[Vision2020] Marriage at all??

Sat Aug 15 10:17:34 PDT 2009

How about just eliminating the pesky concept of marriage and be done
with it?  After all, what real benefits are there in such contractual
agreements that one cannot have by simply saying "Hey wanna shack up
for a while?"  I mean one can already will whatever one wants to
whomever (or whatever) one wants and just do away with the "rights of
survivorship" nonsense.  And those who have no wills due to lack of
motivation on their part?  It all goes to the state.  Tough luck for
being a slug.

Medical benefits for "spouses"?  Forget it.  Each and every one
responsible for his or her own medical coverage - whatever that may
turn out to be.  Let the states / feds take care of the kids and once
your "of age" buy your own damn catastrophic medical coverage and pay
for your own physician visits.  Lean to save for those down-the-road
and later-in-life medical expenses while you're at it.

Income tax?  No "union" deduction for anyone - go with a national flat
rate tax, pay the damn thing, and quit squealing.

About the only thing I can think of to suggest marriage in any form
could be beneficial is a study from the early 1990's which suggested
that married people have more and better sex than do cohabitants.

Hmmmmmmmmmm . . . sorry dear, looks like yer stuck with me. . .

GS

On Sat, Aug 15, 2009 at 9:47 AM, Glenn Schwaller<vpschwaller at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not an advocate of gay marriage, at least not until it is extended
> to the concept of pluralistic marriage.  That being said (and I'm not
> going to get involved in arguments over polygamy but feel free to do
> so yourselves), the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment protecting the
> free exercise of religion makes it unlikely that a church would be
> forced by law into performing same-sex weddings.
>
> If arguments against gay marriage are considered either religious or
> bigoted, our Constitution and the associated federal laws make seem to
> prohibit endorsing of these viewpoints by the government.  I would
> suggest reviewing for example, the First Thirteenth, Fourteenth,
> Fifteenth, Nineteenth, Twenty-Fourth, and Twenty-Sixth amendments for
> discourses on government-sponsored discrimination, bigotry and
> intolerance.
>
> Every generation adds new legislation to forbid discrimination against
> a "new" category of people, which suggests to me that obviously our
> laws are meant to protect all categories of people.  I would go so far
> as to say even those categories of people of whom our legislators
> haven't gotten around to protecting.  At least not yet considering the
> vast number of remarkably short-sighted and unimaginative legislators
> who seem to get voted into office on a regular basis.
>
> It will be interesting to see how the philosophy of these arguments
> will be turned on their heads when one of these "new" categories of
> people arise who really get the intoleristas knickers in a twist.
>
> GS
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 5:24 PM, Andreas Schou<ophite at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Right, yeah, Gary. I don't claim comprehensive knowledge, but 'm not
>> aware of how such an action would be brought, much less any examples
>> of how it could be done.
>>
>> -- ACS
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Mo
>> Hendrickson<hend5953 at vandals.uidaho.edu> wrote:
>>>  "There are quite a few instances of legal action being brought to bear on
>>> religious groups for refusing to provide services to homosexual couples."
>>>
>>> Please, please, please do give us your source on this statement.
>>>
>>> -Mo
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: lockshop at pull.twcbc.com
>>> To: kathys at moscow.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:50:06 -0700
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Gay Marriage benefits for Gary
>>>
>>> I have always been of the opinion that just because people might disagree
>>> over any particular point does not mean that they must become enemies or be
>>> accussed of "not giving a rats ass." Over the years that we have known one
>>> another, I'm quite positive that I have never let my opinion on this matter
>>> bleed over into our relationship and It's unfortunate that all of a sudden
>>> the fact that we are not in absolute agreement on this one topic causes you
>>> to re-evaluate that.
>>>
>>> As to your contention that "No church will ever be forced to perform the
>>> religious ceremony if we are given a civil marriage license," this is far
>>> from reality. There are quite a few instances of legal action being brought
>>> to bear on religious groups for refusing to provide services to homosexual
>>> couples. I find it quite hard to believe that a repeal of DOMA would cause
>>> that intrusion into religious practice to lessen. To the contrary, I would
>>> envision a huge increase in that sort of harassment.
>>>
>>> So, to answer your questions in the order asked, absolutely and precious
>>> little. I'm not sure what that changes, however. I've spoken with Pete and
>>> there will be no further abuse of your neighborly hospitality and no
>>> hypothetical future inconvience for me.
>>>
>>> g
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Katherine Sprague" <kathys at moscow.com>
>>> To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 10:13 AM
>>> Subject: [Vision2020] Gay Marriage benefits for Gary
>>>> Gary,
>>>> If  Tabitha died tomorrow and I had to fight her family to stay in the
>>>> home
>>>> she and I are buying would you feel any empathy for me as your neighbor?
>>>> The
>>>> fact that I would undoubtedly have to shut down the store would mean UPS
>>>> would have to drop off your packages elsewhere. There's a concrete way
>>>> that
>>>> you might be inconvenienced.
>>>>
>>>> What I don't understand is how you can be willing to help me catch my dog
>>>> or
>>>> lock up my store if it is left unsecuredaccindently but you don't give a
>>>> rat's ass about my ability to see the woman I love and have made a life
>>>> with
>>>> for the last 18 years if she is hospialized. Write supporting gay marriage
>>>> off as being neighborly. Think about all the extra money liberal lawyers
>>>> are
>>>> making off of gay couples that want to insure they can inherit already
>>>> shared property. That's money they should be spending on other things and
>>>> stimulating the economy. If  Tabitha and I could marry we would be paying
>>>> the "marriage penalty" in taxes thus putting more money into the
>>>> collective
>>>> pot.
>>>> When one group faces additional hurdles to living the American dream and
>>>> the
>>>> remedy is so simple why put so much effort into denying them that help?
>>>> I have a question for you Gary, what harm will come to you personally if
>>>> the
>>>> Lesbians two doors down are allowed to marry?  No church will ever be
>>>> forced
>>>> to perform the religious ceremony if we are given a civil marriage
>>>> license.
>>>> They will maintain their freedom OF religion. I am asking for freedom FROM
>>>> their religion.
>>>> And for the record I think the smoking ban is ridiculous.
>>>>
>>>> Kathy Sprague
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> =======================================================
>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>> =======================================================
>>> ________________________________
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.56/2302 - Release Date: 08/14/09
>>> 06:10:00
>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>               http://www.fsr.net
>>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>