I for one am genuinely surprised. The gay marriage bill looks to only be just that: recognition of same sex marriage under federal law. No ear marks, no hidden taxes, no ulterior agendas. No provision that private citizens or businesses must also recognize said marriage.
If only this was how everything else was put through congress. We might have an actually functioning federal government.
On the question of gay marriage, I've always found the debate silly. One should not need the federal government's permission to get married, and one should not consider other marriages when deciding how much their own marriage means to them. The baker should not be forced to bake the cake, and the genitals of the couple walking down the isle is no one else's business.
and the genitals of the couple walking down the isle is no one else's business.
Marriage is a breeding contract, plain and simple. The subterfuge of “love” equating marriage was like everything else progressives worship, the death of logic by emotion. Gay people can’t breed, therefore gay people can’t marry. This lolbertarian view is the same celebration of the death of logic. Your logic is the same logic that allowed the proliferation of aids and that allowed the same tyrannical demands from gays to spend massive resources to keep them alive despite it being a voluntary action. Do you really believe this stupid view has left society better off now that your kids are getting groomed by gay men in drag? This absolution of degeneracy to make you feel better about yourself is exactly what progressives and pedophiles want.
No provision that private citizens or businesses must also recognize said marriage.
They do not have the authority to impose that.
One should not need the federal government's permission to get married
I don't really understand this. Obviously, if a given government is giving you benefits for being married, it is their business whether you are married or not.
touche. I guess I've always fallen into the "Marriage is about love" camp, so I don't consider things like taxes when debating the issue. I suppose the question of custody and legal guardianship is a bit more of a concern, but otherwise it's all you-do-you to me.
I only have issues when they start legally mandating other people participate.
I for one am genuinely surprised. The gay marriage bill looks to only be just that: recognition of same sex marriage under federal law. No ear marks, no hidden taxes, no ulterior agendas. No provision that private citizens or businesses must also recognize said marriage.
If only this was how everything else was put through congress. We might have an actually functioning federal government.
On the question of gay marriage, I've always found the debate silly. One should not need the federal government's permission to get married, and one should not consider other marriages when deciding how much their own marriage means to them. The baker should not be forced to bake the cake, and the genitals of the couple walking down the isle is no one else's business.
Wait, so this law would mean some states no longer have to issue new marriage licenses to gay couples?
like it or not the government and the legal system is an indicator of the social and cultural state of the country
if the federal government is legitimizing buttsex and pretending two faggots can be a "family" then it is de-legitimizing normal families
Marriage is a breeding contract, plain and simple. The subterfuge of “love” equating marriage was like everything else progressives worship, the death of logic by emotion. Gay people can’t breed, therefore gay people can’t marry. This lolbertarian view is the same celebration of the death of logic. Your logic is the same logic that allowed the proliferation of aids and that allowed the same tyrannical demands from gays to spend massive resources to keep them alive despite it being a voluntary action. Do you really believe this stupid view has left society better off now that your kids are getting groomed by gay men in drag? This absolution of degeneracy to make you feel better about yourself is exactly what progressives and pedophiles want.
They do not have the authority to impose that.
I don't really understand this. Obviously, if a given government is giving you benefits for being married, it is their business whether you are married or not.
never stopped them before
touche. I guess I've always fallen into the "Marriage is about love" camp, so I don't consider things like taxes when debating the issue. I suppose the question of custody and legal guardianship is a bit more of a concern, but otherwise it's all you-do-you to me.
I only have issues when they start legally mandating other people participate.