Boston Mayor Letter to Chick-Fil-A bashes them over their anti-gay stance

Then why not just get rid of the whole institution of marriage from a state perspective?

 

By saying he has the right to believe whatever he wants?

 

...and that's under one of the more generous civil union arrangements in the land.

 

lol fine. How about why a man can't marry a 15 year old girl

you have logic holes

 

Can't they with parental consent?

 

Your talk about people in puppy love getting married is true, but doesn't apply more to same sex marriage than it does to heterosexual marriage, and the previsions already exist.

As far as the benefits you listed there... Whether people should or shouldn't get tax breaks for being a couple, they do. And as far as the others those are things that can be done, but it isn't equal under the law, and it doesn't touch on other rights that heterosexual couples have such as immigration status, social security status, possible health care status, etc.

 

Another argument with an analogy that isn't really analogous. Also one that has been shot down before. Why do you keep doing that? I expect better from a poster who brags about his posting prowess as much as you do.

 

Bigtexx isn't serious. If his slippery slope argument were based in any sort of reality, and he really thought that bestiality and pedophilia were comparable to homosexuality, he'd be for making homosexuality illegal, right?

 

I'm just going to leave this link here. lol homophobes...

 

Consenting adults you said.

If I have to enumerate how children are more vulnerable in decision-making than adults, then I do believe the gaping holes in your "grasping-at-straws" methodology are beginning to reveal themselves.

What are you going to propose next? Marriage to animals? I personally would not give a s**t if you want to marry a shoe, if the shoe could think it through, and consent meant reasoned and informed consent, if you want to extend your terrible metaphors.

 

Personally, I could give 2 ****s about any of these "rights."

Really grasping at straws here.

 

You could give two s**ts about federal benefits, and joint filing of federal taxes?

How old are you, 15?

 

Obviously older than you.

Any lawyer worth a paycheck can make these "rights" available. Or are you that stupid?

 

Why should gays have to pay a lawyer money to get the same rights heterosexuals enjoy? You can see the legal costs on the side. How is that fair?

As for your argument, in New York City at the very least, that is impossible to do when it comes to filing jointly on federal taxes or getting federal SS benefits.

I'm going to assume the best of you and say that you didn't read the side column, because, in your old age, you missed a whole entire column of information.

 

14th Amendment.

Different laws for different folks. hmm.

 

lol. Dude, you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Keep fighting the fight, but don't post crap you can't back up.

 

Look at the table you just quoted.

How about this for crap you can't back up? You came in here talking a whole lot of trash about how gays can just pay lawyers for rights heterosexuals inherently earn, then you learned that a) sometimes they can't, and b) maybe you realized that whole premise was flawed judicially speaking.

Now you're leaving with an ad hominum attack on my level of knowledge. Fair enough, it might not be the highest there is on this topic. But, it appears to be higher than yours, if that's all you can garner in terms of argumentation.

 

Their opinion was contrary to the first amendment (a definition of marriage that is basically a law respecting an establishment of religion) and now they're crying behind the first amendment. Irony.

Christians are soooooooo oppressed in this country.

 

Lol. Yeah, keep thinking that.