disposal of wasteOriginally Posted by Brian96
|
|
|
|
|
disposal of waste
Are there restrictions against same-sex marriages? I don't think the government has any restrictions against same-sex marriages, they just don't recognize them. There is a difference. Exactly what is a marriage? Isn't the purpose of marriage two people who love each other joining together to spend the rest of their lives together? Do same-sex partners need government permission to do that?
While we're naming government controls we don't like, I wish the speed limit were higher on 167 between Ruston and Alexandria and I'd like "80" mph speed limits on the interstate.
I am also highly in favor of removing legislation that bans the wearing of masks in public. These laws are highly discriminatory against certain gorilla suit wearing individuals.
According to the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), there are over a thousand federal laws that treat married people differently from single people.
Now, the issue is that the government should not recognize marriage period (or at least only as a basic partnership as in standard business agreements). I'm pretty sure the government has tried to promote marriage by fostering special privileges for married people (particularly with respect to the insurance companies, etc.). In doing this, they certainly create a government incentive to wed, which does directly discriminate against same-sex couples that cannot wed and get the same benefits (i.e., the government only allows the insurance companies to extend coverage to "families," which same-sex couples cannot by definition be a part of).
It should without doubt be up to those insurance companies as to whom they offer benefits to. So, I'd have NO PROBLEM with State Farm deciding that it wanted to recognize marriage, but only if it was between members of the opposite sex (or only 1 marriage per partner at a time). Perhaps Aflac will offer similar benefits to same-sex couples, and same-sex couples will naturally get insurance where they can get benefits to the levels they desire.
The only tricky part to me is that as long as the government defines liabilities in businesses in accordance with their business structure (corporation, partnership, etc.), I think a marriage should probably be considered a legal partnership. In this case, it is just complicating the economic system to not allow same-sex couples to form the same partnerships as heterosexual partners.
no sh*t...i bought a brand new windshield just for an inspection...and two months before I had to get another inspection...i had to buy ANOTHER f'ing windshield!!!
This thread should not have gone so long without updating. Here's another one:
My testicles. I understand that testosterone is a "controlled substance." Does that mean the government is concerned about my testicles? Stay out of my pants Uncle Sam!
Exactly. The government has no business with your testicles or your girlfiends ova.
^ Yes. Could it be that I agree with Salty again?
Good to see you coming around to my way of thinking.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
