Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-28-2013, 05:42   #1
railfancwb
Senior Member
 
railfancwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Shelbyville, Tennessee TN
Posts: 4,414
Remember, when someone says...

..."It's not about the money." It's about the money.

http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbyi...-all-50-states
__________________
"Never give to your friend any power that your enemy may some day inherit." -- Paul Weyrich
railfancwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 05:54   #2
jeanderson
Platinum Membership
Toga!... Toga!
 
jeanderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 2,696
I'm not getting the "it's not about money" angle here. The Supreme Court decision on DOMA is about discrimination. To me, the advocates for the "Respect for Marriage" act are trying to usurp the rights of states to define marriage.
__________________
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
- Rudyard Kipling, 1919

jeanderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 08:08   #3
Kablam
Senior Member
 
Kablam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,573
So the striking down of DOMA didn't remedy discrimination against gay married couples as neatly as I was told in another thread here. Now we need a "respect for marriage act" to fix it. So, MORE legislation is needed because we don't want to fix the more basic problem of giving benefits to the "married class" that the "unmarried class" is denied. This is just one example how the gov dividing society along arbitrary lines and deciding which group deserves special treatment is a bad idea. And, of course, it is at least in part about the money.
Kablam is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 08:42   #4
FLIPPER 348
Happy Member
 
FLIPPER 348's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Lyle WA
Posts: 23,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by railfancwb View Post
..."It's not about the money." It's about the money.

exactly

....why else would all the homos want to be 'married'??
FLIPPER 348 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 15:36   #5
railfancwb
Senior Member
 
railfancwb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Shelbyville, Tennessee TN
Posts: 4,414
Yes... It's about the money and no time is being wasted going after it...

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/mich-...nefits-blocked
__________________
"Never give to your friend any power that your enemy may some day inherit." -- Paul Weyrich
railfancwb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 16:31   #6
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,951
Blog Entries: 1
I'm sure if the 1136 benefits afforded to married couples suddenly went away there would be no public outcry from the heterosexuals, because for heterosexuals it's not about money.
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 17:28   #7
ChuteTheMall
HildabeastHater
 
ChuteTheMall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Anti-Obamaville
Posts: 61,573


Why does the government give special rights, privileges and tax breaks to married couples, while denying them to single people?

Is this a legitimate and necessary purpose of government?
__________________
"I was part of a 10-person team at the human genome project that weaponized diseases to fight weaponized diseases. Pathogenic microorganisms with pathogenic microorganisms. Fire with fire. Interdepartmental drinks were had, relationships made..."
ChuteTheMall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 17:54   #8
ArtificialGrape
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
 
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 5,951
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall View Post
Why does the government give special rights, privileges and tax breaks to married couples, while denying them to single people?

Is this a legitimate and necessary purpose of government?
I guess you'd have to ask the 84% married Congress
ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 18:05   #9
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,640


Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuteTheMall View Post
Why does the government give special rights, privileges and tax breaks to married couples, while denying them to single people?

Is this a legitimate and necessary purpose of government?
No...

The government shouldn't even know if you are married


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh

Last edited by certifiedfunds; 06-28-2013 at 18:05..
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2013, 22:20   #10
Kablam
Senior Member
 
Kablam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,573
Ding ding!

Thank you. Someone besides me finally said it.

Last edited by Kablam; 06-28-2013 at 22:22..
Kablam is online now   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 15:44.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,075
313 Members
762 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31