how does one denote what is fair? its easy if you also strive to treat all equally.
I am not being treated equally in many areas, yet this is based in logic, and should not be an issue. I also agree that denoting what is fair, is one of the bigger challenge's of the whole debate.
is it the federal government that isn't treating you equally?
Sure, there are areas where the government doesn't treat me as a white American the same as it dose a black American. The federal government has grants that specifically exclude me from funding for college. The same can be said for several minorities, and for women. This is just one small and easily identifiable area of inequality that exists.
you should be able to marry a rock, I don't actually care.
Why would god be mad at jesus it was his followers that wrote the book and then the church is the one that deeded certain parts of it to be included or excluded
you should be able to marry a rock, I don't actually care.
Is this meant to be sarcastic? From a social standpoint, I tend to agree with you, that I really dont.care much what others do when it only effects themselves.
The issue you may not be considering when talking about being married to a rock is dose mages then get the tax break like I do? Dose the rock count as a dependant? What about marriage to an animal, or multiple people. Taxes. Yes, same sex marriage will effect you, they will change the tax status of millions of people, and even tho it may not be huge changes, it will change the the economy.
a rock is still a rock. It wouldn't count as a dependent (or they could properly define what a dependent is for terms of taxes. As in defining it to be a living human being).
no not sarcastic at all you wanna marry a rock go for it. If you wanted to drill a hole in said rock so you could stick your cock in it go for it.
Same sex marriage has been qusi-legal for over 20 years in my province(you couldn't get "married" but if you lived together for long enough and sign a paper you had all the legal and tax options that married couples have) and has been fully country wide legal for 10 so whatever effect it would of had on me has been had along time ago.
I think we have to look back at defining marriage.
Women are given rights.
GLBT are given rights.
But....marriage itself is not even a human right because of the definition, as a "social institution"?
Per definition, marriage is a social institution, who are those priviledge people (man + woman) who can avail it? What makes them different than the GLBT community?
As an individual, How can we make changes? Who will make these changes? What kind of changes can be done?
Granting we exclude the financial implications of this marriage discourse, does anyone care if a couple is "officially married in church/state or not"?
On the other hand, The implications of getting married: I see some postings about financial breaks: taxes, medical/dental, etc, makes you think. This is a big issue in itself.
I like this particular post. A rock is my dependent, hmm,,,, I will marry El Capitan, then? We will live happily ever after.
is it the federal government that isn't treating you equally?
Sure, there are areas where the government doesn't treat me as a white American the same as it dose a black American. The federal government has grants that specifically exclude me from funding for college. The same can be said for several minorities, and for women. This is just one small and easily identifiable area of inequality that exists.
When I walk in at the RCMP office for recruitment interview 2 years ago, one guy - white (born and race in Ottawa) told me that I have higher chances of getting hired than him, does not matter if he has PhD in mathematics.
I guess, this is the in-equality that you are referring to.
I think we have to look back at defining marriage.
Women are given rights.
GLBT are given rights.
But....marriage itself is not even a human right because of the definition, as a "social institution"?
Per definition, marriage is a social institution, who are those priviledge people (man + woman) who can avail it? What makes them different than the GLBT community?
As an individual, How can we make changes? Who will make these changes? What kind of changes can be done?
Granting we exclude the financial implications of this marriage discourse, does anyone care if a couple is "officially married in church/state or not"?
On the other hand, The implications of getting married: I see some postings about financial breaks: taxes, medical/dental, etc, makes you think. This is a big issue in itself.
I like this particular post. A rock is my dependent, hmm,,,, I will marry El Capitan, then? We will live happily ever after.
The benefits would change depending on who is providing those benefits and same for tax things which is why I think it becomes a subject people other than the religious might not be all for it, if they are getting the benefit and now more are getting the benefit then that might make the benefit smaller to account for more people having it.
more people having it...meaning, divide the pie to more people, then the quantity of pie given to each person is smaller.
So, if it was married (man +woman = get the tax break through marriage. Now, you get (man+man) also getting tax break through marriage.
If majority of married couples, regardless of gender, pay lower tax bracket, does it mean the federal budget collect less taxes - those less services, and budget cuts everywhere, thus impacting community services, health, education and other social services?
Lol, and i'm sitting here thinking about how it wasn't legal yet... We have had it for years... And i donnt see how it is a valid reason for not allowing it was the tax breaks... That shit shouldn't have anything to do with it
Comments
I also agree that denoting what is fair, is one of the bigger challenge's of the whole debate.
but fairly they should be and it wasn't fair that only one man and one women could get married so it was changed.
Why would god be mad at jesus it was his followers that wrote the book and then the church is the one that deeded certain parts of it to be included or excluded
cis
Short for "cisgender" (opposite of "transgender"), used to describe someone whose gender identity matches their anatomical gender at birth.
Occasionally used derogatorily.
taken from urban dictionary.
wikipedia link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender
From a social standpoint, I tend to agree with you, that I really dont.care much what others do when it only effects themselves.
The issue you may not be considering when talking about being married to a rock is dose mages then get the tax break like I do? Dose the rock count as a dependant? What about marriage to an animal, or multiple people. Taxes.
Yes, same sex marriage will effect you, they will change the tax status of millions of people, and even tho it may not be huge changes, it will change the the economy.
But anyway, good talk.
no not sarcastic at all you wanna marry a rock go for it. If you wanted to drill a hole in said rock so you could stick your cock in it go for it.
Same sex marriage has been qusi-legal for over 20 years in my province(you couldn't get "married" but if you lived together for long enough and sign a paper you had all the legal and tax options that married couples have) and has been fully country wide legal for 10 so whatever effect it would of had on me has been had along time ago.
Somewhere around Margaret Thatcher might not be a bad way to describe it. She was a character though- the opposite of our current PM.
i enjoyed watching the spats between blair and hague.
Women are given rights.
GLBT are given rights.
But....marriage itself is not even a human right because of the definition, as a "social institution"?
Per definition, marriage is a social institution, who are those priviledge people (man + woman) who can avail it? What makes them different than the GLBT community?
As an individual,
How can we make changes?
Who will make these changes?
What kind of changes can be done?
Granting we exclude the financial implications of this marriage discourse, does anyone care if a couple is "officially married in church/state or not"?
On the other hand, The implications of getting married: I see some postings about financial breaks: taxes, medical/dental, etc, makes you think. This is a big issue in itself.
I like this particular post. A rock is my dependent, hmm,,,, I will marry El Capitan, then? We will live happily ever after.
I guess, this is the in-equality that you are referring to.
So, if it was married (man +woman = get the tax break through marriage. Now, you get (man+man) also getting tax break through marriage.
If majority of married couples, regardless of gender, pay lower tax bracket, does it mean the federal budget collect less taxes - those less services, and budget cuts everywhere, thus impacting community services, health, education and other social services?
And i donnt see how it is a valid reason for not allowing it was the tax breaks... That shit shouldn't have anything to do with it