RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Canada to Allow Same-Sex Marriage

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
The 22d Amendment specifically denies someone the right to serve as President for more than two terms.

---

Quote:

---

The 18th Amendment denied people the right to "manufacture, sale, or transport... intoxicating liquors."

---

Quote:

---

The Eleventh Amendment limits the rights of people to sue states.

---

Quote:

---

I suppose one could also argue that the Sixteenth Amendment, which allows the government to impose the income tax, also denies us the right to our own money.

---

Quote:

---

Captain Sammitch said:
what's a constition?

---

Quote:

---

r3x29yz4a said:

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
The 22d Amendment specifically denies someone the right to serve as President for more than two terms.

---

to one specific subsection of society?

Quote:

---

The 18th Amendment denied people the right to "manufacture, sale, or transport... intoxicating liquors."

---

to one specific subsection of society?

Quote:

---

The Eleventh Amendment limits the rights of people to sue states.

---

to one specific group of people?

Quote:

---

I suppose one could also argue that the Sixteenth Amendment, which allows the government to impose the income tax, also denies us the right to our own money.

---

to one specific subsection of society?

the point, that everyone seems to miss, is my point is that the bush amendment is the first one to target one group of people and limit their rights.
doesn't matter what the founding fathers thought of gay rights, they probably hated gays, but they left the constitution and the government set up to allow change and evolution of society. writing this amendment is a big step backwards because it is, by definition, discrimination.

---

Quote:

---

Pariah said:

Quote:

---

r3x29yz4a said:
you cut my quotes apart to make a joke but the fact is the gay marriage amendment is writing a ban on a right and a form of discrimination into the constitution. this pisses on the essence of the constitution's foundings.
and the signing statements go against the founding father's intent of balance in the government.
so you can cut up what i say to prove a non-existent point because you have no solid grounding other than being an asshole.

---

The Gay Marriage issue has nothing to do with "political balance" and everything to do with social effectiveness. You know this because I hammered it into your skull only pages prior to the current line of palavor. However, it seems you're unable to survive more than three posts within these types of arguments without a whole bunch of ad hominem pot-shots that have nothing to do with anything. Your attempt at trying to use the Founding Fathers as a mouth piece is further proof of your idiocy. Gays aren't being "discriminated against," marriage simply does not work for its ratio. It was designed for straight couples; It's not some sort of private club. If you knew anything about the way it worked, you'd realize that it's a way for the government to insure a healthy population that grows steadily rather than extraneously.

---

Quote:

---

r3x29yz4a said:

Quote:

---

Captain Sammitch said:
what's a constition?

---

the founding document of WBAM's america, teh home of the brave and teh land of teh free.

---

Judging by the oral argument from February, which you can watch online, the plaintiffs have a very good chance of prevailing. Two of the seven justices asked no questions; if I'm reading between the lines of the others' questions correctly, the state can count on only one vote while the plaintiffs have two for certain and another two that seemed to be leaning in their direction.

New Jersey has a reputation for activist jurisprudence, which isn't surprising given that the state's constitution opens with a sweeping declaration of vaguely enumerated rights.

Given that, the case for gay marriage by judicial fiat isn't really such a stretch in light of declared "natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of ... pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness."



This could have profound implications, both politically and legally. Stay tuned.

Denying committed same-sex couples the financial and social benefits and privileges given to their married heterosexual counterparts bears no substantial relationship to a legitimate governmental purpose. The Court holds that under the equal protection guarantee of Article I, Paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution, committed samesex couples must be afforded on equal terms the same rights and benefits enjoyed by opposite-sex couples under the civil marriage statutes. The name to be given to the statutory scheme that provides full rights and benefits to samesex couples, whether marriage or some other term, is a matter left to the democratic process.

Quote:

---

Beardguy57 said:
Gay Couple Refuses To Pay Taxes Until Australia Recognizes Same-Sex Marriage
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff

October 30, 2006 - 9:00 pm ET


(Sydney, Australia) A Sydney same-sex couple is refusing to file tax returns until the government allows them to submit a joint return as a married couple.

Australian Marriage Equality said the couple was legally married overseas and in past years had been allowed to file jointly but this year the Australian Tax Office changed its form, asking the sex of of spouses.

After submitting their return on line it was rejected. When they complained the men received a letter from the ATO saying that under the Income Tax Assessment Act of 1997 their marriage could not be recognized and that they were not entitled to name each other as spouse on their returns.

Australian Marriage Equality did not name the couple. Spokesperson Sharon Dane said the ATO decision was discriminatory.

"Same-sex couples should receive the same treatment as opposite-sex couples", she said.

The Tax Office says it is only following the law.

In 2004 the federal government passed a law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Earlier this year the Australian Capital Territory passed legislation giving same-sex couples most of the rights of marriage (story) but the bill was overturned by the federal government.

That action prompted the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission to begin an investigation into inequities faced by same-sex couples. The commission has been holding hearings across the country.

Earlier this month at a stop in Brisbane the mother of a gay man told commissioners the government is imposing an apartheid-type situation on gay and lesbian couples. (story)

"The Federal Government is really persecuting the gays for something they can't help," Shelley Argent said.
"It's like the South Africans. They persecuted the blacks for something they couldn't help."

Meanwhile the ACT government has announced plans to reintroduce a modified version of laws allowing for civil partnerships.

Public opinion has been slowly shifting in favor of recognizing same-sex relationships and Prime Minister John Howard now has suggested his government may look at ways of granting limited recognition to same-sex couples. But Howard said he has no intention of repealing the ban on gay marriage.

©365Gay.com 2006

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:

Quote:

---

Beardguy57 said:
Gay Couple Refuses To Pay Taxes Until Australia Recognizes Same-Sex Marriage
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff

October 30, 2006 - 9:00 pm ET


(Sydney, Australia) A Sydney same-sex couple is refusing to file tax returns until the government allows them to submit a joint return as a married couple.

Australian Marriage Equality said the couple was legally married overseas and in past years had been allowed to file jointly but this year the Australian Tax Office changed its form, asking the sex of of spouses.

After submitting their return on line it was rejected. When they complained the men received a letter from the ATO saying that under the Income Tax Assessment Act of 1997 their marriage could not be recognized and that they were not entitled to name each other as spouse on their returns.

Australian Marriage Equality did not name the couple. Spokesperson Sharon Dane said the ATO decision was discriminatory.

"Same-sex couples should receive the same treatment as opposite-sex couples", she said.

The Tax Office says it is only following the law.

In 2004 the federal government passed a law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Earlier this year the Australian Capital Territory passed legislation giving same-sex couples most of the rights of marriage (story) but the bill was overturned by the federal government.

That action prompted the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission to begin an investigation into inequities faced by same-sex couples. The commission has been holding hearings across the country.

Earlier this month at a stop in Brisbane the mother of a gay man told commissioners the government is imposing an apartheid-type situation on gay and lesbian couples. (story)

"The Federal Government is really persecuting the gays for something they can't help," Shelley Argent said.
"It's like the South Africans. They persecuted the blacks for something they couldn't help."

Meanwhile the ACT government has announced plans to reintroduce a modified version of laws allowing for civil partnerships.

Public opinion has been slowly shifting in favor of recognizing same-sex relationships and Prime Minister John Howard now has suggested his government may look at ways of granting limited recognition to same-sex couples. But Howard said he has no intention of repealing the ban on gay marriage.

©365Gay.com 2006

---

I've never understood the logic behind this, regardless of the cause. There's not a person alive who doesn't think that something their government does is unfair. But that's why we have elections and courts.

Should everyone with a beef against their government be excused from paying taxes?

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Maybe, but should, for example, the KKK be able to catch the governments attention in this manner over affirmative action?

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Fair enough. I'm simply pointing out that if we start letting one special interest group get away with it we need to let every special interest group get away with it.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Fair enough. I'm simply pointing out that if we start letting one special interest group get away with it we need to let every special interest group get away with it.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
Someone at the KKK could claim, not frivolously, the affirmative action is a form of reverse racial discrimination and, therefore, a violation of a white person's "civil rights."

Therefore, the KKK'er would be 'justified' in not paying his taxes, under the same theory as the gay Australians.

I don't the KKK doing it, so I don't support the gay activist either.

---

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
No, I'm pointing out that actions have future consequences.

---

What are the consequences of "allowing" gays to marry? I mean, besides the inevitable gay divorces to follow?

Quote:

---

the G-man said:
The consequences of the civil disobedience, Jerry, not gay marriage.

---

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:
It's called Civil Disobedience. A method used effectively by Thoreau, MLK, and Gandhi.

---

Quote:

---

Pariah said:

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:
It's called Civil Disobedience. A method used effectively by Thoreau, MLK, and Gandhi.

---

There's reasonable civil disobedience and then there's downright senseless idiocy. Those people you cite fought for rights. Marriage is not a right (for the thousandth time).

It's interesting that you think simply because people choose to blatantly go against the rules that they're performance is admirable.

---

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:
Where did I say that? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I simply pointed out a fact. Reading comprehension is fundamental.

---

Quote:

---

Pariah said:

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:
Where did I say that? Oh, that's right. I didn't. I simply pointed out a fact. Reading comprehension is fundamental.

---

I'm sorry if I don't know how to read. But I do know how to read between the lines.

---

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:
Well, remember that one of the main reasons behind the Revolutionary War was that colonists didn't want to have to pay taxes to pay for the French and Indian Wars.

---

Quote:

---

Pariah said:

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:
Well, remember that one of the main reasons behind the Revolutionary War was that colonists didn't want to have to pay taxes to pay for the French and Indian Wars.

---

But isn't that the difference? Revolt?

They stopped paying taxes because they didn't want to support a particular country. That's seems like more than just protest.

---

Quote:

---

Beardguy57 said:
Key Evangelical Quits Amid Gay Sex Claim
By CATHERINE TSAI, Associated Press Writer
1 hour ago

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - The leader of the 30 million-member National Association of Evangelicals, a vocal opponent of same-sex marriage, resigned Thursday after being accused of paying for sex with a man in monthly trysts over the past three years.

The Rev. Ted Haggard, a married father of five who has been called one of the most influential evangelical Christians in the nation, denied the allegations. His accuser refused to share voice mails that he said backed up his claim.

Haggard also stepped aside as head of his 14,000-member New Life Church while a church panel investigates, saying he could "not continue to minister under the cloud created by the accusations."

"I am voluntarily stepping aside from leadership so that the overseer process can be allowed to proceed with integrity," Haggard said in a written statement. "I hope to be able to discuss this matter in more detail at a later date."

He also told KUSA-TV late Wednesday: "Never had a gay relationship with anybody, and I'm steady with my wife, I'm faithful to my wife."

The allegations come as voters in Colorado and seven other states get ready to decide Tuesday on amendments banning gay marriage. Besides the proposed ban on the Colorado ballot, a separate measure would establish the legality of domestic partnerships providing same-sex couples with many of the rights of married couples.

Mike Jones, 49, of Denver told The Associated Press he decided to go public with his allegations because of the political fight. Jones, who said he is gay, said he was upset when he discovered Haggard and the New Life Church had publicly opposed same-sex marriage.

"It made me angry that here's someone preaching about gay marriage and going behind the scenes having gay sex," said Jones, who added that he isn't working for any political group.

Jones, whose allegations were first aired on KHOW-AM radio in Denver, claimed Haggard paid him to have sex nearly every month over three years. Jones also said Haggard snorted methamphetamine before their sexual encounters to heighten his experience.

Haggard and his attorney, Martin Nussbaum, did not return calls Thursday night from the AP.

Jones said he had advertised himself as an escort on the Internet and that a man who called himself Art contacted him. Jones said he later saw the man on television identified as Haggard.

He said that he last had sex with Haggard in August and that he did not warn him before making his allegations this week.

Jones said he has voice mail messages from Haggard, as well as an envelope he said Haggard used to mail him cash. He declined to make any of it available to the AP, but KUSA-TV reported excerpts from some of the alleged voice mails late Thursday.

"Hi Mike, this is Art," one call began, according to the station. "Hey, I was just calling to see if we could get any more. Either $100 or $200 supply."

A second message, left a few hours later, began: "Hi Mike, this is Art, I am here in Denver and sorry that I missed you. But as I said, if you want to go ahead and get the stuff, then that would be great. And I'll get it sometime next week or the week after or whenever."

Jones said Haggard was referring to methamphetamine.

"There's some stuff on there (the voice mails) that's pretty damning," he said.

Haggard, who is about 50, was appointed president of the evangelicals association in March 2003. He has participated in conservative Christian leaders' conference calls with White House staffers and lobbied members of Congress last year on U.S. Supreme Court appointees after Sandra Day O'Connor announced her retirement.

After Massachusetts legalized gay marriage in 2004, Haggard and others began organizing state-by-state opposition. Last year, Haggard and officials from the nearby Christian ministry Focus on the Family announced plans to push Colorado's gay marriage ban for the 2006 ballot.

At the time, Haggard said that he believed marriage is a union between a man and woman rooted in centuries of tradition, and that research shows it's the best family unit for children.

"Homosexual activity, like adulterous relationships, is clearly condemned in the Scriptures," the evangelicals association says on its Web site. The Bible says homosexuality is a sin that "brings grave consequences in this life and excludes one from the Kingdom of God."

Haggard's resignation from the NAE seems unlikely to do lasting damage to the organization, an umbrella group for a diverse and independent-minded membership. At his own church, Haggard's decision to step aside _ if it became permanent _ would have a more profound effect.

"One would hope and pray that this matter would be resolved expeditiously and quickly and he can be restored back to being the pastor of the church and the leader of the NAE," said Michael Cromartie, vice president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, a conservative Washington think tank.

New Life Church member Brooks DeMio, 44, said he thinks Jones is a liar and can't believe Haggard would engage in sex with a man.

"He loves the Lord, homosexuality is a sin and that's not Ted," DeMio said. "His desire is to serve other people and uphold the word of God. ... I don't know him well enough to give a complete character description, but I know him enough to know it's not true."

Carolyn Haggard, spokeswoman for the New Life Church and the pastor's niece, said a four-member church panel will investigate the allegations. The board has the authority to discipline Haggard, including removing him from ministry work.

"This is really routine when any sort of situation like this arises, so we're prepared," Carolyn Haggard said. "The church is going to continue to serve and be welcoming to our community. That's a priority."

___

Associated Press writers Dan Elliott in Denver and Rachel Zoll in New York contributed to this report.

---

Quote:

---

thedoctor said:
They stopped paying taxes because they didn't want to pay taxes. Taxes that were to pay for a war fought to protect them. That protest led to rebellion. So if you approve of the protest of the colonists in the late 1700's which was definetly more violent as it involved vandalism, then you'd also have to approve of the protest of the Australian couple who are using a non-violent form of protest. Not their politics, but their use of non-violent protest. Otherwise, you're just splitting hairs due to your unacceptance of their reason for the protest.

---

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado (CNN) -- Evangelical pastor Ted Haggard confessed on Sunday to a "lifelong" sexual problem, and said he was "a deceiver and a liar," in a letter read to his New Life Church.

"There is part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I've been warring against it all of my adult life," he said in the letter.

Haggard apologized to his congregation and asked for their forgiveness in the letter read by pastor Larry Stockstill, a member of the board of overseers of New Life Church.

On Saturday, the board ousted Haggard from the 14,000-member church, which he founded more than 20 years ago, citing his "sexually immoral conduct."

Haggard had previously admitted that he bought methamphetamine and got a massage from Mike Jones, a former prostitute. Jones said the prominent pastor had paid him for sex over a three-year period. (Watch what led to Haggards firing -- 2:40)

Haggard, in an interview with CNN affiliate KUSA denied having sex with Jones and said he did not use the drug and threw it away.

In the letter read Sunday, Haggard took responsibility for his actions, saying "I am guilty of sexual immorality" and noted that "the things I did opened the door for additional allegations."

He asked the congregation to also forgive his accuser, who Haggard said has revealed "the deception ... that was in my life."

In a separate letter from Haggard's wife, also read by Stockstill, Gayle Haggard said while her heart is broken, she remains "committed to him until death do us part."

An overflow congregation responded to the announcement with a standing ovation.

Haggard, 50, and his wife have five children.