Subway Sandwich.

no, I have the exact same limits concerning marraiges.... Noone is allowed to marry a same gender, a close relation, multiple partners. All limitations EQUALLY applied to all.

if a straight man was allowed to marry another straight man, while a gay man was not allowed, you'd have a valid complaint. All you have currently is "I want tax breaks too" Those are privlidges that I'm under no obligation to extend for whatever reasons I feel are important.

 

Oh, you mean just like how blacks and whites had the same rights as long as they didn't marry each other?

- - - Updated - - -

That's a load of crap, and you know it. You've been here long enough to know that there is a hell of a lot more to marriage than tax breaks. Quit insulting our intelligence.

 

Gay is a behavior.... black is not.... false analogy


and bullspit it's about marraige.... if it was only about that, Civil Unions would be fine... but the difference between Civil Unions and Marraige is ...... TAX BREAKS

 

marriage is a basic civil right. the 14th amendment precludes discrimination based on race, religin or GENDER.

they are denied the right to marry.

 

Wrong- I'm gay 24/7, not just when I have sex. Being gay is just that- a state of being.

Civil unions do not offer the same rights and responsibilities. This has been explained to you many times, over several months.

 

They don't have the same rights.

 

A "sandwich tech" seriously?

 

same argument was tried and failed regarding interracial marriage.

the 14th amendment precludes discrimination based on race, religin or GENDER.

they are being denied a civil right based on gender. that is not allowed.

 

all marriage is behavioral. you have no evidence that homosexuality is behavioral, any more so than heterosexuality.

seperate but equal is unconstitutional. there is no constitutional justification for denying same sex couples the right to marry.

 

Keep putting the typically-homophobic stuff out there, keep getting the typical response.

- - - Updated - - -

No, you have an obligation to be 'realistic', which you are not being. Homosexual people are being discriminated against, and you either do not care or you WANT that discrimination.

Otherwise, your commentary is typical BS.

 

Yep. He's full of sh__ and should know it.

 

Marriage is not a right. A right can NEVER depend on the actions of another human being.

There is nothing currently in the Constitution which gives the federal government the authority to define marriage or otherwise deny, restrict, limit, sanction or license a personal relationship.

Get the government out of marriage altogether. Allow people to have contracts which can be recognized by anyone regardless of their personal beliefs or religion. For that matter, the contract would be handy for elderly -- like two elderly sisters living together for example. In a marriage, your spouse is automatically able to make next-of-kin decisions when you may not want that aspect. They might want to keep you alive when you would pull the plug. A contract would be customizable.

- - - Updated - - -

There is no need to give the govt even more power.

 

I believe an inalienable right cannot be transferred or shared.

 

Marriage is a right. Sorry you hate equal treatment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

 

so is gun ownership.... but restrictions are put on it as well.
so is free speech.... but restrictions are put on it as well.


Marriage is a right. And so long as those restrictions are applied to straights the same way they are applied to gays.... no "equality" issues exist.


NOONE is allowed to marry multiple partners regardless of religion.
NOONE is allowed to marry the same gender regardless of gender or sexual preference.



If I was allowed to marry a guy, but a gay guy was not allowed to...then, AND ONLY THEN, would there be a equal rights violation.


So no RIGHTS are being violated. Sorry.

 

and noone is stopping gays from doing that. Not being able to marry does not prevent any of that.

- - - Updated - - -

same rhetoric... Interacial comparison.

Except gay sex is a behavior... black is not.

 

The freedom to be free from "icky-ness".

 

Twelve states and the District of Columbia disagree with you.

 

Yes, and that doesn't mean that the other 38 states agree with him either. . .they are just moving at their own pace toward "enlightenment!"

 

Nope. . . he actually doesn't care much about what you think of his sandwich. . .he just wants to make sure that if you get a discount on your sandwich for asking for it politely, he gets it too.

And he wants to make sure that, if you're allowed to eat your sandwich right there, sitting at a table with a nice cold drink, he doesn't have to hide in the bathroom to eat his.

 

Why do you talk that way?

[video=youtube;6YZNy7mhRvw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YZNy7mhRvw[/video]

Haha I'm just messing around. Anyway, the op's point is valid in my opinion, but the analogy is slightly off-target. Legal marriage is about tax, not relationships. The problem isn't that there's a prohibition on gays signing marriage contracts, there isn't - the problem is that the government determines how much they'll steal from you based on whether your household fits the bill for their interpretation of a Christian sacrament.