Boycotting NC

Veteran

869

Stevens Point, Wisconsin

Subject: RE: Boycotting NC

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by Hook'em

hahahahaha

I do believe Obama has outlawed torture so this would not be possible.

Can we issue an emergency stay on that ruling? Won't someone please think of the children!

My Race Log

1502

Katy, Texas

Subject: RE: Boycotting NC

Originally posted by chirunner134

Christians need to do to NC what they did for Chick-fil-a. They need to take there companies and move them all to NC.

Again, this is confusing the issues. What happened with Chick-fil-a is that the owner/ceo (or whatever he is) noted his opinion on the matter. That was it. He didn't state or act in discriminatory hiring practices. He didn't try to keep homosexuals out of his stores. He simply stated his opinion on what he felt marriage was. To me, that is perfectly fine. I don't agree with his opinion, but he has every right to it. However; he DOESN'T have the right to act on those opinions in a way that affects citizen's civil liberties. THAT is the difference that keeps getting missed here.

The Chick-fil-a thing was a debacle in my opinion. The guy has the right to his beliefs. The NC thing is COMPLETELY different. It is not about people having beliefs, it is about enacting a law that takes away citizen's civil liberties. Totally different and a line that seems to be getting blurred constantly.

You can believe whatever the heck you want. You cannot act on those beliefs in a way that affects other peoples' civil liberties.

My Race Log

1731

Denver, Colorado

Subject: RE: Boycotting NC

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by 3mar

Originally posted by tuwood I also think the government state/federal should get out of the marriage business and just have civil unions for any non related couples who want to for a legal partnership. If an individual wants to have a church commitment ceremony or marriage then by all means.

Could it be that easy? I'd vote for that. It'd probably make both sides happy. The problem I see is the legal side of things; a gay couple not allowed to be together while one is dying in the hospital, tax benefits, life insurance, health insurance, etc. As far as I'm concerned the term "marriage" is up for each person's interpretation anyway. Are you or I truly married in the eyes of the Islamic faith? No. And that's fine.

I've thought about it quite a bit and I'm sure there's some basic flaws but at a high level I think something like this could work. Obviously you'd have to change all the laws to recognize the same rights as marriage with visitation, death benefits, divorce (can we still call it that), etc.

I threw in the "non relative" provision due to a very wealthy elderly gentlemen out in CA, I believe, who "married" his son so that when he dies his son gets his entire fortune tax free. That's obviously a loop hole. (and kind of weird) lol

To me it really seems as simple as this. Most of us just want the same rights and privileges that a married couple have. I really don't give a monkeys uncle what it's called. If I were ever to get married (or partnered whatever you want to call it!), I want to make sure that we are protected legally, just as any of you who are married are to your spouses. This includes all things such as my pension, retirement account, savings, of course there is the bad to; debt, in-laws, etc. I also want to be able to have the rights for the harder decisions in life, such as when to pull the plug, visitation in hospitals.

X

I think the in-laws issue everyone can handle

Anyways, I totally agree and I am very happy some companies are taking the steps in recognizing a partnership outside of the "standard" model. For example, my current employer (and couple of the previous ones) offer benefits for "domestic partner" - which is open to any gender, as well as couples who are not married at all. I know this is a very small step and much more needs to be done to see the change, but at least it starts happening.

My Race Log

Pro

9391

Omaha, NE

Subject: RE: Boycotting NC

Originally posted by marysia83

Originally posted by Justin86

Originally posted by tuwood

Originally posted by 3mar

Originally posted by tuwood I also think the government state/federal should get out of the marriage business and just have civil unions for any non related couples who want to for a legal partnership. If an individual wants to have a church commitment ceremony or marriage then by all means.

Could it be that easy? I'd vote for that. It'd probably make both sides happy. The problem I see is the legal side of things; a gay couple not allowed to be together while one is dying in the hospital, tax benefits, life insurance, health insurance, etc. As far as I'm concerned the term "marriage" is up for each person's interpretation anyway. Are you or I truly married in the eyes of the Islamic faith? No. And that's fine.

I've thought about it quite a bit and I'm sure there's some basic flaws but at a high level I think something like this could work. Obviously you'd have to change all the laws to recognize the same rights as marriage with visitation, death benefits, divorce (can we still call it that), etc.

I threw in the "non relative" provision due to a very wealthy elderly gentlemen out in CA, I believe, who "married" his son so that when he dies his son gets his entire fortune tax free. That's obviously a loop hole. (and kind of weird) lol

To me it really seems as simple as this. Most of us just want the same rights and privileges that a married couple have. I really don't give a monkeys uncle what it's called. If I were ever to get married (or partnered whatever you want to call it!), I want to make sure that we are protected legally, just as any of you who are married are to your spouses. This includes all things such as my pension, retirement account, savings, of course there is the bad to; debt, in-laws, etc. I also want to be able to have the rights for the harder decisions in life, such as when to pull the plug, visitation in hospitals.

X

I think the in-laws issue everyone can handle

Anyways, I totally agree and I am very happy some companies are taking the steps in recognizing a partnership outside of the "standard" model. For example, my current employer (and couple of the previous ones) offer benefits for "domestic partner" - which is open to any gender, as well as couples who are not married at all. I know this is a very small step and much more needs to be done to see the change, but at least it starts happening.

I don't currently have any gay employees (that I know of), but if I did I'd do everything I could to offer them the same benefits as the other married couples. I don't really care what the laws are or what my personal beliefs are, it's just the right thing to do.

My Race Log

Boycotting NC (Page 4)

REGISTER TODAY