DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Same-Sex Marriage Ruled Constitutional

oh nah bro.

j/c

In other news.......

So far the SCOTUS has not ordered anyone to get gay married, like gay marriage or be happy about gay marriage.

It appears nothing has changed except those who were being discriminated against are no longer subject to such treatment.

If we're really lucky, people will stop referring to themselves by their sexual preferences and gay can go back to meaning happy like it did when I was a growing up.

i think my favorite website pretty much nailed it:

A 30-Second Guide to How the Gay Marriage Ruling Affects You

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/a-30-second-guide-to-how-gay-marriage-ruling-affects-you/

If You Are a Homosexual and Are Already Married:

If you had been lucky enough to live in a state that allowed gay marriage, the federal government already recognized your marriage as a thing, and you were eligible for tax, health, and pension benefits under federal law like any other married couple. Previously, if you had moved to another state that didn't recognize gay marriage, that state didn't have to recognize your marriage. Now, your marriage is recognized everywhere, the same as anyone else's.

If You Are a Homosexual and Want to Get Married:

Where before this came down to whether or not your state had legalized it, now you are free to do so regardless of which state you live in.

If You Are a Heterosexual and Do NOT Want to Enter into a Homosexual Marriage:

You will not be required to marry a gay person. This is a common misunderstanding. This decision actually does not affect you in any way.

If You Are Currently in a Heterosexual Marriage:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are a Heterosexual Who Is Not Currently Married:

This decision does not affect you in any way.



If You Are a Heterosexual Who Hopes to Eventually Marry:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are a Member of a Church That Performs Wedding Ceremonies but That Does Not Believe in Gay Marriage:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are a Religious Official Who Performs Wedding Ceremonies but Who Thinks Gay Marriage Is Wrong:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are an Individual Who Believes Gay Marriage or Homosexuality in General Is Wrong for Religious Reasons, and Wish to Continue Expressing Those Beliefs:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are an Individual Who Believes Gay Marriage or Homosexuality in General Is Wrong for Non-Religious Reasons, and Wish to Continue Expressing Those Beliefs:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are a Heterosexual Who Fears This Decision Adversely Affects Your Marriage or the Concept of Marriage in General:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are a Heterosexual Who Fears This Decision Negatively Affects You in Some Way:

This decision does not affect you in any way.

If You Are a Heterosexual Who Suffers Anger or Anxiety at the Thought of Gay Couples Getting Married as an Abstract Concept, and Believes the Only Cure Is to Legally Prevent Gay Marriage:

This decision will cause you some degree of anger or anxiety. Otherwise, this decision does not affect you in any way.

Hope this helps!

j/c

So - exactly what does this do for gays?

I get that, if married, spousal benefits apply - union benefits, social security. Filing taxes as a couple (I don't know how it all works with taxes - my wife and I file separately.......)

What other benefits from being "married" do they get? (totally not a snarky question)

They now have access to all of the lawyers in the Divorce business, whereas there were previously shut out from this.

It's not just financial....

Ability to make medical/end of life decisions on partners behalf (when the partner is unresponsive)

Right to even be in the hospital to visit your partner if they are sick.

Right to adopt partner's children / pick up kids from school

Ability to collect life insurance/inheritance (also for your kids, if you die first, and then your spouse dies, your kids could still obtain your home)

There's probably 100 i'm forgetting, just because it's a lot of things we take for granted.

Not being treated like there's something wrong or inferior with who you are.

Except as modified by the 19th amendment. women's right to vote.
Except as modified by the 24th amendment. no poll tax
Except as modified by the 26th amendment. 18 yr old can vote.

That is why the constitution can be amended.

There is NO... absolutely no theological premise in the constitution. It is intended to be a document that could be changed.

There are those who seek to biblify the constitution. Be very careful of them.

It's not just financial....

Ability to make medical/end of life decisions on partners behalf (when the partner is unresponsive)[/quote}
Doesn't that take a living will to do? My understanding is, it does take a living will. I may be wrong though.

Are you certain that it takes "marriage" to visit your spouse? Again, I'm not being snarky. Just a question. I wasn't married to my grandma when she was in the hospital - but no one questioned me, or disallowed me (or tried to disallow me) to visit her. Perhaps that's because I was family? I don't know.

Okay - I can see that.


Life insurance goes to whoever you state it goes to. I could take out a life insurance policy and have it go to you...as long as I have your name, address, etc.

Inheritance goes where ever your will says it goes. Spouse or no spouse. Family, friend, complete stranger, church..............

Granted - in lieu of a will, a judge could make it tough. So, without a will, I can see where marriage would work in that scenario...


I'm sure there's a lot. I'm just wanting to know what those things are. Not calling you out - but really, having a will - and a living will - takes care of pretty much everything you listed.



My question still is: What does this right to marriage do for gay people? How does it benefit them?

And I'm not disagreeing with anything.

Why is this such a huge celebration? So gays can get married. Okay.

Exactly HOW is this going to change the bias against gays? Here's a clue: it won't. Just as taking the rebel flag down won't change racist's feelings.

It's a feel good moment, no doubt. But next week, I'll still be hearing about bias against gays.

by the logic, what was the point of you getting married in the first place? since you can do those same things with a will.

I know you said you and your wife file separate, but being able to file jointly is pretty big. It reduces your tax bracket effectively.

Additionally, there are IRA benefits to being married (spouse can contribute to your IRA, higher limits, etc)

You can benefit shop if both people work. Whereas if you are single you are pretty much bound to the insurance you can get, if you're married you can pick the best of the two policies.

Estate Tax - big one. Any money you leave your surviving spouse is tax free.

Just further proof that marriage in our country has lost its meaning and that our country continues to lose its morality and lose its way to perverts. Perverts out in public and druggies out in public and they call it progress... congrats. People wonder why our country is in the process of falling apart. It's not that hard to figure out to me.

I wonder how long before churches lose their ability to perform legal marriages once they are told that if they don't perform gay marriages their license will be revoked. 5 to 10 years?

Then again once all these liberal judges retire or die off it's quite possible this stupid decision get reversed if we don't end up in a civil war first. Lot of States are getting offly fed up with with the fed interfering in domestic issues.

Hopefully I'll be dead before I have to suffer and watch the crap our nation is turning into that my kids will have to live in.

If your estate is under $600,000. I think that's the number.
Whatever.

When my grandpa died, grandma owed the state of Ohio $90,000. Not sure how that worked - but she had to pay it. Because her husband died, and left all he had to her, she paid $90,000 to the state.

Neat.

Precisely. You got it. you hit the nail on the head.


So, tell me, if a will can give anyone the benefits of marriage...........why is gay marriage an issue? If no one can list benefits that married couples get that gays don't get, what's the big deal?

Let gays get married.

And then we'll cease with the gay rights movement - right? After all, they will have achieved equality. Right?

not sure why this is a big deal... marriage should be abolished ... that's why divorces should be abolished and people would stop destroying the lives of the ones they used to love...

the problem with marriage straight or gay is that very few people know what tough love is about... and how to work their way though rough times...

I'm not at all saying people don't... but it is easier to get a divorce ,then it is to work hard at saving a marriage.

Proud to be Straight !

they achieved the legal rights everybody else is afforded.

but people are still going to discriminate against them.

example? you think the civil right's movement ended racism? should minorities stop fighting for equal treatment?

Ah - they achieved the legal rights everyone else is afforded.

So, that was my original question: What legal rights have they gotten that they didn't have before? They get social security rights they didn't have, they get access to pension benefits they probably didn't have before. But what else do they get?

Sincere question. If you, or others can't list benefits aside from what I've listed - substantial benefits - what's all the hoopla about?

Homosexuality is still a sin and no law made by man will ever change that or make it acceptable. People can follow Man's laws strait to hell. I don't care. I'll follow God's law first and keep my soul from the hellfire.

the hoopla isn't from those who support it, but those that are against it.

i think that's what you getting confused. those who support it are fine, we'd like to move past it.

but those that are against it are the ones making all the ruckus now.

I'm sure any reasonable hospital could/will make exceptions for gay partners, where marriage isn't allowed, but if the hospital director is a jerk (or maybe the family of the patient are jerks), it does tend to come up a lot:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/health/19well.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/15..._n_3086977.html
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/08/20...ic-partnership/
http://americablog.com/2013/04/missouri-gay-hospital-visitation-remove-research-medical-center.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/h...gQCQ_story.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/14/same-sex-partner-banned-hospital/3524889/

It's a sin for you and that's fine, for you. People have been as militant and "in your face" about religion over millennias as they have been about gay marriage these last few decades. Other people don't believe as you. This is the USA, it's okay to have a differing point of view. In the end it's always been good for us.

People say, we're losing our country. We're not. Our country is ever changing. We may be losing the way of life we grew up with but that has been normal through out our countries history. I grew up in the "Leave It To Beaver" world and my morals are a bit more prudish than kids today. I like to think I'm still capable of learning a lesson or two, today I'm learning to adapt. My father was born in 1917, he fought in WWII. What do you think his thoughts were when he heard my Black Sabbath albums, "this is what I fought for?", not my dad. Those albums were as radical to him as the changing times we face today. He'd just look over his paper at me and slightly shake his head but he accepted our differences and embraced our commonalities.

I for one, am growing weary of all the militant groups blathering ban this and ban that, I think we should, as a nation, just sit back for a while and leave the militancy behind. Let everyone catch their breath. Let everyone see that today's a new day, people are waking up the same people they were yesterday. One group has a new right and no one else lost a right. No one was harmed in the making of this right. You may or may not agree with this right but like Roe vs. Wade, it's the law now. Time to accept it and move on, it's not going away.

Relax.

We're still all Americans. Embrace our commonalities.

Unless of course if you are a practicing Christian Photographer who refuses to take pictures at a Gay Wedding and gets sued out of business.

Would y'all stop asking me to marry you? I'm already hitched. I know I'm a great catch and all with a nice rack and cute behind but control yourselves.

On a serious note it's about time they made this legal

religious freedom lets them be protected from that.

but hey, that's just bad business. photographers who are in business to make an actual profit, not moral and political statements, are gonna be rolling in dough.

so are wedding planners. gonna be some FABULOUS ceremonies going on. My wife and i already got invited to one, can't wait to go(mainly cause it's a polish wedding, will be alcohol EVERYWHERE).

Hell and divorce lawyers lol.

if they still don't want to bake, or pizza(lol), or take pictures, etc. hey, good luck with your business. their competition is more than happy to take business away from them.

And that's worse than being denied the legal right to visit your dying loved one in the hospital?

I'm going to start a protest movement for all Christian photographers and the unbearable oppression they have been committed to.

We have already seen where many people have NOT been protected by freedom of religion in this regard. Whether by law or by being ostracized by the gay community because others followed their own beliefs. It's so ironic that a group that wants to be respected for THEIR beliefs get a platform for slamming the beliefs of others.

I am happy for many of my friends and clients who now can enjoy the benefits of marriage. Good people in good relationships who love each other and simply want to have the same rights and benefits of like-minded couples.

My concern boils down to the freedom of religion issue that I believe will be the next target.

What happens when a gay couple wants to be married in a church? The church should have the right to refuse access.

What if a church's leaders allow access but some parishioners disagree? What is the religious freedom for those parishioners in their house of worship?

What if one Methodist church allows access but another Methodist church does not? Should a Methodist with strong beliefs in this regard swallow the idea simply because it wasn't THEIR specific church building that allowed access?

We shall see. Hopefully the Supremes recollect how important freedom of religion is to the foundation of this country...unfortunately they have demonstrated this week that they believe they have the right/duty to legislate from the bench to do what they think is best. Which should be frightening to anyone able to differentiate between what is the law of the land and what an individual believes in.

yes, as they should. Civil liberties should never be left to the states. we've seen time and time again how that plays out.

if the church starts allowing marriages, and parrish's disagree, that's between them and the church. that has nothing to do with the government.

Separate of church and state damn near protects you from gays trying to sue church's anyway. and if gays in massive moment start trying to sue church's, i'll be the first to be arguing against that, because i'm not a hypocrite. i believe religion shouldn't be laws and forced down people's throats, and that goes vise versa. church's have a right to practice their religion on their grounds, gays have no right to infiltrate that.

religious freedom has already protected bakeries and pizza joints from getting successfully sued.

i can sue you for any reason, whether i win or not is the topic, and gay didn't win.

no it doesn't

A man who doesn't believe in something , will believe in anything ... Feel like there outa be some norms ,(I kinda like the 10 commandments myself ).. Think there is a big difference between love and sex and marriage .. Now I don't expect everyone to believe the way I do : But I feel like should kinda , sorta have the right to have my beliefs ??

Can you please post some links, because I cannot find these stories. There was the story of "Memories Pizza", who received over $800K in support from people .....

However, I cannot find any bakeries who have successfully defended themselves against being sued over such a thing.

I was going to stay out of this discussion.I disagree with this ruling, and I consider it to be just one more step towards the end for this world. I am absolutely shocked at how many Christians call Jesus Lord, yet disagree with Him on this subject.

In the Bible, Jesus affirmed the 10 Commandments as to be followed.

He said, in Matthew 19: 16-19: Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?”

“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”

“Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.

Adultery is having sex with anyone other than your spouse.

So, for a Christian to avoid committing adultery, he cannot have sex outside of marriage.

How did Jesus Christ, God Almighty, define marriage?

Well, in Matthew 19:5-9, Jesus defined marriage for us Christians. He said: and said, ‘FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?” He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

If a man contradicts his Lord and Savior, by professing the complete opposite of what his Lord and Savior said, then is that man really submitting himself to Jesus Christ? Christians appear to have to walk a line between this world and the next, trying to follow 2 masters.

What did Jesus say about a man serving 2 masters?

Again, from Matthew 6:24, Jesus said: "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.

This verse was more about money, but the point is made regardless. We cannot serve the world and Jesus both. We will always come into conflict, our Christian beliefs fighting with secular concerns. We have to decide which we will follow. We cannot follow both, at the same time, going down opposite paths.

In Romans 6: 11-13, St Paul wrote: In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer any part of yourself to sin as an instrument of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer every part of yourself to him as an instrument of righteousness.

Do we offer ourselves to Jesus as an instrument of righteousness when we disobey what Jesus told us to do, or support things other than what Jesus said for us to do? Can we be in rebellion, and still a follower of Jesus? Do we get to pick and choose what we will follow and what we will disregard when it comes to what Jesus tried to teach us? Are we so arrogant that we believe that we know better than God Almighty?

Those who do not believe in Jesus, or the Bible, have an excuse. Those who profess to follow Jesus do not. If we follow Jesus Christ, should we be trying to help people come to Jesus Christ, and salvation, or should we try to be "nice", and tell people that whatever they want to do is probably OK? Is it more loving to tell someone that their actions are a path to hell, and that they need to change their path and come to salvation, or is it more important that we are popular, and appear "tolerant", even as we condemn not only those who will take this particular path today, but also those in the future who will be led astray, onto the path to hell? The road to hell is said to be paved with good intentions. If we believe the Bible, then how can we not believe this is the case here?

Those of you on this board who are Christians, please give me your Biblical backing for supporting things that contradict the Bible, like gay marriage. Please, if you claim to follow Christ, and the Bible, please show me your justification, because if I am wrong, I want to be right instead. It would sure make life in the world considerably easier. Please, Christians, give me a Biblical basis for supporting this action.

If you cannot, then perhaps you should take a look at yourself and decide if you are following Jesus Christ, or the world. Maybe you should decide whether you want to follow Jesus Christ, or the world. I see no way that you can openly rebel against what Jesus taught, and accept Him as your Lord. How does that work? How can it work?

The part of this post about the Bible is only for those who profess to be Christians. The rest, who don't believe, well, it doesn't apply to you, because you have decided not to follow Christ, and that is your decision. I am not going to convince you that the Bible is right, and you are not going to convince me that you are right. Thus, it is a senseless debate, so you need not even try to answer this. If you do not believe in the Bible, then you do not have to. God allows us each to make our own choice regarding whether we will follow Him, or not. This is for those who have professed to follow Him, and to obey Him.

I do have one final thought for those claiming that this is about rights though. Thisis not about rights. It is about desires, and public acceptance of those desires. However, just because someone has a desire to do something does not equate to having a right. Just because someone has a desire to do something differently than the law (God's moral law, or man's law) allows does not equal a right. Desires are not rights. We all have desires. I dread the very thought of all desires being made legal, and everyone being allowed to do whatever they desire.

I wonder how soon we start seeing lawsuits against churches who use the Bible with verses speaking against homosexuality, or suing churches that refuse to marry gay couples? I am willing to bet that it takes less than 2 years to see at least one of these types of lawsuits brought to bear against a church.

Check your facts again, gays did win.

Gays sue photographer

Gays sue bakery

Gays sue florist

Religious freedom definitely does not protect people. Which is why when they says SCOTUS ruling won't impact you if you are not gay, is just not true.

Why do people keep insisting on trying to insert God's laws into the law of the land.

The whole "war on Christianity" buys votes for the right wing. It only emboldens them to enact a "persecution complex" by standing by "beliefs" which oppress the dignity of every American citizen.

I fail to see undue burden or restrictions on religious freedom in any of those cases. In all three instances, no one was forced to suppress a religious belief. The baker was completely within their rights to put "Mark & Steve" on the cake, and then tell Mark and Steve that they oppose their union and think it's disgusting. The courts aren't concerned with their belief, they're concerned with the baker turning down someone for a public service they provided based on a protected class. It seems to me like a lot of religious folks think that their freedom of their religion entitles them to not have to interact with or serve sinners. And, I'm sorry, but that will never be a right, anywhere, nor is it possible for that matter. Should a cashier at Walgreen's have the right to refuse to sell condoms to a couple because they don't see wedding bands? As far as in the walls of the church, discriminate away. But if you own a business that caters to the public, then you're going to deal with members of that public that you don't like. That's business.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressman Jason Smith released the following statement

“As the son of a preacher, I have never wavered in my commitment to the biblical definition of marriage, and in our state, more than a million Missourians voted to define marriage as between one man and one woman. Until today, it was the right of each state to determine how they wished to define marriage. The Supreme Court wrote yesterday that it is not in the Court’s scope of power to undo the law. Yet, with today’s ruling, five unelected, unaccountable judges in Washington, D.C., stripped more than a million Missourians of their voice and of their vote by tearing a page out of the Missouri constitution.”

If one were two add four words, it would read like this:

If we are Christians, should we follow and support what Jesus said to do, or should we pretend that His teachings, somehow, do not apply o public policy? If Jesus was here today, do you think that he would tell Christians that it is perfectly OK if they disobey Him, as long as it's only a public policy matter?

Christians should be doing what every other group does, and try to get laws passed that support their morality and their beliefs. There is no reason why this should be fine for everyone else, but somehow it is wrong for Christians. How do people arrive at that conclusion? If our Faith is the most important thing in the world to us, and if we love and obey God before all else, then how do we decide that this means that except in legal matters?

If you find yourself standing before God at judgement, do you think that He will say "Well, you disobeyed me, but since it was only a legal matter, and you didn't want to impose your beliefs on anyone else, it's OK"? Really? Do you think that He will say that it was OK to give your approval and support to laws that lead people astray, and away from God, and into sin? Can you really believe that? Is that what the Bible teaches? If so, then where, exactly?

So to you, all the people of Missouri are Racists? They didn't vote to not allow Blacks to marry or against interracial marriage. Why do you insist they are Racists?

and two steps back