Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Bush's Announcement 9 Comments More | Login | Reply /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.

  • Money? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by djberg96 (2603)
    Let's skip the moral/ethical stuff and get right down to what people are really willing to fight for - money.

    Anyone have any stats on how a federal law that allows same-sex marriage affects insurance, taxes, etc? Or is it insignificant.

    Anyway, the lawyers will be happy if this passes. Just think - an instant 3% increase in divorce court clients!

    • I don't have the stats on hand -- I doubt the government has ever commissioned a study of the financial impact of gay marriages -- but if we consider some of the financial benefits of marriage (and other special rights automatically granted to married couples), then we get quite a list:

      • joint parenting;
      • joint adoption;
      • joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents);
      • status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent;

      • Why does this have to be about sex? What about single heterosexuals? What about the celibate? Why not push for equal protection for everyone, where "everyone" doesn't have a little asterisk?

        • I agree completely. I don't think that the special rights that marriage conveys should be something enshrined into law. However, given that married people are going to fight viciously to maintain their special rights, I think the easier tactic is to at least end the discrimination against homosexuals.

          • Money has nothing to do with it. It has everything to do with what is moral and right. Same sex marriage is neither. If it takes an act of Congress to cement what a marriage is in stone then so be it. I look at the moral slide this country is making and I do not wonder why talking about God is not allowed anywhere any more. Our founding fathers would weep if they could see us now. And those would not be tears of joy.

            • I look at the moral slide this country is making and I do not wonder why talking about God is not allowed anywhere any more.

              There is nothing wrong with talking about God. There is everything wrong with a government that is supposed to recognize the separation of church and state failing to do so.

              One of the biggest threats our country faces today is the hate and intolerance that the religious right is teaching us. To try and take their values and enshrine them in the Constitution would not only be de

              • I don't understand why Americans are so much attached to their constitution. A constitution that does not mandate absolute separation of church of state is anti-democratic; be it two centuries old or not. One of the problems here is that some people continue to think that civil marriage and the form of marriage practiced in their favourite religion are related in some way; they are not. Several religions authorize polygamy; should a government allow it, then? So why a government should ban a form a marriage

                • I've been hearing the "no separation of church and state" claim for a while now. People who utter it are absolutely right that those exact words are not in the Constitution. However, they're dead wrong that it's not mandated. I don't know who started this ridiculous lie, but many people have been parroting it blindly that it's become this piece of Right Wing Christian propaganda that they keep throwing at unsuspecting people (mind you, I have no problem with Christians or people who are right wing, thoug

                  • No it isn't in there. It isn't even implied. That whole argument is from taking one statement out of context from a letter written to a church that was afraid another church was getting "national" status like the church of England. That is a historical FACT. Nothing you can say changes it. You are part of the "say it long enough and a lie becomes the truth crowd".

Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.