Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Obama Orders Hospital Visitation Rights For Gays,  
User currently offlineATTart From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 638 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4211 times:

Wow, it is about time!!!!!!!!!


http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/...l.gay.visitation/index.html?hpt=T2


Remember: When someone talks behind your back, it only means you're two steps ahead of them!
84 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineN867DA From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1001 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4106 times:

Instead of giving rights to gay couples piece by piece I think the federal government should just grow a pair and legalize gay marriage. It makes no sense for six or seven states in one country to legalize marriage.


A nation turns its lonely eyes to you
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19371 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4078 times:

Quoting N867DA (Reply 1):
Instead of giving rights to gay couples piece by piece I think the federal government should just grow a pair and legalize gay marriage. It makes no sense for six or seven states in one country to legalize marriage.

The Federal Government can't grow a pair and build a decent ATC system. There's a lot that the Federal Government can't do, so why should they do this?


User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3280 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4009 times:

Quoting ATTart (Thread starter):
Wow, it is about time!!!!!!!!!

Amen - can't agree more!



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineMoltenRock From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4000 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
The Federal Government can't grow a pair and build a decent ATC system. There's a lot that the Federal Government can't do, so why should they do this?

No kidding. China is building 16,000 miles of high speed rail and will have much of it up and running within 5 years. The US federal government couldn't even get to the final blueprint stage and zoning hearings within 5 years.

But credit where credit is due to President Obama and making life a little easier for gay people in times of crisis.

[Edited 2010-04-16 01:10:26]

User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5562 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3935 times:

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 4):
No kidding. China is building 16,000 miles of high speed rail and will have much of it up and running within 5 years. The US federal government couldn't even get to the final blueprint stage and zoning hearings within 5 years.

It doesn't help that the US is basically paying for, well, everything.

Quoting N867DA (Reply 1):
Instead of giving rights to gay couples piece by piece I think the federal government should just grow a pair and legalize gay marriage
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 2):
The Federal Government can't grow a pair and build a decent ATC system. There's a lot that the Federal Government can't do, so why should they do this?

I'm pretty sure Doc knows this, but you should know that the Feds don't regulate marriage. It's a state issue.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21498 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3860 times:

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 4):
China is building 16,000 miles of high speed rail and will have much of it up and running within 5 years. The US federal government couldn't even get to the final blueprint stage and zoning hearings within 5 years.

And even if we could, it would be China that we'd be paying to design and build the thing.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7799 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3739 times:

Well I am not one for conspiracy theories, but I was thinking about this. I know a few fiscally conservative gays who would probably vote Republican if it weren't for, you know, the whole gay rights issue. Do you think they are trying to give rights piece by piece to have many voters keep coming back for more?

Quoting N867DA (Reply 1):
Instead of giving rights to gay couples piece by piece I think the federal government should just grow a pair and legalize gay marriage.

  



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinerwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3077 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3727 times:

Increasingly, I think there's only two equitable solutions to resolve the current discriminatory practices:

1) A federal statute recognizing gay marriage, and requiring all states to recognize all marriages from other states. On a Federal basis, all marriages would be created equal.

or

2) Remove all legal benefits that come with marriage. Marriage is essentially a religious contract, recognized by the state, that provides certain benefits such as preferential tax treatment, visitation rights, inheritance rights, and many other benefits. If these benefits are going to be denied to homosexuals because they are only available for married couples (which in most places cannot be homosexual), then I do not believe these religious unions should be given any legal standing or preference. Under this plan, each person could chose one and only one person who would receive all of these benefits. This could be their husband, wife, partner, friend, whatever. But one and only one.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8021 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 5):
I'm pretty sure Doc knows this, but you should know that the Feds don't regulate marriage. It's a state issue.

They don't regulate it but they promote heterosexual marriage by conferring more than 1,000 unique rights to straight couples. It's a legal abomination.

Quoting rwSEA (Reply 8):
1) A federal statute recognizing gay marriage, and requiring all states to recognize all marriages from other states. On a Federal basis, all marriages would be created equal.

There would be major Constitutional issues with that.

Quoting rwSEA (Reply 8):
If these benefits are going to be denied to homosexuals because they are only available for married couples (which in most places cannot be homosexual), then I do not believe these religious unions should be given any legal standing or preference.

Marriage contracts have separate legal and religious distinction in US jurisdictions. You can walk into a church and get married but you still have to go to city hall and sign the paperwork.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineoa260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 26844 posts, RR: 58
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3621 times:

About time and a very important move.

User currently onlineMaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 17322 posts, RR: 46
Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3609 times:

Quoting N867DA (Reply 1):
Instead of giving rights to gay couples piece by piece I think the federal government should just grow a pair and legalize gay marriage

When has the government ever done anything whole-hog? It's always baby steps, and 1 baby step forward, 2 back.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 7):
I know a few fiscally conservative gays who would probably vote Republican if it weren't for, you know, the whole gay rights issue.

Since my sexuality is a small part of my life, I generally vote for what's best for my entire being, rather than just one small aspect, but a party that did not discriminate against gays--against all rational thought--and was equally rational about spending would be a godsend. I'm still more worried about impending economic doom than I am optimistic about getting marriage equality, so I tend to vote with the former in mind.



E pur si muove -Galileo
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19371 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3589 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 6):
And even if we could, it would be China that we'd be paying to design and build the thing.

No. I believe that China is using Alstom, although it might be Seimens. I don't think it's Shinkansen. Either way, there are no HSR builders in the U.S. Rail is a European and Asian industry.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3550 times:

Quoting ATTart (Thread starter):
Wow, it is about time!!!!!!!!!

What was stopping them from obtaining POA's and living wills previous to this?


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2711 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3548 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 5):
Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 4):
No kidding. China is building 16,000 miles of high speed rail and will have much of it up and running within 5 years. The US federal government couldn't even get to the final blueprint stage and zoning hearings within 5 years.

It doesn't help that the US is basically paying for, well, everything.

The US sold its debt to the highest bidder. China bought it. Several Trillion dollars worth. Also, American consumers appetite for cheap products poured trillions into the coffers of Chinese sweatshops and startups. How is any of this a critique of China?

Now they are spending their nest egg wisely. The US could learn a great deal...



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlineMBMBOS From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2597 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3548 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 13):
What was stopping them from obtaining POA's and living wills previous to

Wow, the voice of compassion! Money, for one thing. I cannot tell you how many thousands of dollars my partner and I have spent working with lawyers to establish power of attorney, health care proxy and to protect our assets because we cannot marry.

And by the way, having a health care proxy or power of attorney papers in your hand will not allow you immediate access to the hospital room of your gay partner. You have to take those papers to court first and get an order. I know because I've been there. So, if your partner is gravely ill, you may have to wait until the next day to see him. Many gay couples have lost partners and were unable to see them because of this very issue.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3501 times:

Quoting MBMBOS (Reply 15):
Wow, the voice of compassion! Money, for one thing. I cannot tell you how many thousands of dollars my partner and I have spent working with lawyers to establish power of attorney, health care proxy and to protect our assets because we cannot marry.

So for you, love has a price? What's the top out? BTW, I had to do the samething with my parents. We had an attorney establish a POA, a trust, and a liiving will. It all costs a pretty penny but I didn't bitch because in the end it was worth the price for the protection.

Quoting MBMBOS (Reply 15):
And by the way, having a health care proxy or power of attorney papers in your hand will not allow you immediate access to the hospital room of your gay partner. You have to take those papers to court first and get an order. I know because I've been there. So, if your partner is gravely ill, you may have to wait until the next day to see him. Many gay couples have lost partners and were unable to see them because of this very issue.

Niether will being a family member if the medical personnel are doing their job trying to save someones life. If you're partner was gravely ill, and had been for sometime I would think that would have been worked out beforehand. If it was something that came on suddenly and was over quickly, as this case seems to present itself, I'll bet there are just as many straight couples that were not able to hold someones hand either.


User currently offlineMBMBOS From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2597 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 3491 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 16):
So for you, love has a price?

Oh please. How manipulative can an argument get?

Just in case you really don't understand: why should I have to pay for something heterosexual couples have for next to nothing by signing a marriage contract?

Quoting DXing (Reply 16):
...I'll bet there are just as many straight couples that were not able to hold someones hand either.

That is not what I'm talking about. I can stand before a doctor or hospital administrator with a health care proxy in hand and they will refuse it until I have produced a court order. They will only allow spouse or, in the event of no spouse, next of kin without an obtained court order. This has all too commonly been reported. And as I said in my earlier posting it has happened to me.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 3472 times:

Quoting MBMBOS (Reply 17):
Just in case you really don't understand: why should I have to pay for something heterosexual couples have for next to nothing by signing a marriage contract?

I didn't sign a marriage contract, I signed a marriage license, issued by the State, of which the people of the State said was legal and proper. When you can convince enough people that gay marriage is of the same standing, then your argument will be valid and the State will change the law. Several States have done this, others have voted it down. It is not the same a slavery so please don't go there. It is not the same a man and woman of differing skin colors wanting to marry please don't go there.

Quoting MBMBOS (Reply 17):
That is not what I'm talking about. I can stand before a doctor or hospital administrator with a health care proxy in hand and they will refuse it until I have produced a court order. They will only allow spouse or, in the event of no spouse, next of kin without an obtained court order. This has all too commonly been reported. And as I said in my earlier posting it has happened to me.

Then you have a right to sue. It does not change the fact that if the illness was long term you being in the room should have been worked out long before hand. If it was something sudden then there are plenty of examples of a hetrosexual spouse not being in the room when the person passed due to a variety of reasons. Compassion has little to do with this and I think it is rather strange that when it is a legal issue some will not look at it any other way and yet when their legal argument falls apart all of the sudden it becomes a "compassion" issue.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8021 posts, RR: 26
Reply 19, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3425 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 18):
When you can convince enough people that gay marriage is of the same standing, then your argument will be valid and the State will change the law. Several States have done this, others have voted it down. It is not the same a slavery so please don't go there. It is not the same a man and woman of differing skin colors wanting to marry please don't go there.

But it is second-class citizenry and it's wrong. Why should your relationship be more valid than MBM's? It's hogwash in a society that values freedom and fairness. What's wrong with using the Loving case as supporting criteria? Both race and sexual orientation are identities an honest person can't reasonably change.

Quoting DXing (Reply 18):
yet when their legal argument falls apart

There's no legal argument "falling apart" where gay equality is concerned. If you can show where there is, that would certainly be helpful.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5562 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3410 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 18):
It is not the same a man and woman of differing skin colors wanting to marry

I'm sorry.... are you suggesting that you can change your sexual orientation? Because you would be dead wrong.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinephotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2716 posts, RR: 18
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3390 times:

This whole thread is total BS with the "gays" trying to score political points on a false premise.

You see.... I'm single, Not married, NO family or Next of Kin. Whether I'm straight or gay has absolutely no merit when I needed to arrange hospital access for those close to me.

Sure it sucks, but I had to arrange a Living Will, POA, and have pre-signed access documents acceptable to the hospital, SPECIFICALLY NAMING those to of my friends (one male, one female) who were to be granted FULL ACCESS as if they were legally family.

The gay crowd is simply taking what should be a "RIGHT OF ACCESS" issue, and trying to turn it into a "Gay" issue. Which it's NOT!!!!

nuff said.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3361 times:

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
But it is second-class citizenry and it's wrong

I disagree. It is only second class if they want to make it that way. Every life decision comes with choices. If you want to live the gay lifestyle then there are States that support that. Go live there. If you don't want to do that then convinvce a majority of people in the State you do live in to change the rules. That's how a represenative democracy works. Don't give me the slave crap, it ended 140 years ago and no one would tolerate that today.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
Why should your relationship be more valid than MBM's?

My relationshiop shouldn't be any more valid than MBM's but I don't need the State to validate it anymore than he does. The legal avenues exist for him to have the same rights with his partner as I do my wife. If the President was serious why did he not grant them the same tax status that my wife and I enjoy? That could also be done fairly easy but no one in power brings that one up.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
It's hogwash in a society that values freedom and fairness.

Freedom yes, fairness? I would disagree with you on that one any number of points. If it were fair no one would be hungry or homeless. Fair is what you make of it.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
What's wrong with using the Loving case as supporting criteria? Both race and sexual orientation are identities an honest person can't reasonably change.

I can tell black from white, how do you tell gay from straight??? This ought to be good. On top of that, there is more that goes into a marriage than sex. We've discussed this before I don't intend to cover the real estate again.

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
There's no legal argument "falling apart" where gay equality is concerned. If you can show where there is, that would certainly be helpful.

Sure there is. My wife and I had to pay out significant cash to get a will. As we get older we wil have to pay out again to get that changed into a trust, have one of our daughters listed with a POA in case we both become incapacitated, and we will have to pay to have a living will so that our wishes will be honored in case we are again incapaciated. That differs from what gays have to do today how? So their legal argument that they are denied access to their partners hospital room is just worthless. Once those things are in hand if a hospital denies them access then the hospital is legally wrong.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 20):
I'm sorry.... are you suggesting that you can change your sexual orientation? Because you would be dead wrong.

I'm sorry, are you suggesting that people can hide their color? By what nature can someone determine anothers sexual orientation?


User currently offlineMoltenRock From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3335 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 22):
I disagree. It is only second class if they want to make it that way. Every life decision comes with choices. If you want to live the gay lifestyle then there are States that support that. Go live there. If you don't want to do that then convinvce a majority of people in the State you do live in to change the rules. That's how a represenative democracy works. Don't give me the slave crap, it ended 140 years ago and no one would tolerate that today.

Funniest post all week!!!      

This is the most hypocritical thing I've seen you ever post which says a lot. DXing you whine, complain, piss, and moan, constantly about demanding change, defeating Obama, going out to vote for Republicans to get new laws / ideas passed and yet you post this tripe about if you don't like it as is, leave?

That knife cuts both ways DXing. People are allowed to push for change, not just the anti-Obama nuts making up insane statements to get their way.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3311 times:

Quoting MoltenRock (Reply 23):
That knife cuts both ways DXing. People are allowed to push for change, not just the anti-Obama nuts making up insane statements to get their way.

Yep which is why I said if they want change all they have to do is convince a majority of voters in their State that they are right. But of course you ignore that part which makes your posts the most predictable.


25 Ltbewr : The affect of this order is: That any hospital or health care facility getting any Federal Medicare and/or Medicade funds must allow access to a perso
26 Aaron747 : If that's really your take on it, there's nothing substantial to further discuss now is there?
27 DXing : Which is fine and dandy. All it is is a feel good for laws that already are on the books that say that if your are the person with POA just must be c
28 UAL747 : How many gays or lesbians on this forum have to say, "we did not choose to be gay," for you to actually believe that is true? I live in Oklahoma, I w
29 Aaron747 : Some things are not choices but whatever you want to believe is your deal dude. Ignorance is bliss. Some people, for whatever reason, just can't get
30 UAL747 : And I should follow up with DXing, I've been through years of "Christian Therapy" to repair my "brokeness" as they called it. I'm still as gay as I wa
31 DocLightning : Time and money. Yes it is. Bottom line: you're wrong. We're right. And that's why we're winning.
32 DocLightning : A mathematically undefined number. DXing has demonstrated on a number of occasions that he is incapable of being persuaded or having his mind changed
33 Maverick623 : How does this work for you? BEING GAY IS NOT A CHOICE. Christ, can't you get that through your head? Please explain how that is in any way relevant t
34 johnboy : Man i love it when the tools on this website get thrashed.
35 N1120A : This is a very good step forward. The vast majority of hospitals in this country bill Medicare/Medicaid at some point, so they are on the hook. Oh, le
36 Mir : Nobody chooses to live the gay lifestyle. We've heard this from gay people time and time again. We've heard scientific studies state it time and time
37 Post contains images DXing : I have never said that anyone chose to be gay. But being gay doesn't mean that we have to change an age old definition, that being "marriage" to incl
38 GuitrThree : (*disclaimer, I'm against gay marriage, so let that be known up front*) Well, if you ask me, for those pushing for Gay Marriage, this is a step in the
39 Yellowstone : You forgot the most important one - equal rights under the law. That one's not going anywhere until gay marriage is fully legalized.
40 Zentraedi : The "choice" and democracy issues are red herrings. Homosexuality is simply an anathema to their cultural background, religion and/or political party.
41 DocLightning : No. AGM100 and Dreadnought have core beliefs that don't agree with mine. They, however, can be convinced that they are wrong when presented with fact
42 KrisYYZ : I just find it very sad that this is even an issue in the US. KrisYYZ
43 Aaron747 : Then you made a foolish decision in my view. What happened to you is patently wrong, is discrimination in its own right, and is, like special rights
44 Post contains images TheCol : Since when can the government restrict visitation rights? Shouldn't it be up to the individual in the hospital bed?
45 DXing : But since, with my vote, I am a small part of the "State" it does. Again though, since I am a part of the "State" through my vote, what the State doe
46 cws818 : It is perfectly acceptable to have an opinion about someone else.
47 Aesma : But marriage is still a religious concept.
48 DXing : Sure it is. But when you say: with no authentication to back it up, that is not an opinion, that is a statement and an untrue one at that. I have nev
49 cws818 : DocLightning's central charge was that you do not seem to ever admit to being anything other than entirely correct. From what I have read in my time
50 Post contains links Aaron747 : In my libertarian America, most HOAs and deed restrictions would be fought vigorously in court. What's the point to property ownership if you can't c
51 Post contains links DXing : And he would be wrong. Video Leaked Of US Killing 2 Reporters In Iraq (by Yellowstone Apr 5 2010 in Non Aviation) DXing Reply 258, Quoting AverageUse
52 Aaron747 : Well again you choose not to respond to the part about the "choices" we apparently make in adolescence when we become aware of our innate desires, so
53 Post contains images DXing : I do not respond because I have made my position clear, repeatedly. If you choose not to recognize my position, or that it even exists, that is your
54 cws818 : Point well-taken. I appreciate your correcting my misconception, particularly since by doing so you pointed out an instance of personal error. I apol
55 Post contains links Aaron747 : The clarity of reason and thinking process behind your position remain rather unclear, that much is certain. Here: These two statements are in direct
56 DXing : 1st, that is not what I asked you to cite. You said: To which I have asked you to cite where I have said that which gender we are attracted to is an
57 Post contains links Aaron747 : Sorry, but what's on record is on record: Obviously a faith-based one, which has nothing to do with being gay. No, assigning "this or that" lifestyle
58 Zentraedi : Unless there is some sort of personal advantage, then I would classify that bigotry as d-baggery Exactly how does it affect you directly? How signifi
59 DXing : As the article you linked to states: "“There is a real disconnect between what might be a good written policy or state law and actual implementatio
60 MoltenRock : Regardless if it's "right" or not at the federal level, I've been a proponent for a long time of just accomplishing it at the states level since it's
61 Post contains links UAL747 : Nobody really can make an argument on gay marriage, at all.... http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tu...ecember-9-2008/mike-huckabee-pt--2
62 MaverickM11 : And vote for...? Constitution Party? Libertarian Party? Write-in?
63 DocLightning : You obviously know very little about the founding ideals of our country, about the great pains that the founders took to avoid a "tyranny of the majo
64 DXing : It's only silly when it's something you disagree with. Then facts and accuracy go by the way side as well. What is not accruate about what I have sai
65 UAL747 : DXing, The point I think everyone is blatantly trying to make to you, is that you cannot and never will be able to make an argument against gay marria
66 DXing : Which is why so many people in so many States have decided via the ballot box what they really want. Still not a shred of evidence that this Presiden
67 UAL747 : And you know, as well I as I do, that the will of the people is not always the most appropriate way to decide things. It took the higher educated ind
68 DXing : Those "higher educated" people also realized that courts can make mistakes or be swayed by personal opinion. That is but one reason why the amendment
69 UAL747 : Whoa, I don't know how someone else's post ended up on mine, anyway, sorry about that. Here's what I said: Would you like me to start a separate threa
70 MoltenRock : And yet civil rights wouldn't have passed the ballot box had a national referendum been had on it 40+ years ago. How often is mob rule and mob mental
71 DeltaMD90 : Well, I see where you are going, but don't forget, the Constitution trumps "popular opinion." If the Supreme Court would rule that the Constitution a
72 Post contains links ADXMATT : Yes, everyone can come up with a story for each scenario and then can "sue" the hospital for going against their wishes. In a man/woman hetero "marria
73 Maverick623 : Hahahahahhahaha. We'd have several states today with racially segregated schools if the ballot box trumped civil rights. And I haven't harped on this
74 DocLightning : I very much hope that in this case, individuals involved in the agencies that this are personally found guilty of criminal acts. Some heads need to s
75 N1120A : Yeah. That sums it up really well.
76 Continental : I just thought about that as well. If Canada was pulling this crap I'd be dumbfounded. It's issues like these that makes me feel that Canada is light
77 DXing : You are free to do whatever you choose. I'm quite sure you don't need my permission or advice. And there you have it from at least one person. Thank
78 UAL747 : Okay, for sake of future argument, you agree with me, that I should have every right you do, to marry a man, have children, adopt children, have the
79 DeltaMD90 : What people forget is that there really are 2 types of marriage... through the state and through the church. Religious groups should focus and have ju
80 photopilot : ROTFLMAO........ So... you are a man and want to marry a man and also "have children" which you address separately from the "adopt children" point. Y
81 UAL747 : Obviously I made a typing error. I never said I wanted to conceive and bear a child, I said I want to have children, as in be their legal guardian, a
82 Aaron747 : Simply because one simply cannot wrap their head around something does not make that something a laughing matter. It's called maturity.
83 DXing : Nothing to correct. My position has been clear for a long time. Civil unions are fine with me. The tax code needs to be scrapped so couples are on th
84 UAL747 : And I never said it did....... So, I am glad we cleared this up for future discussion.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Parental Rights For Gays - What A Load Of Garbage posted Tue Jun 21 2005 18:10:28 by Clickhappy
No Heaven For Gays/Transsexuals - Vatican posted Wed Dec 2 2009 11:24:20 by Kaitak
Would You Hit It Thread For Gays & Girls posted Sun Dec 2 2007 03:37:03 by Mal787
For Gays In Iraq, A Life Of Constant Fear posted Sun Aug 5 2007 23:19:21 by Charles79
Church Weddings For Gays Soon.... posted Fri Jul 6 2007 14:15:05 by Solnabo
Would You Hit (For Gays And Gals) posted Sun May 20 2007 22:23:08 by Trekster
Ohio Gov. Restoring Some Protection For Gays posted Thu May 17 2007 05:14:33 by Falcon84
Landscaper Won't Work For Gays, Starts Uproar posted Fri Nov 10 2006 21:48:11 by Falcon84
Serious Question For Gays/Lesbians posted Tue Dec 7 2004 05:31:12 by AA7771stClass
Principal: Permission Slips For Gays At Dance posted Sun Dec 5 2004 16:22:00 by Falcon84