Dan Savage

[Frigidus]

Marriage is NOT a right

The fact that it isn't is one of the glaring weaknesses of the Constitution. While it might not legally be a right, many believe that it is morally a right. I would consider the ability to marry anyone capable of giving consent to be under the umbrella of free religious practice which is certainly a right.

therefore society can define the parameters of marriage: one male may be married to one female at one time.

"Society" is a nebulous concept as it is, and even if we can pin down what society as a whole wants these wants can be clouded by emotion. The law is in place to enforce what is right rather than what is popular, in theory if not in practice.

[natty dread]

NS says gays shouldn't be allowed the same rights as straight people.

You never actually read my posts do you? You see that I made a post and immediately reply with "homophobe" or "racist" (depending on the thread topic). Every person has the same rights, no matter what color or lifestyle they have. That's part of the whole "inalienable rights" instilled in the founding of this nation. Marriage is NOT a right, therefore society can define the parameters of marriage: one male may be married to one female at one time.

Yeah, go on and use whatever excuse to justify your bigotry, we've all heard it before.

Btw, the same argument could be used to justify prohibiting interracial marriages: every person is free to marry a person of the same race, so everyone has the same rights! Whee!

Go on Nightstrike, tell me how I'm a horrible sinner and I'm going to hell. You know it turns me on...

[Phatscotty]

Dan Savage - "I wish they were all F'n dead."

I'll give you this one, Phatscotty.
Yes, Savage is being a bit... savage here.

Thanks. I will try to remember in the future you can be an honest and objective participant

[Phatscotty]

you continue to spew out crap like your some sort of saint.

I can't be your Superman

[pimpdave]

Dan Savage is a piece of shit, and if it took this incident for people to realize it, they weren't paying attention until now.

[Army of GOD]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

[Timminz]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

It encourages good, moral behaviour.

[Army of GOD]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

It encourages good, moral behaviour.

[Phatscotty]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

It encourages good, moral behaviour.

and produces new taxpayers. I understand the government should encourage family unity, but we are going about it completely the wrong way. Another reason I support eliminating ALL loopholes, credits etc. in our tax code.

A lot of people get married for the benefits. This is especially true for gay couples. What I am saying is the answer is not to extend benefits to more types of married couples, but to get rid of those benefits for all married couples.

TRUE equality, where everyone is treated equally, and no special favors are given for xyz reasons...

[jak111]

Well, scotty seems to be settling down some, more than the others.

But how are we going from Dan Savage's speech to all this? o.O

[pimpdave]

Dan Savage is a prick and I hope he gets more public shaming and people stop reading his shitty, shitty column. f*ck that guy.

[Frigidus]

Dan Savage is a prick and I hope he gets more public shaming and people stop reading his shitty, shitty column. f*ck that guy.

I honestly know next to nothing about the guy. The name is vaguely familiar, and that's about it. What's he done that has you hate him that much?

[Phatscotty]

Dan Savage is a prick and I hope he gets more public shaming and people stop reading his shitty, shitty column. f*ck that guy.

I might have missed it if you stated it earlier. What is the reasons you dislike him so much besides the general comments here?

♥

[Army of GOD]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

It encourages good, moral behaviour.

and produces new taxpayers. I understand the government should encourage family unity, but we are going about it completely the wrong way. Another reason I support eliminating ALL loopholes, credits etc. in our tax code.

A lot of people get married for the benefits. This is especially true for gay couples. What I am saying is the answer is not to extend benefits to more types of married couples, but to get rid of those benefits for all married couples.

TRUE equality, where everyone is treated equally, and no special favors are given for xyz reasons...

I agree with this.

[Symmetry]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

It encourages good, moral behaviour.

and produces new taxpayers. I understand the government should encourage family unity, but we are going about it completely the wrong way. Another reason I support eliminating ALL loopholes, credits etc. in our tax code.

A lot of people get married for the benefits. This is especially true for gay couples. What I am saying is the answer is not to extend benefits to more types of married couples, but to get rid of those benefits for all married couples.

TRUE equality, where everyone is treated equally, and no special favors are given for xyz reasons...

I agree with this.

It's kind of sad that marriage equality is seen as a financial thing. I don't think that gay people want to get married "especially for the financial benefits". Is it so beyond your purview that gay people might want to get married for love?

And indeed that love might be a slightly more important factor in gay marriage compared to heterosexual marriage?

[Army of GOD]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

It encourages good, moral behaviour.

and produces new taxpayers. I understand the government should encourage family unity, but we are going about it completely the wrong way. Another reason I support eliminating ALL loopholes, credits etc. in our tax code.

A lot of people get married for the benefits. This is especially true for gay couples. What I am saying is the answer is not to extend benefits to more types of married couples, but to get rid of those benefits for all married couples.

TRUE equality, where everyone is treated equally, and no special favors are given for xyz reasons...

I agree with this.

It's kind of sad that marriage equality is seen as a financial thing. I don't think that gay people want to get married "especially for the financial benefits". Is it so beyond your purview that gay people might want to get married for love?

And indeed that love might be a slightly more important factor in gay marriage compared to heterosexual marriage?

I'm not saying that they don't want to get married because of love, but I just don't see how people can be against gays getting married if the financial benefits are gone. Like Scotty said, it's an abused system any way. If people are still against marriage because they want to protect its sanctity or whatever then f*ck them.

[Symmetry]

Personally, I don't think many gay people want to get married for the financial stuff. Don't get me wrong- the financial and legal sides are important, but they're more seen as how the lack of equality is a negative, a sense of not being recognised equally.

I think we're mostly in agreement AOG.

[thegreekdog]

I'm not saying that they don't want to get married because of love, but I just don't see how people can be against gays getting married if the financial benefits are gone. Like Scotty said, it's an abused system any way. If people are still against marriage because they want to protect its sanctity or whatever then f*ck them.

There are three ways to go with this:

(1) The government regulates marriage (and provides benefits to married couples).
(2) The government doesn't regulate marriage (and provides no benefits to married couples).
(3) The government regulates some marriages and does not permit others (and provides benefits to married couples).

I think (2) is how we should go. Most gay marriage advocates think (1) is the answer. Most conservative advocates think (3) is the answer. I'm confused as to why most gay marriage advocates don't advocate (2).

Personally, I don't think many gay people want to get married for the financial stuff. Don't get me wrong- the financial and legal sides are important, but they're more seen as how the lack of equality is a negative, a sense of not being recognised equally.

I think we're mostly in agreement AOG.

I agree that it is about equal rights. But it's only about equal rights because the government treats one class of citizens (heterosexuals) different than another class (homosexuals) with respect to the government's regulation of marriage. If the government didn't regulate marriage or give benefits, it would be a non-issue; no marriage licenses would be needed.

[Army of GOD]

Personally, I don't think many gay people want to get married for the financial stuff. Don't get me wrong- the financial and legal sides are important, but they're more seen as how the lack of equality is a negative, a sense of not being recognised equally.

I think we're mostly in agreement AOG.

I suppose. All in all, none of this would be controversial if NightStrike and his crew didn't go out of their way to "disagree" with a lifestyle. Which I still find an absolutely hilarious claim.

[Army of GOD]

I'm not saying that they don't want to get married because of love, but I just don't see how people can be against gays getting married if the financial benefits are gone. Like Scotty said, it's an abused system any way. If people are still against marriage because they want to protect its sanctity or whatever then f*ck them.

There are three ways to go with this:

(1) The government regulates marriage (and provides benefits to married couples).
(2) The government doesn't regulate marriage (and provides no benefits to married couples).
(3) The government regulates some marriages and does not permit others (and provides benefits to married couples).

I think (2) is how we should go. Most gay marriage advocates think (1) is the answer. Most conservative advocates think (3) is the answer. I'm confused as to why most gay marriage advocates don't advocate (2).

I agree that 2 is also the way to go. Marriage is such an arbitrary concept and is taken advantage of because the government provides benefits for it. Seriously, why the f*ck does the government provide benefits for marriage? I can see why it would provide benefits for children (though ,there should be a limit to how many children per mother or something the parents get benefits for) but marriage? Are you shitting me?

[Phatscotty]

Why is marriage considered a right or a privilege at all? Why does the guv'ment give benefits to those who are married?

It encourages good, moral behaviour.

and produces new taxpayers. I understand the government should encourage family unity, but we are going about it completely the wrong way. Another reason I support eliminating ALL loopholes, credits etc. in our tax code.

A lot of people get married for the benefits. This is especially true for gay couples. What I am saying is the answer is not to extend benefits to more types of married couples, but to get rid of those benefits for all married couples.

TRUE equality, where everyone is treated equally, and no special favors are given for xyz reasons...

I agree with this.

It's kind of sad that marriage equality is seen as a financial thing. I don't think that gay people want to get married "especially for the financial benefits". Is it so beyond your purview that gay people might want to get married for love?

And indeed that love might be a slightly more important factor in gay marriage compared to heterosexual marriage?

Do you know about the "kid" thing? People get up to $3,500 per kid from the taxpayers.

[Symmetry]

It's kind of sad that marriage equality is seen as a financial thing. I don't think that gay people want to get married "especially for the financial benefits". Is it so beyond your purview that gay people might want to get married for love?

And indeed that love might be a slightly more important factor in gay marriage compared to heterosexual marriage?

Do you know about the "kid" thing? People get up to $3,500 per kid from the taxpayers.

So you're objecting to gay people getting married because they might look after children?

[Phatscotty]

It's kind of sad that marriage equality is seen as a financial thing. I don't think that gay people want to get married "especially for the financial benefits". Is it so beyond your purview that gay people might want to get married for love?

And indeed that love might be a slightly more important factor in gay marriage compared to heterosexual marriage?

Do you know about the "kid" thing? People get up to $3,500 per kid from the taxpayers.

So you're objecting to gay people getting married because they might look after children?

no

though

I was asking if you knew about it.

[Symmetry]

It's kind of sad that marriage equality is seen as a financial thing. I don't think that gay people want to get married "especially for the financial benefits". Is it so beyond your purview that gay people might want to get married for love?

And indeed that love might be a slightly more important factor in gay marriage compared to heterosexual marriage?

Do you know about the "kid" thing? People get up to $3,500 per kid from the taxpayers.

So you're objecting to gay people getting married because they might look after children?

no

though

I was asking if you knew about it.

I don't see how it would be an incentive or disincentive for gay people to get married more than heterosexual couples to get married. If anything, it's less relevant for gay couples.

[Phatscotty]

Nevermind dude....

Nevermind....