In response to:

Marriage: A Relationship Unlike Any Other

Stacey23 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 2:44 PM
Tinsldr2-I understand where you are coming from. I have a gay cousin who is not celibate She knows perfectly well my views on homosexual behavior and the redefinition of marriage. And she is okay with it. Do I love her any less because she is gay? Absolutely not. Do I approve of her lifestyle? Absolutely not. The point I, and I think DCM, are trying to make is: If ONE definition for marriage does not exist, then it becomes difficult to restrict ANY definition. You are okay with close blood relatives marrying, but I'll bet that some gay people will find that appalling.
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 5:35 PM

I base my beliefs on individual freedom , natural rights and equality under the law and not what I find appalling.

You and I voted for Romney so this is not addressed to you directly. But how ,amy people vote for what is in their own interest instead of the best interest of their country or doing the right thing?

many Blacks voted for Obama because he was black.

Many gays voted for Obama because he was going to help them

Many Corporate CEO's voted for Obama because he was going to help them

Many people voted for Obama because he was going to give them free stuff

I voted not for who would help me but who was right choice for the Country

What is right for country may not appeal to me but what is right is to treat all equal

Cambermeister Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 2:58 PM
Stacey23, many homosexuals have no self image except as 'the homosexual'. They believe your unwillingness to praise their private behavior means you hate them as a person.
Stacey23 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 4:07 PM
Cambermeister-correct. But unfortunately, like with any group of people, the most vicious and hateful members have the most power.
peaceman Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 6:25 PM
You and Cambie are a real pair. People are people first and under Constitutional law they have the SAME rights as you and I. It's that you have different religious view on this subject but that's completely irrelevant. This 'redefinition' of marriage talking point is pure opinion with nothing to support it other than it being a belief many like to hold on to. Fine...but it gives no one the right to legislate their beliefs against another which is what you two are supporting...that's you using the 'state' to enforce your dictates
Jack2894 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 2:57 PM
Stacey, its comforting for some to think things are solid and immutable, even when they are not. There are ALREADY multiple definitions to work with. For example, if you live in Alabama, you can marry your first cousin. If you live in Arkansas, you cannot. Where is this mythical single definition? IN several European nations, you can marry a sibling, with some restrictions. And then of course, in many nations and in some religions, marrying more than one person is perfectly OK, if not expected.
David3036 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 3:27 PM
Jack is correct. Marriage norms are all over the lot, even in the U.S. -- and yet, opponents of same-sex marriage insist that there is only one correct view of marriage.

If a state allows marriage at the age of 14, or recognizes common-law marriages, or allows first cousins to marry, those marriages are recognized by the federal government and must be recognized by every other state. The single exception is same-sex marriages that can now be performed in nine U.S. states. Those are not recognized beyond those state borders.

That is where the inequality lies, and it is all because of the Defense of Marriage act. It must be struck down so that all married couples qualify for the same federal benefits.
David3036 Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 3:44 PM
In addition to bing second-class spouses if married to a soldier or veteran, married same-sex couples may pay higher taxes because they can't file jointlly. They receive no Social Security survivor benefits upon the death of a partner, despite paying the same payroll taxes as every straight couple. They pay significant tax penalties when they inherit a 401(k) from their spouse. They are denied family leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act.

There are other "pocketbook" issues that are non-govenmental, such as having to pay a second-driver fee when renting a car, which is not required of straight married couples. They can't even get the family rate at the gym, and rarely does any "family" discount apply to a gay married couple.
Cambermeister Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 2:56 PM
Stacey23, you said; "I'll bet that some gay people will find that appalling"

Stacey, I live and work with many homosexuals. (a) Many are proud and full of gay pride. They really don't care what you or I think although they do want fair treatment. In the last few years, proud homosexuals have been intimidated by the new (b) category with no pride and unsure of their decision. I'll clearly define this mindset; "Santa didn't give me a puppy... so Santa hates me"
Cambermeister Wrote: Feb 13, 2013 2:49 PM

NOTE: This is the fifth column in a series of columns related to National Marriage Week, Feb. 7-14, 2013. The fourth column is available here.

Many of us will recall the song from Sesame Street that begins, “One of these things is not like the other.” The song conveyed to viewers that not everything, or every relationship, is the same; we have different capabilities and purposes.

The government routinely sings this song as it recognizes and seeks to support certain relationships based on their uniqueness, their distinctive purpose, or their benefit to society.

One such relationship that is unlike...