Comments on: ACLU: Supreme Court Decision Could Boost Gay Marriage In Florida

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Sat, 11 Oct 2014 13:59:34 +0000

REGARDING THE STATEMENT:
“No government should interfere with the free associations of consenting adults”

Nor have they here. Those “consenting adults” have requested government involve itself in a matter which is essentially a contract betweej or among people. Without the contract with its legal obligations, as many as wish may associate with each other however they wish behind closed doors.

These want more. They want social acceptability via legal recognition. (Contemplate Article One, Section ten of The US Constitution, the contracts clause.) They also want monetary rewards associated with that contract. You telling them they shouldn’t be allowed to request that would violate their right to petition to correct what they believe to be a wrong.

And you already noted limitations when you required it to involve adults, no children forced into the marriage contract.

David for justice

By: David

David — Thu, 09 Oct 2014 20:30:13 +0000

The government should not be in the business of issuing marriage licenses. No government should interfere with the free associations of consenting adults.

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 16:57:23 +0000

CONTEMPLATING:
“They have destroyed the institution of marriage, something no other society has been able to do in all of recorded history.”

So nobody is married any longer?

If marriage depends on the courts, it was already in trouble.

I was just talking to a monument dealer. She told of a couple who had a pre-need double heart monument in the cemetery. The wife found the husband engaged in sexual congress with another lady. The soon to be non-wife had the stone returned to the quarries, cut his half off, put her broken half back up in the cemetery, delivered his broken half to his front step. (waste not, want not)

Cheating on your spouse is probably harder on the institution of marriage than letting somebody else get married. I already have the perfect wife. All other men and women will have to make do as best they can.

David for unbroken hearts

By: The DOER

The DOER — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 15:17:12 +0000

The court said Monday that it would not hear appeals from five states
whose same-sex marriage bans had been invalidated by lower federal courts.

When the highest court in the land goes off the reservation and declares
State law unconstitutional, and State constitutions unconstitutional,
where does one go to address the issue?

The SCOTUS is not the final say in any law, and they are not our rulers.
We the People are their rulers! And 1% does not overrule our Constitution either.

And Kimberly, if I die before my husband, he gets all of my benefits because I’ve been paying social security into the system for the past 25 years.

By: Bryan Bethea

Bryan Bethea — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 14:58:43 +0000

Social Security benefits are based on the contributions you paid into the system. If your husband worked for 40+ years and passes away before you, then you are entitled to draw on his contributions as his spouse. If you did not personally contribute into the system, then of course, when you pass your husband would not receive benefits. There would be none to pay him based on your contributions. Being straight or gay has nothing at all to do with how Social Security works. A gay couple would find themselves in your exact same position if one partner worked while the other didn’t.

By: Curious

Curious — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 13:26:11 +0000

They the government can legalize all they want but it will not be right in GODs eyes & that’s the only way to live is through him, without him we are nobody, no matter what some of us think & if we approve then we’re wrong too & also not living right with him. GOD made Adam & Eve, not Adam & Steve.

By: Bryan Bethea

Bryan Bethea — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 12:29:30 +0000

Fighting to keep gay couples from marrying has absolutely no effect on strengthening heterosexual marriages. If protection of marriage as a cultural institution is your goal, then logic dictates you allow any and all couples who wish to make those commitments to each other. The real issue destroying marriage is the availability of quick, no-fault divorces. Why don’t we see a crusade to ban divorce in the state constitution?

By: Kimberly

Kimberly — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 10:46:33 +0000

As a Christian, I believe in what the Bibles says. But, I don’t hate anyone.
IMO I think it’s unfair that if my husband dies, I would get his benefits, yet if I die first, my husband gets nothing. Gay couples who want to legally marry claim they should be entitled to the same benefits as we are, but from all I’ve read and heard, that isn’t the way it works. If “either” one should die, the other gets their “spouses” benefits.
How is this fair? Everyone is so worried about being PC these days. If I am rewarded for my husbands death, why not change the law so that my husband wouldn’t be punished after my death and get a mere $250 from SS to help w/ my burial?

By: Henry Coe

Henry Coe — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 08:03:28 +0000

I think government supporting any marriage is a Government endorsement of a religious concept.
Gay or Straight, I think Government should only provide a Certificate of Union to consenting adults. People should be able to make that legal commitment to those who are their family.
If the folks getting a government “Civil Union Certificate”, from their own personal beliefs decide to have a “religious marriage ceremony”, that’s their own business and government should have no part in that religious ceremony.
What people choose for their own lives should not be discriminated against by religious bigots trying to use laws to force their beliefs on to others.
America should be about Liberty and Freedom for each American, not about Religious Dogma and oppression.

By: Claire Hogan

Claire Hogan — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 00:06:03 +0000

I believe in equality, same sex couples should have the right to marry, enjoy a family, and grow old with their partner. Years ago Loving VS Virginia, fought for mixed race couples to marry. Live and let live. I am glad to have lived to see this day.