|
 Post in Forums
Create a Profile
Upload Pictures
|
Keep a Journal
Meet Friends
It's FREE!
|
|
Sign Up!
|
Forum Index > News & Politics |
pile
Apprentice
16 points
0/NA/
Join Date: Feb 2004 | Quote:
I think we need to take away all federal penalties or rewards for being marriege, IE tax breaks. This will take away a strong arguement the Homosexual community has in asking for Same sex Marriege.
Bush's Tax bill proposed in May of 2003 actually Helped married couples. Before you received a tax benefit if you were not married. Now since his proposal has been passed. Married couples get the same tax breaks as 2 single individuals.
There is no real break in filling a joint return opposed to 2 single returns. You will get the same basic deductions over all.
*EDITED*
Shoot me prz....2 classes of Federal Taxation and all i can see is exemptions, phase outs to exemptions, and thresholds. *runs screaming off into the night* |  | |
|
wheaties99
Recruit
4 points
0/NA/Cookeville, Tennessee
Join Date: Mar 2004 | Homosexual marriage is wrong, not because I say it is, but because God says it is. God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gamora because there were men with men and women with women. Several times in the New Testiment, the law of God which we are now under, Jesus, Paul, and Peter all say to stay away from the lusts of the flesh. He also says to stay away from strong drink and not be a drunkard. Now with that being said, if homosexuality is something one is born with as some protest, would it not then be as alcoholism, a sin one has to refrain from for life. I feel that this is so. It doesn't matter what Bush says or does about this because gay marriages will happen in this country. Some of you say that there needs to be a separation of church and state, but you forget why this country was sought out, for religious freedom from the church of England. The reason the speration of church and state is in the constitution is because the founding fathers knew that religion was diverse, although it should not be, but that is for a latter discusion. They did not want a predominant religion to take power as in England. In God We Trust, indeed, we have become a nation of hypocrits. Yes for God in your own way, but hurah for the Gays? I think not. | | | |
|
cet
Apprentice
18 points
0/NA/
Join Date: Mar 2004 | Quote:
Homosexual marriage is wrong, not because I say it is, but because God says it is.
Being a non-christian, that isn't good enough for me. That certainly isn't good enough to write laws that apply to me. If this country's government were founded upon a religion (which I believe to be unfair and immoral), we would have a different issue and that would be a good enough argument.
Quote:
God destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gamora because there were men with men and women with women.
There is no mention in the bible of lesbianism, let alone a condemnation of it.
Quote:
Several times in the New Testiment, the law of God which we are now under, Jesus, Paul, and Peter all say to stay away from the lusts of the flesh.
Paul wanted everyone to be celibate. Jesus makes no mention of celibacy as far as I know. Please correct me if that is not true.
Quote:
He also says to stay away from strong drink and not be a drunkard. Now with that being said, if homosexuality is something one is born with as some protest, would it not then be as alcoholism, a sin one has to refrain from for life. I feel that this is so.
Alcoholism brings harm to the alcoholic and those around him, homosexuality does not.
Quote:
It doesn't matter what Bush says or does about this because gay marriages will happen in this country. Some of you say that there needs to be a separation of church and state, but you forget why this country was sought out, for religious freedom from the church of England. The reason the speration of church and state is in the constitution is because the founding fathers knew that religion was diverse, although it should not be, but that is for a latter discusion. They did not want a predominant religion to take power as in England. In God We Trust, indeed, we have become a nation of hypocrits. Yes for God in your own way, but hurah for the Gays? I think not.
Part of the reason the "seperation of church and state" idea is so important is because there is diversity in this country and to make laws based on the ideals of one religion is unfair to those who do not practice that religion. What you believe to be the correct religion is not only unprovable, but irrelevant.
What has been failed to be mentioned at all in this thread is what threat gay marriages pose to anyone else. This is probably the most important point and if it cannot be satisfied, then preventing gay marriage is tantamount to biggotry no different then Jim Crowe laws. | | | |
|
pepper
Apprentice
16 points
0/NA/
Join Date: Feb 2004 | Quote:
...Some of you say that there needs to be a separation of church and state, but you forget why this country was sought out, for religious freedom from the church of England. The reason the speration of church and state is in the constitution is because the founding fathers knew that religion was diverse, although it should not be, but that is for a latter discusion. They did not want a predominant religion to take power as in England. In God We Trust, indeed, we have become a nation of hypocrits. Yes for God in your own way, but hurah for the Gays? I think not.
This country was NOT "sought out" for religious freedom. The puritans did not come to this land to practice "Freedom of Religion" they came here to practice puritianism. They in no way had a free religious society.
I think everyone (besides CET and a few others) is missing the point. I don't care if you are christian, budist, hindu, muslim, black, white, native american, gay or straight. I doesn't matter if you think homesexuality is right or wrong (this is a whole seperate debate). A group of people in our great country is being deined rights. I don't care who the hell is being deined rights, it is wrong. Everyone in this country should be "created equal" and thats that.
Quote:
America Should not force Americans to obey Christian law.
Amen. | | | |
|
pile
Apprentice
16 points
0/NA/
Join Date: Feb 2004 | Quote:
As i pointed out, if you take away the marrige tax breaks, there is no legal arguement in my opinion.
THERE IS NO MARRIAGE TAX BENEFIT. There USED to be a benefit for 2 individuals to file single on there tax return. Now since May 2003, there is NO, and i repeat (again) NO marriage PENALTY. You get the Tax breaks 2 single individuals get. This was a marriage penalty. Two single individuals got more deductions (don't mess with the accountant)
Only benefits you could possibly get from this is your partners health insurance if same sex marriages became legal.
Quote:
Which right are homosexuals being denied? The right to marry who they want? hmm thats not a right defined in our constitution. You cant marry more then 1 person. You cant marry a child without parental permision. You cant marry objects or animals.
Actually it is imposing on your freedoms. Look in the bill of rights. Its pretty vague. Some how the right to bare arms is equated to it being legal to own machine guns, bazookas, and some very wealthy individuals jet fighters.
I don't remember seeing any where in the Bill of Rights that abortion was legal either if you are keeping your stance. Or for that case that Affirmitive Action (since it denies a certain group of individuals of there freedoms for reparations of our ancestors actions) should be put in place.
*EDITED*
Included 9th Amendment in Bill of Rights
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. | | | |
|
cet
Apprentice
18 points
0/NA/
Join Date: Mar 2004 | Quote:
Which right are homosexuals being denied? The right to marry who they want? hmm thats not a right defined in our constitution. You cant marry more then 1 person. You cant marry a child without parental permision. You cant marry objects or animals.
They are denied the same opportunity other people already enjoy. You also committted the slippery slope fallacy.
Quote:
You can argue they are denied legal rights. But to my knowlege, almost all the legal rights married people have, can be given to somone if they go to a lawyer and get the documents drawn up. A "Civil union" just packages all those documents into one.
"Civil union", euphamism for "marriage". Why not just call a horse a horse and be done with it?
There are so many things that change when you get married, that it would cost tons of money to get all the contracts drawn up that are covered by marriage. Not to mention, that everytime a "priviledge of being married" comes along, you'll have to get another contract made up to cover that as well. Further, those contracts don't cover everything and cannot. How about visiting someone in the ICU of a hospital where only spouses and immediate family members are allowed in? Are they going to get a lawyer to draw up a contract that only one party can sign to allow them to see their "spouse"?
Quote:
As i pointed out, if you take away the marrige tax breaks, there is no legal arguement in my opinion.
Are you married? If you were, you would immediately realise that everything changes. Taxes are the least of it, there are other things like insurance, or even filling out stupid little forms for just about anything. These are things that cannot be fixed with a contract written up by a lawyer. But I digress to my previous reply. | | | |
|
pile
Apprentice
16 points
0/NA/
Join Date: Feb 2004 | Quote:
They cant win. They didnt play thier cards right.
How do you know they didn't play there cards right?
Actually what you didn't notice was the amendment under the bill of rights that states that no law can be created to discriminate againist the American people. That Amendment protects us from the government discriminating againist anyone. Everyone is granted Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Making a law that deprived someone of these is unconstitutional. They have the liberty to marry whom they want, and furthermore they have the right to pursue happiness with whom they choose, regardless of sexual preference.
And from our OWN Declaration of Independence:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. | | | |
|
wheaties99
Recruit
4 points
0/NA/Cookeville, Tennessee
Join Date: Mar 2004 | Do you believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God? II Timothy 3:16 says, "All Scripture is given by the inspiration of God..." If you do not believe, then my statements have no bearing.
Ashemaker you said I don't know anything about laws, ironic, I'm a SOC/CJ major. Well, rest assured I do know how laws are made in this country. But if we cannot intertwine morality with laws, then why can't I commit murder? Why not steeling? Why can I gamble in some states and in others I cannot? Why is there a drinking age, an age limit to purchasing tobacco, or pornagraphy for that matter? The founding fathers and other law makers had to get these ideas from somewhere. All sin is equal in the eyes of God. Matthew 22:21 says, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." That means follow your government untill it goes against God. Daniel and the lion's den, Meshach, Shadrach, and Abed-Nego would not give up God for King Nebuchadnezzer, all in the book of Daniel. Nowhere in my comment did I say we should Force anyone to do anything. We should just open our eyes as to our surroundings. I Peter 5:8 says, "Be sober, be viligent; because your advisary the devil walks about like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour."
CET read I Corinthians Chapter 7, and I think you'll be suprised what Paul has to say about celibacy. You were right that Jesus never said to be celbate because neither did Paul. Also read Genisis Chapters 18-19 and espeacially Romans 1: 18-32 to see what God says about Homosexuality and I think you all will be suprised, and yes it talks about lesbians!
Pepper, I looked up puritans in the world book encyclopedia and the word Puritan was misused and given to all Protestants in England. So, maybe the hard core calvinistic Puritans weren't the only ones on the Mayflower, who knows? Correct me if I'm wrong, but were there not 13 colonies when the Constitution was written? So my guess is, they weren't all Calvinistic Puritans that landed on Plymoth Rock over a hundred years before it was written. | | | |
Top
|
Mar 09, 2004 @ 04:10:46
