Pennsylvania gay marriage ban struck down-

Its still there. The fact that some parents don't fulfill that obligation doesn't change the fact that only they are obligated.

 

Except of course they haven't

For example Maryland

The language of Referendum Question 6 informed voters that the Civil Marriage Protection Act would allow same-sex couples to obtain a civil marriage license, protect clergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs, and affirm that each religious faith has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith.[70]


On November 6, 2012, the measure passed with 52.4% of the vote.[71][72] On November 29, 2012, the attorney general issued a legal opinion stating that court clerks could accept applications for same-sex marriage licenses immediately and issue them on December 6, 2012, as long as the effective date on the licenses specified January 1, 2013.[73] 20 out of the 23 counties in Maryland and the city of Baltimore chose to issue the licenses ahead of schedule.[74]

Not limited to gay couples at all.

You could marry your friend Bob and assuming you were both straight- it would still be a legal marriage in Maryland.

 

Got anything relevant to the topic of discussion? I didn't think so.

 

They continue to prohibit closely related couples of the same sex as their only intent was to extend marriage to gay couples.

 

I've said plenty that's relevant. You just don't want to deal with it. This is my way of saying that I'm sick of you and Sammy's amazing super ego.

 

But the law doesn't say one word about 'gay couples'.

Your claim:
I think its unconstitutional discrimination because they have limited it to gay couples of the "same sex"

Except of course they haven't

For example Maryland

The language of Referendum Question 6 informed voters that the Civil Marriage Protection Act would allow same-sex couples to obtain a civil marriage license, protect clergy from having to perform any particular marriage ceremony in violation of their religious beliefs, and affirm that each religious faith has exclusive control over its own theological doctrine regarding who may marry within that faith.[70]


On November 6, 2012, the measure passed with 52.4% of the vote.[71][72] On November 29, 2012, the attorney general issued a legal opinion stating that court clerks could accept applications for same-sex marriage licenses immediately and issue them on December 6, 2012, as long as the effective date on the licenses specified January 1, 2013.[73] 20 out of the 23 counties in Maryland and the city of Baltimore chose to issue the licenses ahead of schedule.[74]

You and Bob could go get married in Maryland tomorrow if you want to.

 

Here's a challenge for you: Father a child, give it up for adoption, have some couple adopt it, and THEN have that couple sue you for child support. See how much obligation you have. Consult a lawyer if you don't know the answer.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah but, you know, that's what they actually meant Citing the actual law is a strawman.

 

And here we go again. Making laws LESS discriminatory is unconstitutional because they're discriminatory! So we should stick with the MORE discriminatory laws, which magically are permitted despite the discrimination.

Orwell called this "doublethink".

 

Really? Pretty sure people of the opposite sex can get married too.

Also way to go avoiding answering the actual question on whether you think married same sex couples are capable of being just as good parents to adopted children as Biological parents would be.

 

nope. any child born in a same sex marriage obligates both spouses as legal parents.

- - - Updated - - -

except they didn't.

 

Yet when I point out that California law was changed to exclude homosexual couples, Dixon is quick to point out that the law doesn't even mention homosexuals.

Funny eh?

 

Costs are high. Don't kid yourself. That affects me.
http://www.wnd.com/2013/12/the-stats-dont-lie-gay-health-costs-coming-your-way/

If two gays can't have a piece of paper, how exactly does that affect me?

 

Gays portray themselves as victims. That is part of the gay rights myth.

 

While their radical leaders threaten lawsuits and even violence to those that don't fall in line with their pov.

 

Most of the medical issues in your "source" have been directly attributed to the discrimination and hate that gay people face. The only true medical issue is aids although it effects only a minority of the gay population, black herpterosexual women are more likely to contract aids than a gay white male.

Gay people not having "that piece of paper" effects them. Them having it does not effect you in the slightest.
Just because you don't like something is not just cause. I would ask you for a legally valid reason but there are none.

 

What costs? Same sex marriage doesn't cost you anything. It has no effect on you at all

This doesn't make any sense.

 

Of course, that is necessary when facts are not on their side.

 

What does this have to do with Pennsylvania overturning their same sex marriage ban?

- - - Updated - - -

What myth?

 

This is off topic, and flamebait.

- - - Updated - - -

How exactly do you think that Gays are at fault for being discriminated against when it comes to marriage?

 

The myth of gay rights. Yanno, the myth liberals have faith in.

 

So they are acting just like Christians?

- - - Updated - - -

LOL....so you don't even believe homosexuals have any rights.....what a shock that is.

 

They have rights as citizens but not based on perverted behavior. That is just silly nonsense.

 

Seriously quoting WND? LOL.....

How does treating two homosexuals like my wife and I are treated under the law affect you?

- - - Updated - - -

And one of those rights, as pointed out in Loving v. Virginia, is the right to marriage.

 

Gays have always had the same marriage rights as anyone else.

 

Subtle?? You're reading different threads than I am lol...