:
According to a report given to the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. General Accounting Office, here are a few of the 1,138 benefits the United States government provides to legally married couples:


Access to Military Stores
Assumption of Spouse’s Pension
Bereavement Leave
Immigration
Insurance Breaks
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner
Social Security Survivor Benefits
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Tax Breaks
Veteran’s Discounts
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison

Here are a few of the state level benefits within the United States:


Assumption of Spouse’s Pension
Automatic Inheritance
Automatic Housing Lease Transfer
Bereavement Leave
Burial Determination
Child Custody
Crime Victim’s Recovery Benefits
Divorce Protections
Domestic Violence Protection
Exemption from Property Tax on Partner’s Death
Immunity from Testifying Against Spouse
Insurance Breaks
Joint Adoption and Foster Care
Joint Bankruptcy
Joint Parenting (Insurance Coverage, School Records)
Medical Decisions on Behalf of Partner
Certain Property Rights
Reduced Rate Memberships
Sick Leave to Care for Partner
Visitation of Partner’s Children
Visitation of Partner in Hospital or Prison
Wrongful Death (Loss of Consort) Benefits
Marriage Benefits
Click to expand...

Please link to the exact law for each of those benefits.

...and btw, Visitation of Partner in Hospital is a myth. That has nothing to do with law but of hospital policy. Anyone know if Inferno's (God rest her soul) partner was denied access while she passed?
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
If children are the focus then yes children need to be at the forefront of the issue so that their plight can be seen by everyone and the problem accurately understood.
Click to expand...

Not every same sex couple who wants to get married has children.

They all exist so as to provide children a stable home, which in turn creates more stability. Enjoyment of secondary benefits meant to reinforce the primary, when the primary purpose is absent, is not a reason to redefine marriage to now be about enjoying those secondary benefits. You gut the thing when you do.
Click to expand...

Redefine marriage? How does allowing same sex couples to marry in any way affect people who have traditional marriages? I don't understand this "redefining marriage" argument. It sounds like semantics, as if somehow there is a potential danger to marriage if gays are allowed to have it, but whenever questioned on it, traditional marriage folks never seem to have an answer.

I've clearly stated my support for exactly that many times on this thread.
Click to expand...

Your position would be detrimental to the stability of society and is highly irrational. By the way, how would your position not be a redefinition of marriage?
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
I don't know, could you provide a link to that ruling please?
Click to expand...

I am not the one making claims about the purpose of marriage.
 
Jerry said:
"Windows can not open this file...."

Do you have anything that can actually be verified?
Click to expand...

My computer opens it fine, get a decent computer.
 
CriticalThought said:
Not every same sex couple who wants to get married has children.
Click to expand...

Right, and those couples should simply stop trying to get marriage; it doesn't apply to the kind of relationship they enjoy.

CriticalThought said:
Redefine marriage? How does allowing same sex couples to marry in any way affect people who have traditional marriages? I don't understand this "redefining marriage" argument. It sounds like semantics, as if somehow there is a potential danger to marriage if gays are allowed to have it, but whenever questioned on it, traditional marriage folks never seem to have an answer.
Click to expand...

It changes what marriage is for, from raising children to free association.

Gays do not need marriage to freely associate as that's not a right marriage addresses in any way.

CriticalThought said:
Your position would be detrimental to the stability of society and is highly irrational.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but the point of being on a debate forum is to demonstrate how.
 
Jerry said:
Been there don that, not the truth :2wave:
Click to expand...

:lol:

There used to be something called the marriage penalty. But not any more.
 
Jerry said:
Right, and those couples should simply stop trying to get marriage; it doesn't apply to the kind of relationship they enjoy.
Click to expand...

Would you say the same for strait couples?



It changes what marriage is for, from raising children to free association.

Gays do not need marriage to freely associate as that's not a right marriage addresses in any way.
Click to expand...

Proof that marriage is legally only for children?
 
windovervocalcords said:
Jerry asks for sources but doesn't provide any. 'The purpose of marriage according to Jerry' is for procreation. That makes all childless marriages invalid.
Click to expand...

Jerry uses lots of tactics in gay marriage threads. Debate is not one of them.
 
Jerry said:
Then why am I still paying it?
Click to expand...

How do you know you're still paying it? Did you get married and then have an exactly identical tax situation with the same income and deductibles and all that the following year, allowing you to compare the two?
 
Jerry said:
There's a difference between demanding sources to prove a claim and calmly asking for information.

I hope you see the distinction :2wave:
Click to expand...

I hope you can see the difference. You ask everyone else to provide sources and you provide none. Zero.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom