DOMA struck down!
- Thread starter Madea
- Start date
LisaC
I'm here to spin the moral compass.
I guess we have our gay thread of the day.... :whistle
They did, however, save the best quote for the last sentence of the article. "Chief Justice John Roberts criticized the president for this move during oral arguments in the case, saying the president lacked “the courage of his convictions” in continuing to enforce the law but no longer defending it in court."
They did, however, save the best quote for the last sentence of the article. "Chief Justice John Roberts criticized the president for this move during oral arguments in the case, saying the president lacked “the courage of his convictions” in continuing to enforce the law but no longer defending it in court."
S
stradial
Guest
What is DOMA?
And who here is surprised?
naturegirl
Rolling down the highway
Guard Dad said:
^^^I've been saying this for a long time. I don't care what you do in your bedroom just don't expect me to endorse it if you choose to share. The government shouldn't either. I would prefer we not even discuss it.
ShoeDiva
Shoes!!!!
naturegirl said:Guard Dad said:
^^^I've been saying this for a long time. I don't care what you do in your bedroom just don't expect me to endorse it if you choose to share. The government shouldn't either. I would prefer we not even discuss it.
I truly believe all of this is about all the other aspects of marriage not the bedroom. I do not want to discuss any bedroom stuff of anyone's, gay, straight, anything.
LisaC
I'm here to spin the moral compass.
ShoeDiva said:naturegirl said:Guard Dad said:
^^^I've been saying this for a long time. I don't care what you do in your bedroom just don't expect me to endorse it if you choose to share. The government shouldn't either. I would prefer we not even discuss it.
I truly believe all of this is about all the other aspects of marriage not the bedroom. I do not want to discuss any bedroom stuff of anyone's, gay, straight, anything.
I agree - this case had to do with the fact that the plaintiff had to pay estate taxes because the federal government refused to acknowledge her same-sex marriage. Had this been a hetero couple, the tax would not have been applied. This is about benefits, not what happens in the bedroom.
S
stradial
Guest
Did you know that when the country was young, it was against the law for a clergy person to preform a marriage?
It was strictly a legal affair and preformed only be legal persons.
No point, just a bit of trivia.
It was strictly a legal affair and preformed only be legal persons.
No point, just a bit of trivia.
LisaC said:ShoeDiva said:naturegirl said:Guard Dad said:
^^^I've been saying this for a long time. I don't care what you do in your bedroom just don't expect me to endorse it if you choose to share. The government shouldn't either. I would prefer we not even discuss it.
I truly believe all of this is about all the other aspects of marriage not the bedroom. I do not want to discuss any bedroom stuff of anyone's, gay, straight, anything.
I agree - this case had to do with the fact that the plaintiff had to pay estate taxes because the federal government refused to acknowledge her same-sex marriage. Had this been a hetero couple, the tax would not have been applied. This is about benefits, not what happens in the bedroom.
That's why a man should be able to marry his son or daughter on his deathbed. How can their possibly be anything wrong with that? I mean, there is no right and wrong anymore as long as we believe no one is harmed by it, correct?
ShoeDiva
Shoes!!!!
Grey Colson said:LisaC said:ShoeDiva said:naturegirl said:Guard Dad said:
^^^I've been saying this for a long time. I don't care what you do in your bedroom just don't expect me to endorse it if you choose to share. The government shouldn't either. I would prefer we not even discuss it.
I truly believe all of this is about all the other aspects of marriage not the bedroom. I do not want to discuss any bedroom stuff of anyone's, gay, straight, anything.
I agree - this case had to do with the fact that the plaintiff had to pay estate taxes because the federal government refused to acknowledge her same-sex marriage. Had this been a hetero couple, the tax would not have been applied. This is about benefits, not what happens in the bedroom.
That's why a man should be able to marry his son or daughter on his deathbed. How can their possibly be anything wrong with that? I mean, there is no right and wrong anymore as long as we believe no one is harmed by it, correct?
You can drink at work now? :confused
ShoeDiva said:Grey Colson said:LisaC said:ShoeDiva said:naturegirl said:Guard Dad said:
^^^I've been saying this for a long time. I don't care what you do in your bedroom just don't expect me to endorse it if you choose to share. The government shouldn't either. I would prefer we not even discuss it.
I truly believe all of this is about all the other aspects of marriage not the bedroom. I do not want to discuss any bedroom stuff of anyone's, gay, straight, anything.
I agree - this case had to do with the fact that the plaintiff had to pay estate taxes because the federal government refused to acknowledge her same-sex marriage. Had this been a hetero couple, the tax would not have been applied. This is about benefits, not what happens in the bedroom.
That's why a man should be able to marry his son or daughter on his deathbed. How can their possibly be anything wrong with that? I mean, there is no right and wrong anymore as long as we believe no one is harmed by it, correct?
You can drink at work now? :confused
Interesting you should mention it, but from the summer of 1988 until the summer of of 1992, I was paid to drink on duty.
ShoeDiva
Shoes!!!!
Grey Colson said:ShoeDiva said:Grey Colson said:LisaC said:ShoeDiva said:naturegirl said:Guard Dad said:
^^^I've been saying this for a long time. I don't care what you do in your bedroom just don't expect me to endorse it if you choose to share. The government shouldn't either. I would prefer we not even discuss it.
I truly believe all of this is about all the other aspects of marriage not the bedroom. I do not want to discuss any bedroom stuff of anyone's, gay, straight, anything.
I agree - this case had to do with the fact that the plaintiff had to pay estate taxes because the federal government refused to acknowledge her same-sex marriage. Had this been a hetero couple, the tax would not have been applied. This is about benefits, not what happens in the bedroom.
That's why a man should be able to marry his son or daughter on his deathbed. How can their possibly be anything wrong with that? I mean, there is no right and wrong anymore as long as we believe no one is harmed by it, correct?
You can drink at work now? :confused
Interesting you should mention it, but from the summer of 1988 until the summer of of 1992, I was paid to drink on duty.
And I get a gig like that how? :spitchick Just kidding!