common misconception about same sex marriage

[Kayla]

If You Are a Heterosexual and Do NOT Want to Enter into a Homosexual Marriage:

You will not be required to marry a gay person. This is a common misunderstanding. This decision actually does not affect you in any way.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/a-30 ... z2XaVZO5Xc

[Skip]

How stupid are Americans?
(Please don't tell me!)

[RickLewis]

If You Are a Heterosexual and Do NOT Want to Enter into a Homosexual Marriage:

You will not be required to marry a gay person. This is a common misunderstanding. This decision actually does not affect you in any way.

Read more: http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/a-30 ... z2XaVZO5Xc

This brilliant. Thanks very much for this link - I hadn't heard of cracked.com before. They seem to have a lot of amusing stuff there.

[Bill Wiltrack]

.








...............................................................








.

[Perspective]

Statistically, homosexuality is harmful - STDs, AIDS/HIV, mental illness, drug use etc. Laws (ie redefining marriage) should not encourage behavior known to be harmful.

And, society has a vested interest in unions which produce more society. Obviously not all man/woman marriages produce children. But children can only come from the union of a man & a woman. So this is why marriage between a man and a woman has served the purpose to help society (especially children). What benefit is it to society to honor harmful behavior between 2 people who engage in disordered imitations of sex?

[Flannel Jesus]

2 reasons:

Freedom, obviously, matters. A government telling you they don't want you having sex with women because they've determined it's not healthy enough probably wouldn't please you very much. You expect gay people to just accept it? Would YOU accept it?

The second thing is, being homosexual is not like this choice you can just turn on and off. Gay guys can't just wake up one day and decide to be attracted to women.

Prohibition of homosexuality, as far as I can tell, does far more harm than would be prevented by making it illegal. Sure, maybe there's less aids, but now there's a lot more people miserable in their lives because they have to pretend to be straight, or just be alone all their lives. If you had to choose between a risk of aids, vs perpetual loneliness and dissatisfaction, would you really choose the loneliness? And you would force that choice also on all the gay people in the world, instead of giving them the freedom to choose for themselves?

[Gary Childress]

2 reasons:

Freedom, obviously, matters. A government telling you they don't want you having sex with women because they've determined it's not healthy enough probably wouldn't please you very much. You expect gay people to just accept it? Would YOU accept it?

The second thing is, being homosexual is not like this choice you can just turn on and off. Gay guys can't just wake up one day and decide to be attracted to women.

Prohibition of homosexuality, as far as I can tell, does far more harm than would be prevented by making it illegal. Sure, maybe there's less aids, but now there's a lot more people miserable in their lives because they have to pretend to be straight, or just be alone all their lives. If you had to choose between a risk of aids, vs perpetual loneliness and dissatisfaction, would you really choose the loneliness? And you would force that choice also on all the gay people in the world, instead of giving them the freedom to choose for themselves?

Excellent rebuttal!

[accelafine]

The biggest question is why they even want to. What a waste of time and money. Might as well just marry yourself. Far less complicated and the divorce is a lot less messy. Marriage has always been a contract between outside interests and about ownership of women-- hence the 'giving away' of the bride.

[Gary Childress]

The biggest question is why they even want to. What a waste of time and money. Might as well just marry yourself. Far less complicated and the divorce is a lot less messy. Marriage has always been a contract between outside interests and about ownership of women-- hence the 'giving away' of the bride.

Fair point. However, in the US, marriage is treated differently from a tax perspective than being single. In some sense, I wonder if the whole point of gay marriage is to get the same tax breaks that a married couple gets. Thoughts?

[accelafine]

The biggest question is why they even want to. What a waste of time and money. Might as well just marry yourself. Far less complicated and the divorce is a lot less messy. Marriage has always been a contract between outside interests and about ownership of women-- hence the 'giving away' of the bride.

Fair point. However, in the US, marriage is treated differently from a tax perspective than being single. In some sense, I wonder if the whole point of gay marriage is to get the same tax breaks that a married couple gets. Thoughts?

I thought that just living tothether was no different in that regard.

[Gary Childress]

The biggest question is why they even want to. What a waste of time and money. Might as well just marry yourself. Far less complicated and the divorce is a lot less messy. Marriage has always been a contract between outside interests and about ownership of women-- hence the 'giving away' of the bride.

Fair point. However, in the US, marriage is treated differently from a tax perspective than being single. In some sense, I wonder if the whole point of gay marriage is to get the same tax breaks that a married couple gets. Thoughts?

I thought that just living tothether was no different in that regard.

In general, married couples filing jointly tend to get larger tax breaks compared to two people filing as single due to the way tax brackets, deductions, and credits are structured in the U.S. tax system. Here’s why:

https://chatgpt.com/share/67c11732-4e48 ... 081bd172c5

[accelafine]

Fair point. However, in the US, marriage is treated differently from a tax perspective than being single. In some sense, I wonder if the whole point of gay marriage is to get the same tax breaks that a married couple gets. Thoughts?

I thought that just living tothether was no different in that regard.

In general, married couples filing jointly tend to get larger tax breaks compared to two people filing as single due to the way tax brackets, deductions, and credits are structured in the U.S. tax system. Here’s why:

https://chatgpt.com/share/67c11732-4e48 ... 081bd172c5

I don't know about the US. I think in most developed countries couples living together are treated no different from married ones.

[accelafine]

I didn't realise this tread was so old. How the heck did it appear from the catacombs again?

[Gary Childress]

I thought that just living tothether was no different in that regard.

In general, married couples filing jointly tend to get larger tax breaks compared to two people filing as single due to the way tax brackets, deductions, and credits are structured in the U.S. tax system. Here’s why:

https://chatgpt.com/share/67c11732-4e48 ... 081bd172c5

I don't know about the US. I think in most developed countries couples living together are treated no different from married ones.

Let's find out what ChatGPT has to say:

In most countries, tax laws require individuals to file separately if they are not married. However, there are a few countries with progressive tax systems that allow single people to file jointly under certain conditions, often for those living together in long-term partnerships or domestic arrangements.

. . .

These examples show that while some countries do allow unmarried couples to file jointly under certain circumstances, it’s not the norm for "single" individuals who are not in a partnership. Many other countries have more restrictive laws, typically only allowing joint filing for legally married couples or civil unions.

https://chatgpt.com/share/67c118a4-9d18 ... d73719b8f5

[Gary Childress]

I didn't realise this tread was so old. How the heck did it appear from the catacombs again?

Looks like a poster who created his account in 2013 posted this today as his 17th post if the stats are correct.