Rjpieces From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1412 times:
I was wondering about gay rights in other countries. Do gay couples in other countries have the same rights as married couples? Is it a controversial issue in other countries as it is in the US?
What is the future of the gay marriage/union issue in the US now? Assuming there is no federal amendment to ban gay marriage, are any other states expected to legalize gay marriage/civil unions? Are gay couples in Mass. being given FULL equal rights, even when it comes to issues with the Federal Government like taxes? What other states have been progressive with regards to gay rights? Any chance that Congress will ever get rid of the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996?
It seems crazy that in NYC and San Francisco, there hasn't been more of a forceful movement for equal rights. It really boggles my mind that in 2004 this is still an issue.
ARGinMIA From Argentina, joined Nov 2001, 487 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1368 times:
Lets see how long till someone starts saying that we want special priveleges.. when are they going to undestand that we just want to have the same rights.. put it this way.. you live with your girfriend for 5 years.. she has no family.. she gets into a car accident.. and she gets hospitalized (lets say a coma .. so she cannot talk) you try to visit her.. but since you are not a family member.. the hospital will not allow you to see her... if you where married.. that would solve the problem.. now things like these happen to gay couples.. you want to visit your partner in a hospital.. and since you aren't family or spouse.. you CAN'T.. what's so "special privilege" about just asking for those rights?
back to the topic.. here in Buenos aires we have full "Civil Union" laws.. still not on the federal law.. but it will shortly be there also.. giving the "civil Union" the same rights as an heterosexual marriage..
ARGinMIA From Argentina, joined Nov 2001, 487 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1350 times:
Nobady said SEPARATE group or rights.. EA CO AS.. we just want the same rights a regular heterosexual cuple can have.. like for example being able to visit your partner in the hospital when he is sick..
Dmeeky243 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 204 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1337 times:
About 10 years ago, something my dad said stuck with me. "I believe in equal rights for everyone, special rights for no one." I live by that. Whether its from my (flagrantly) homosexual lead server Danny, to my mildly handicapped DMO (dishwaser) Juanito. They're each treated the same. I've found that everyone on my crew, respects this approach, and is impressed by it. Just my two cents. Hey, whatever floats your boat.
"I have a favorite dish, which tends to change daily depending on my mood, or whether I have a hangover, or whether it's
Dc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1328 times:
Being gay is not normal. Its ok to be gay but its not "normal" A man and a woman living together for too long becomes "common law" marriage. Gay people can live together forever if they want to but marriage is for men & women.
Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13275 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1318 times:
A man and a woman living together for too long becomes "common law" marriage.
Again, that's not something the Bill of Rights addresses - either in favor of or opposing. As a previous poster said, the Bill of Rights apply to everyone, and there isn't a need for a special set of rights for others.
Jesus is a Liberal Jew !!!
Dc10guy, I have a question about your signature - if Jesus is liberal, do you think he'd embrace a liberal cause, like a woman's right to choose?
(And for the record, I'm pro-choice - just wanted to make you think a bit about your signature)
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
ClassicLover From Ireland, joined Mar 2004, 4602 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1288 times:
Getting back to the topic before this degenerates into a typical Airliners.Net free for all...
In Australia, you can't be married if you're a gay person.
However, what the majority of gay people want is equal rights. In what way is it not equal? If one person in a gay relationship dies, and they have been living together for 40 years, the surviving member has no rights at all.
They don't get the Superannuation money (pension scheme). If the house is in the dead partners name, they have no right to the house.
You are not considered a "partner" legally.
My personal opinion is that people can take marriage and keep it how it is, or do whatever with it. I'd be quite happy with De Facto status being recognised on a future relationship that I have, so that I have the same rights that straight couples who aren't married but who live together for years have.
[Edited 2004-09-20 09:21:41]
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
Ussherd From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 328 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1288 times:
Same-sex couples may marry in the Netherlands, Belgium & Denmark.
Same-sex couples may enter into civil partnerships in Croatia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and Spain.
UK: Civil union legislation is going through parliament. Has been met with complete indifference by the general public.
Ireland: The Law Reform Commission of Ireland has recommended granting both heterosexual and homosexual cohabiting couples a number of legal rights and this proposal is currently being discussed.
Some civil unions offer virtually the same rights as marriage; others are a much more diluted version of marriage. The general view is that civil unions are an intermediate step towards the granting of full marriage rights to homosexuals.
In September 2003, in it’s annual report on human rights issues in the European Union, the European Parliament recommended that the 15 member states grant homosexuals the right to marry and adopt.
Cragley From Australia, joined Jul 2004, 426 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1246 times:
Why call it a right? a 'special right'? a privilege?
Its what I expect! If my partner was in hospital, why shouldnt I be able to visit?
It's a total no brainer.
They aren;t special rights, privileges or even concessions. Its common sense and its not about giving a group something. But its more about witholding human rights from a person/persons because of what they are.
Its nothing 'special' by any means. If you believe the right to not being harrassed, discriminated against or hated is 'special', then the question should be 'why do you believe YOU should have special rights?
Sadly this topis is still an issue.
Til the next retarded 'gays have too many rights' thread.
Arniepie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1239 times:
As far as I know you can get married over here (Belgium) and you are also eligible as adoption couples.
Until now not to many gays get married but this is mainly because of taxes.
In Belgium it is cheaper not to be married but have a so called "living-together"
contract (also the reason why me ,my brother and sister are not married with our partners).
conclusion: gay or straight= no difference.
Dtwclipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1234 times:
Let's put in terms that a-netters will understand:
Two men have a long term relationship, have a home together, a mortgage, one checking account, wills, power of attorney (for catastrophic illness), tax bills, two cars and a dog.
When one of them is involved in an horrific airliner crash (god forbid), no settlements from the airline nor assistance would be given to the other partner.
The surviving partner is not entitled to any cash settlements, nor participation in litigation.
The surviving partner would not be entitled to receive any information from the airline, nor transportation to the event site.
The surviving partner would not receive Social Security benefits, and legal action my be taken by the deceased family in regards to airline settlements rather than the partner who will loose half of his household income, which could have devastating long term financial effects.
These are not special rights, but equal rights that any co-habitating "hetro" married or common law (US) couple have.
Falcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1217 times:
I'm confused; can someone please tell me which parts of the Bill of Rights don't apply to gay individuals?
If that's true, EA CO AS, why are certain groups and individuals working so hard to change the Constitution to, for the first time, to specifically DENY a group something?
That to me implies that these people don't want gays to have equal rights, is that not correct?
The right is tryng to put something into the Constitution something that isn't there, and shouldn't be there-a definition of marriage. That should have nothing to do with our Constitution.
I am not for churches being foreced to accept gay marriages. I have no problem with individual states accepting Civil Unions. But I think amending the Constitution on this issue-and on issues such as flag burning, is just plain stupid.
TWFirst From Vatican City, joined Apr 2000, 6346 posts, RR: 52
Reply 23, posted (9 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1191 times:
>>That's not a "right" that can be legislated though. That's a matter of hospital policy.<<
EA CO AS...
Hospitals are allowed to make such policies because 1) Gay people aren't allowed to enter into a marriage contract as straight people can (can be changed through legislation) and 2) It still is allowable to discriminate against people simply because of their sexual orientation (also can be changed through legislation).
Can you imagine if a hospital had a policy that didn't allow mixed race couples to visit each other??
On another note, I believe Spain is currently considering allowing gay people to marry.