| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
28 Mar 2005 11:47:58 AM |
| Object: |
ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
Why would any man need another man to provide him with health care
benefits? The advantage of gay partnerships is that there are no
children at home that need attending. Let each man provide his own
health care, just like single straight people do. This notion that one
guy stays home and plays "Donna Reed" while the other one goes to work
should not become a burden on the American health care system. The
people of Michigan (and many other states) have spoken; No gay
marriage. Stop seeking "special" dispensations just because your
different.
http://www.freep.com/news/mich/gay22e_20050322.htm
Despite marriage ban, couples want health care
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit Monday asking the
courts to protect same-sex couples' health benefits in light of a state
constitutional ban on gay marriage.
In the suit, filed in Ingham County Circuit Court, the ACLU asked the
court to stipulate that the ban on gay marriage does not extend to
health care benefits for same-sex partners. The amendment, they said,
is ambiguous.
The ACLU filed the suit less than a week after state Attorney General
Mike Cox issued his legal interpretation about what effect the
amendment should have on health benefits. He concluded that the
amendment bans government agencies from extending benefits to same-sex
couples in any future contract negotiations.
.
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
18 Apr 2005 08:26:46 AM |
|
|
"RainLover" <SP-AMB-LOCKrainlover@raincity.com> wrote in message
news:taa761lmcvmuvs7o8ro3etpvgtcgjcrg5b@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:uvn161tmffr2mdkfgdus3vks6bta933ogp@4ax.com...
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 22:12:03 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
Lots of people can't marry the person they love. So what?
What you say, is very true, but none of the reasons why they cannot,
come
from,
what is probably a politically mistranslated, collection of two to three
thousand year old myths.
Life is tough.
Since when does "tough", have to be callous
That's no reason to re-write the Constitution.
Isn't there something in your Declaration of Independence, about men
having a
right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"?
It seems to me, that you are now deciding what is an acceptable course
for
pursuing liberty and happiness.
It says nothing about how happiness should be pursued.
To prevent a same sex couple from doing a thing, based solely on
superstition
and gender orientation, is an infringement of their liberty, and a
deliberate
and spiteful barrier to their pursuit of happiness.
When a thing that harms, IF it harm anyone, only the participants, and
the
participants are aware of what they are doing, and a law prevents them,
then the
law is wrong, and should be changed.
There is no evidence that homosexuality, harms anyone.
There is plenty of evidence.
You SAY there is plenty, but yet you provide none of it.
Before you go off on a tirade about AIDS, let's just remember that
worldwide, HETROsexuals far exceed homosexuals in the number of AIDS
It does not matter. The question was asked, "what harm is there?". I posted
a web site that shows page after page of harm and the dishonest people
snipped it.
--
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ... A
wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor the
bread it has earned. ... Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for
the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated. ... Would
it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to
spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new
hands?" --Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 08:10:21 AM |
|
|
"Susan Cohen" <flavia18@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Pm59e.36180$qO6.1058@trnddc05...
"RainLover" <SP-AMB-LOCKrainlover@raincity.com> wrote in message
news:taa761lmcvmuvs7o8ro3etpvgtcgjcrg5b@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
There is the harm in higher healthcare costs. There is
the harm in higher insurance costs.
Wrong, the statistics prove that couples in loving relationships have
LOWER healthcare costs.
When you snip the relevant parts of a post to show some dishonest rebuttle,
you waste space on my computer. PLONK
--
"In questions of power, then, let no more
be said of confidence in man but bind him
down with the chains of the Constitution."
- Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
16 Apr 2005 04:25:08 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote:
There is plenty of evidence. Homosexuals just refuse to acknowledge it. Just
start with the harm caused to the Father of a homosexual that is devastated
because the chances of the family name that he is so proud of being carried
forward is pretty much nil, and the ridicule he must suffer from his peers
and the loss of respect for his "manhood" he feels. Many of these Fathers
commit suicide. There are statistics for these things but like I said,
homosexuals refuse to acknowledge them and when you bring them to the fore,
you are bombarded with temper tantrums and called all kinds of names. There
are many other harms. There is the harm in higher healthcare costs. There is
the harm in higher insurance costs.
All of which is irrelevant. We were discussing same sex marriage, not the pros
and cons of homosexuality.
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
16 Apr 2005 07:27:20 PM |
|
|
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:mk036197acvnfcrd8meauph9nf9kv9svk2@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
There is plenty of evidence. Homosexuals just refuse to acknowledge it.
Just
start with the harm caused to the Father of a homosexual that is
devastated
because the chances of the family name that he is so proud of being
carried
forward is pretty much nil, and the ridicule he must suffer from his peers
and the loss of respect for his "manhood" he feels. Many of these Fathers
commit suicide. There are statistics for these things but like I said,
homosexuals refuse to acknowledge them and when you bring them to the
fore,
you are bombarded with temper tantrums and called all kinds of names.
There
are many other harms. There is the harm in higher healthcare costs. There
is
the harm in higher insurance costs.
All of which is irrelevant.
Which is just more evidence that when some homosexual asks the question,
"what harm is there in homosexuality" and someone posts any evidence of any
harm at all, homosexuals refuse to acknowledge it and come up with some
cowardly response that is not relevant to the question that was asked.
I had a homosexual brother. (Died of AIDS) I understand how this works. I am
not intimidated, nor disuaded. If homosexuals are too cowardly to confront
the obstacles that lie in their path in an honest and straightforward
manner, that' their problem and that's why they will not make much more
progress with their agenda.
--
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ... A
wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor the
bread it has earned. ... Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for
the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated. ... Would
it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to
spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new
hands?" --Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jenn" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
17 Apr 2005 11:28:11 AM |
|
|
<<<<I had a homosexual brother. (Died of AIDS) I understand how this
works. I am
not intimidated, nor disuaded. If homosexuals are too cowardly to
confront
the obstacles that lie in their path in an honest and straightforward
manner, that' their problem and that's why they will not make much more
progress with their agenda. >>>>
I am very sorry for the loss suffered by your family. It's a terrible
thing. I pray for you and your family.
But please, PLEASE try to understand that being homosexual did not kill
your brother and bring this pain to you. If your brother had contacted
AIDS from HETEROSEXUAL sex, his being heterosexual would not have been
the cause of your pain. From another post of yours, it sounds like
your brother made some very poor choices in life, as do those who
contact AIDS from heterosexual activity. THAT is his fault, and he
bears responsibility for that, and for causing his family and himself
this grief. But the cause of it all is NOT the fact that he was gay.
My partner and I will never cantact AIDS unless it is as Ryan White (to
give one example) did. Nor will any of our gay male or female friends,
because we and they make sane choices. Nor have we cause our parents
pain because of the fact that we are gay. In fact, they are HAPPY that
we are HAPPY and that according to them and many other people, we have
the best committed releationship of anyone they know. They would
rather that we have happy, fullfilled, productive lives than have
grandchildren. Good parents are like that.
I sincerely hope that you and I can have sane, productive discussion on
this topic.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Michael Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
17 Apr 2005 12:26:21 AM |
|
|
Maverick wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:mk036197acvnfcrd8meauph9nf9kv9svk2@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
<snip>
All of which is irrelevant.
Which is just more evidence that when some homosexual asks the question,
"what harm is there in homosexuality" and someone posts any evidence
What evidence? I am still waiting for your to post the recent, peer
reviewed, evidence from the mainstream scientific journals on the rates
of suicide amongst the fathers of homosexual children.
<snip>
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fritz" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
17 Apr 2005 10:46:10 AM |
|
|
Maverick wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:mk036197acvnfcrd8meauph9nf9kv9svk2@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
There is plenty of evidence. Homosexuals just refuse to acknowledge it.
Just
start with the harm caused to the Father of a homosexual that is
devastated
because the chances of the family name that he is so proud of being
carried
forward is pretty much nil, and the ridicule he must suffer from his peers
and the loss of respect for his "manhood" he feels. Many of these Fathers
commit suicide. There are statistics for these things but like I said,
homosexuals refuse to acknowledge them and when you bring them to the
fore,
you are bombarded with temper tantrums and called all kinds of names.
There
are many other harms. There is the harm in higher healthcare costs. There
is
the harm in higher insurance costs.
All of which is irrelevant.
Which is just more evidence that when some homosexual asks the question,
"what harm is there in homosexuality" and someone posts any evidence of any
harm at all, homosexuals refuse to acknowledge it and come up with some
cowardly response that is not relevant to the question that was asked.
I had a homosexual brother. (Died of AIDS) I understand how this works. I am
not intimidated, nor disuaded. If homosexuals are too cowardly to confront
the obstacles that lie in their path in an honest and straightforward
manner, that' their problem and that's why they will not make much more
progress with their agenda.
Like you do with your plunk?
-- Fritz ...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
17 Apr 2005 08:45:25 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 00:27:20 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:mk036197acvnfcrd8meauph9nf9kv9svk2@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
There is plenty of evidence. Homosexuals just refuse to acknowledge it.
Just
start with the harm caused to the Father of a homosexual that is
devastated
because the chances of the family name that he is so proud of being
carried
forward is pretty much nil, and the ridicule he must suffer from his peers
and the loss of respect for his "manhood" he feels. Many of these Fathers
commit suicide. There are statistics for these things but like I said,
homosexuals refuse to acknowledge them and when you bring them to the
fore,
you are bombarded with temper tantrums and called all kinds of names.
There
are many other harms. There is the harm in higher healthcare costs. There
is
the harm in higher insurance costs.
All of which is irrelevant.
Which is just more evidence that when some homosexual asks the question,
"what harm is there in homosexuality" and someone posts any evidence of any
harm at all, homosexuals refuse to acknowledge it and come up with some
cowardly response that is not relevant to the question that was asked.
Just a couple of tiny points.
First; The question wasn't asked, it was merely commented upon.
Second: If it was asked, it was not asked by a homosexual.
Third: You offered no evidence, only assertions that some relatives would
get their selfish, self esteem, injured. But we all know what "pride" comes
before.
Fourth: Why do you assume that anyone that you talk to, on usenet, who is
not homo phobic, is homosexual?
Fifth: You still haven't told us, why same sex marriage, wrong.
I had a homosexual brother. (Died of AIDS) I understand how this works.
Sure you do: You probably understand how time travel works too, and from much
the same source.
But ask your self, and then answer me honestly.
If you had the choice,
"Your brother, live and healthy, gay as ever, and a continuing embarrassment to
the family" ,
Or,
"Your brother, as he is, safely dead, so that you can remember all the "nice"
things, from when he was small, and never have to think of his sexual
orientation
Which would you choose?
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
17 Apr 2005 09:51:31 AM |
|
|
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:u7l461hjj2lusufnfdqbad1imt78m735b6@4ax.com...
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 00:27:20 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:mk036197acvnfcrd8meauph9nf9kv9svk2@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
There is plenty of evidence. Homosexuals just refuse to acknowledge it.
Just
start with the harm caused to the Father of a homosexual that is
devastated
because the chances of the family name that he is so proud of being
carried
forward is pretty much nil, and the ridicule he must suffer from his
peers
and the loss of respect for his "manhood" he feels. Many of these
Fathers
commit suicide. There are statistics for these things but like I said,
homosexuals refuse to acknowledge them and when you bring them to the
fore,
you are bombarded with temper tantrums and called all kinds of names.
There
are many other harms. There is the harm in higher healthcare costs.
There
is
the harm in higher insurance costs.
All of which is irrelevant.
Which is just more evidence that when some homosexual asks the question,
"what harm is there in homosexuality" and someone posts any evidence of
any
harm at all, homosexuals refuse to acknowledge it and come up with some
cowardly response that is not relevant to the question that was asked.
Just a couple of tiny points.
First; The question wasn't asked, it was merely commented upon.
Second: If it was asked, it was not asked by a homosexual.
Third: You offered no evidence, only assertions that some relatives
would
get their selfish, self esteem, injured. But we all know what "pride"
comes
before.
Fourth: Why do you assume that anyone that you talk to, on usenet,
who is
not homo phobic, is homosexual?
Fifth: You still haven't told us, why same sex marriage, wrong.
I had a homosexual brother. (Died of AIDS) I understand how this works.
Sure you do: You probably understand how time travel works too, and from
much
the same source.
But ask your self, and then answer me honestly.
If you had the choice,
"Your brother, live and healthy, gay as ever, and a continuing
embarrassment to
the family" ,
Or,
"Your brother, as he is, safely dead, so that you can remember all the
"nice"
things, from when he was small, and never have to think of his sexual
orientation
Which would you choose?
To be honest, I'm glad he is gone. He passed the HIV to any number of
people. He did it for spite. He was an evil person. He betrayed the one
person that really cared for him, our Grandmother.
--
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ... A
wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor the
bread it has earned. ... Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for
the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated. ... Would
it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to
spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new
hands?" --Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fritz" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
18 Apr 2005 10:44:25 AM |
|
|
Maverick wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:u7l461hjj2lusufnfdqbad1imt78m735b6@4ax.com...
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 00:27:20 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:mk036197acvnfcrd8meauph9nf9kv9svk2@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:30:37 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
There is plenty of evidence. Homosexuals just refuse to acknowledge it.
Just
start with the harm caused to the Father of a homosexual that is
devastated
because the chances of the family name that he is so proud of being
carried
forward is pretty much nil, and the ridicule he must suffer from his
peers
and the loss of respect for his "manhood" he feels. Many of these
Fathers
commit suicide. There are statistics for these things but like I said,
homosexuals refuse to acknowledge them and when you bring them to the
fore,
you are bombarded with temper tantrums and called all kinds of names.
There
are many other harms. There is the harm in higher healthcare costs.
There
is
the harm in higher insurance costs.
All of which is irrelevant.
Which is just more evidence that when some homosexual asks the question,
"what harm is there in homosexuality" and someone posts any evidence of
any
harm at all, homosexuals refuse to acknowledge it and come up with some
cowardly response that is not relevant to the question that was asked.
Just a couple of tiny points.
First; The question wasn't asked, it was merely commented upon.
Second: If it was asked, it was not asked by a homosexual.
Third: You offered no evidence, only assertions that some relatives
would
get their selfish, self esteem, injured. But we all know what "pride"
comes
before.
Fourth: Why do you assume that anyone that you talk to, on usenet,
who is
not homo phobic, is homosexual?
Fifth: You still haven't told us, why same sex marriage, wrong.
I had a homosexual brother. (Died of AIDS) I understand how this works.
Sure you do: You probably understand how time travel works too, and from
much
the same source.
But ask your self, and then answer me honestly.
If you had the choice,
"Your brother, live and healthy, gay as ever, and a continuing
embarrassment to
the family" ,
Or,
"Your brother, as he is, safely dead, so that you can remember all the
"nice"
things, from when he was small, and never have to think of his sexual
orientation
Which would you choose?
To be honest, I'm glad he is gone. He passed the HIV to any number of
people. He did it for spite. He was an evil person. He betrayed the one
person that really cared for him, our Grandmother.
Oh dear, sibling rivalry with a "queer" brother. How sad
for you. May I ask, now that he's dead, does your grandmother
love you any more, or less?
-- Fritz ...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
17 Apr 2005 02:55:18 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 14:51:31 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote:
"Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
news:u7l461hjj2lusufnfdqbad1imt78m735b6@4ax.com...
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 00:27:20 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
snip some.
the same source.
But ask your self, and then answer me honestly.
If you had the choice,
"Your brother, live and healthy, gay as ever, and a continuing
embarrassment to
the family" ,
Or,
"Your brother, as he is, safely dead, so that you can remember all the
"nice"
things, from when he was small, and never have to think of his sexual
orientation
Which would you choose?
To be honest, I'm glad he is gone. He passed the HIV to any number of
people. He did it for spite. He was an evil person. He betrayed the one
person that really cared for him, our Grandmother.
Okay. I aint going any farther with that
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
15 Apr 2005 11:08:21 PM |
|
|
What a fucking MORON!
"Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:T_W7e.4482558$Zm5.702515@news.easynews.com...
:
: "Dubh Ghall" <puck@pooks.hill.fey> wrote in message
: news:86e0615dm6rto4hqer7don5qcr5jh3uloh@4ax.com...
: > On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:26:41 GMT, "Maverick"
<justgopub...@nomail.com>
: > wrote:
: >
: >>Heteros are asking to marry members of the same sex?
: >
: >
: > And Gays, are asking the right to marry the person they love, just
like
: > the
: > Heterosexuals
:
:
: Lots of people can't marry the person they love. So what? Life is
tough.
: That's no reason to re-write the Constitution.
:
:
: --
: "To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation
of
: opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ...
A
: wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor
the
: bread it has earned. ... Congress has not unlimited powers to provide
for
: the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated. ... Would
: it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to
: spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new
: hands?" --Thomas Jefferson
:
: Maverick
: http://www.independent.org/
:
:
:
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
16 Apr 2005 08:25:33 AM |
|
|
"Riain Barton/ריעין ברתון" <riain@zion.org.il> wrote in
Unacceptable language. PLONK
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
18 Apr 2005 09:18:44 AM |
|
|
And Gays, are asking the right to marry the person they love, just
like the
Heterosexuals
The real issue is that gays are asking for rights for themselves that
heteros have, and at no expense to heteros. Meanwhile, some
reactionaries are attempting to deny rights based on sexual
orientation. Those who seek same-sex unions, at least, are asking for
more personal liberties - not less.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
18 Apr 2005 09:53:00 AM |
|
|
<rms1@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1113833924.838734.88450@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
And Gays, are asking the right to marry the person they love, just
like the
Heterosexuals
The real issue is that gays are asking for rights for themselves that
heteros have,
Heteros can NOT marry a member of the same sex.
and at no expense to heteros.
Really? Let's just look at a potential expense or two. Assume there are 10
million gays and the potential is that they will all marry. That adds 5
million dependents to the tax mix, big deduction there, 5 million to the
spousal ranks on the company insurance plan getting that 30% discount,
somebody is going to pay the difference. May not be an expense in the minds
of those asking for a handout, but it sure is to those that will pay the
freight.
Meanwhile, some
reactionaries are attempting to deny rights based on sexual
orientation. Those who seek same-sex unions, at least, are asking for
more personal liberties - not less.
Perhaps we should be legally coerced into taking a knee and praying at 3PM
because the "religiously orientated" want to have everyone treated equally.
"Orientation" is no basis for government intervention in tradition.
--
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ... A
wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor the
bread it has earned. ... Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for
the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated. ... Would
it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to
spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new
hands?" --Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
--
"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of
opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. ... A
wise and frugal government...shall not take from the mouth of labor the
bread it has earned. ... Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for
the general welfare but only those specifically enumerated. ... Would
it not be better to simplify the system of taxation rather than to
spread it over such a variety of subjects and pass through so many new
hands?" --Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jenn" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
18 Apr 2005 07:36:43 PM |
|
|
Maverick: <<<Heteros can NOT marry a member of the same sex.
But they will be able to when the laws change.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 07:55:44 AM |
|
|
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113871003.834892.247750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Maverick: <<<Heteros can NOT marry a member of the same sex.
But they will be able to when the laws change.
Do you think they will NOT have a say in whether or not the law changes?
--
"In questions of power, then, let no more
be said of confidence in man but bind him
down with the chains of the Constitution."
- Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jenn" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 10:12:31 AM |
|
|
Mav: <<<Heteros can NOT marry a member of the same sex.
Jenn: <<<> But they will be able to when the laws change.
Mav: <<<Do you think they will NOT have a say in whether or not the
law changes?
Not my point. The point was that many claim that we are asking for
"special rights". I'm pointing out that we are not.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Maverick" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 10:29:24 AM |
|
|
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113923551.296416.316270@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Mav: <<<Heteros can NOT marry a member of the same sex.
Jenn: <<<> But they will be able to when the laws change.
Mav: <<<Do you think they will NOT have a say in whether or not the
law changes?
Not my point. The point was that many claim that we are asking for
"special rights". I'm pointing out that we are not.
Like the Milk School is not a "special right"?
--
"In questions of power, then, let no more
be said of confidence in man but bind him
down with the chains of the Constitution."
- Thomas Jefferson
Maverick
http://www.independent.org/
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
21 Apr 2005 08:31:36 PM |
|
|
Maverick wrote:
Like the Milk School is not a "special right"?
No, it's an option.
--
The psychotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 5 and is perfectly happy about it; the neurotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 4, but is terribly worried about it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
19 Apr 2005 03:21:14 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:29:24 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
"Jenn" <jennconducts@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113923551.296416.316270@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Mav: <<<Heteros can NOT marry a member of the same sex.
Jenn: <<<> But they will be able to when the laws change.
Mav: <<<Do you think they will NOT have a say in whether or not the
law changes?
Not my point. The point was that many claim that we are asking for
"special rights". I'm pointing out that we are not.
Like the Milk School is not a "special right"?
Is the LaGuardia High School of Music & Art and Performing Arts a
special right for talented people?
http://www.laguardiahs.org/home.html
New York law allows specialized schools be established for either
minority groups or for specialized education. If you could get enough
parents you could get a special school for white students set up.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
18 Apr 2005 01:22:34 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:53:00 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
drained his beer, leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly
proclaimed the following
Really? Let's just look at a potential expense or two. Assume there are 10
million gays and the potential is that they will all marry. That adds 5
million dependents to the tax mix, big deduction there, 5 million to the
spousal ranks on the company insurance plan getting that 30% discount,
somebody is going to pay the difference. May not be an expense in the minds
of those asking for a handout, but it sure is to those that will pay the
freight.
Wow. I can claim my adult wife as a dependents? News to me and the
IRS!
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/itax/tips/20010208a.asp
What you will have is millions of married couple paying the higher
taxes of a married couple without children.
The rest of your argument is specious, since many companies already
offer benefits to domestic partners.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "curtsybear" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
18 Apr 2005 05:08:30 PM |
|
|
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.politics.homosexuality.]
On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:53:00 GMT, Maverick <justgopub> wrote:
<rms1@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1113833924.838734.88450@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Meanwhile, some
reactionaries are attempting to deny rights based on sexual
orientation. Those who seek same-sex unions, at least, are asking for
more personal liberties - not less.
Perhaps we should be legally coerced into taking a knee and praying at 3PM
because the "religiously orientated" want to have everyone treated equally.
"Orientation" is no basis for government intervention in tradition.
That's not a proper illustration of the "everyone treated equally"
concept. A more appropriate illustration would be if certain people
were denied the ability to pray at 3PM while others freely took a
3PM break to go swill gin in the basement of a church. Then you'd
have the proper parallel to denying a same-sex couple who is raising
a child and wants to provide a stable home and lifelong support
their marital rights while allowing fake-breasted pop stars to
marry any drunk off the street in Las Vegas for 54 hours total.
--
"Ok, I'm a drunken, drug addicted, gay crack *****, who lies cheats,
steals and would sell my mother to the devil for $5.00. Whew! I feel
much better having got that out." -- Wyle Coyote doesn't make the cut for
the Jerry Springer show, as he's forgot the all-important "and my sister
is having my illegitimate love-child" required by the Springer-guest-union.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
15 Apr 2005 07:11:26 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 21:59:12 GMT, Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey>
wrote:
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:26:41 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com> wrote:
Heteros are asking to marry members of the same sex?
And Gays, are asking the right to marry the person they love, just like the
Heterosexuals
Homos can do that at will. No state prohibits homosexual marriage. One
even recognizes them.
--
Puck Greenman
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
is purely my own
#162 BAAWA Knight.
Plonked by Rob Duncan
Na bister 500,000
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
15 Apr 2005 07:36:58 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:94m061lr5tebmmdvc9v1ltqdvfgo1mc2jj@4ax.com:
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 21:59:12 GMT, Dubh Ghall <puck@pooks.hill.fey>
wrote:
On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:26:41 GMT, "Maverick" <justgopub...@nomail.com>
wrote:
Heteros are asking to marry members of the same sex?
And Gays, are asking the right to marry the person they love, just
like the Heterosexuals
Homos can do that at will. No state prohibits homosexual marriage. One
even recognizes them.
I'm wondering if you are lying on purpose or you're just a fucking idiot
who lives under a rock.
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political system for controlling people's thoughts,
lives and actions based on ancient myths and superstitions, perpetrated
through generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
15 Apr 2005 10:19:34 PM |
|
|
wrote:
No state prohibits homosexual marriage.
Except Hawaii, Alaska, Ohio, and all the others.
By the by, whatever you're drinking/smoking/injecting, you've had enough.
--
The psychotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 5 and is perfectly happy about it; the neurotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 4, but is terribly worried about it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
15 Apr 2005 11:38:42 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 03:19:34 GMT, Dionisio
<moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote:
wbt@privacy.net wrote:
No state prohibits homosexual marriage.
Except Hawaii, Alaska, Ohio, and all the others.
Idiot. There are any number of homo-oriented churches in the states
mentioned that will perform a same sex marriage ceremony. Get you head
out of your *****, boy.
By the by, whatever you're drinking/smoking/injecting, you've had enough.
That you're mentally in a fucking box is a sure sign of AIDS addled
thinking.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
16 Apr 2005 08:20:10 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Dionisio <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote:
wrote:
No state prohibits homosexual marriage.
Except Hawaii, Alaska, Ohio, and all the others.
Idiot. There are any number of homo-oriented churches in the states
mentioned that will perform a same sex marriage ceremony. Get you head
out of your *****, boy.
Ah. Churches are states in your mind, eh?
--
The psychotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 5 and is perfectly happy about it; the neurotic person knows that 2 and 2 makes 4, but is terribly worried about it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
16 Apr 2005 12:54:39 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 04:38:42 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 03:19:34 GMT, Dionisio
<moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote:
wrote:
No state prohibits homosexual marriage.
Except Hawaii, Alaska, Ohio, and all the others.
Idiot. There are any number of homo-oriented churches in the states
mentioned that will perform a same sex marriage ceremony. Get you head
out of your *****, boy.
Which have no legal meaning. We're discussing the legal status
confered by a marriage license here.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: ACLU sues for gays' benefits |
16 Apr 2005 07:27:45 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 05:54:39 GMT, Douglas Berry
<penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 04:38:42 GMT, drained his beer,
leaned back in the alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the
following
On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 03:19:34 GMT, Dionisio
<moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote:
wrote:
No state prohibits homosexual marriage.
Except Hawaii, Alaska, Ohio, and all the others.
Idiot. There are any number of homo-oriented churches in the states
mentioned that will perform a same sex marriage ceremony. Get you head
out of your *****, boy.
Which have no legal meaning. We're discussing the legal status
confered by a marriage license here.
He is aware of that. He enjoys being an idiot.
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
