most people have such a superficial understanding of this issue, the core of it does not come from hate, bigotry, religion, or intolerance, it boils down to the implemented system of taxation and federal benefits in the united states. I could be supportive of marriage equality IF, the government would repeal the 16th amendment, set a flat consumption tax, and get out of the business of defining ANY civil institution. bottom line, don't redefine marriage, undefine it, its a religious rite.
That's besides the issue. The government IS involved with marriage. You can't dispute that, whether or not you agree it should be. And since the government can't discriminate, it must recognize marriage equality.
Start another movement of "undefining" it for the government. But don't confuse it with the marriage equality movement.
well, by your logic, the government DOESN'T recognize marriage equality. You can't dispute that, whether or not you agree it should be.
was it ghandi that said, be the change you want to see in the world? your telling me to just accept the status quo? I thought the left was opposed to such things? if you don't like something, change it. undefining marriage would be the best way to get support from the vast majority. its an all fulfilling compromise.
dudeman5790, could you help explain to me how by UnitetheFight's logic the government doesn't recognize marriage equality? I'm a little confused by what you said, especially as part of the US Government does recognize marriage equality (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, New York and District of Columbia)
What I'm saying is, the movement for marriage equality is separate from your argument.
I'm not accepting the status quo - I'm asking to be included in a government institution that already exists that currently EXCLUDES the LGBT.
I'm not saying you should accept the status quo either. What I AM saying is, don't confuse the movement of marriage equality with a whole separate movement that you could start by having the government undefine marriage. Those are separate issues.
well, I cannot accept marriage equality as long as the government provides tax benefits to married couples. the federal government cannot just start recognizing any marriage, all of the brother sister couples, dog and owner couples, polygamists etc, would then come out of the hills just in attempt to get those federal tax benefits. do you see what I'm getting at?
No, I don't. Brother/sister couples are biologically harmful, dogs aren't sentient beings that are self-aware to make a commitment such as marriage, polygamy is a choice while being gay is not (just ask the APA). I'm sorry, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I see no logic in your statements.
I think dudeman does have a point. For the cause of gay rights, it is a middle ground which also takes the wind out of the oppoanants sails and can still ensure gay marages and will still put it on an equal footing. Tax credits should be given to all and those wont happen if law centers them around the traditional married family unit.
I remember listening to this tirelessly the night before I came out.
I knew that somewhere in my school, my church, or my community- somebody needed someone who was "out" and needed to have someone to come to.
Let that person be me; regardless the consequences.
cheerwine01 8 months ago
@cheerwine01, thank you very much for your comment; it touched me deeply.
SeanChapin1 8 months ago
WOW this is a Powerfull speach very well done Thank Your for posting it
gaycowboy31 1 year ago
♥♀♀♥ GIRL + GIRL = LOVE ♥♀♀♥
IndigenousQueen 1 year ago
sick
smackfags 2 years ago
Equality for all!
LOVEGOD241 2 years ago
Hope there will be alot of folks !!
Gaygreetings, Holebis ♥♂♂,♀♀♥
Holebis 2 years ago
I Cant Wait to marh on Wash DC
depfox 2 years ago
most people have such a superficial understanding of this issue, the core of it does not come from hate, bigotry, religion, or intolerance, it boils down to the implemented system of taxation and federal benefits in the united states. I could be supportive of marriage equality IF, the government would repeal the 16th amendment, set a flat consumption tax, and get out of the business of defining ANY civil institution. bottom line, don't redefine marriage, undefine it, its a religious rite.
dudeman5790 2 years ago
That's besides the issue. The government IS involved with marriage. You can't dispute that, whether or not you agree it should be. And since the government can't discriminate, it must recognize marriage equality.
Start another movement of "undefining" it for the government. But don't confuse it with the marriage equality movement.
UnitetheFight 2 years ago
well, by your logic, the government DOESN'T recognize marriage equality. You can't dispute that, whether or not you agree it should be.
was it ghandi that said, be the change you want to see in the world? your telling me to just accept the status quo? I thought the left was opposed to such things? if you don't like something, change it. undefining marriage would be the best way to get support from the vast majority. its an all fulfilling compromise.
dudeman5790 2 years ago
dudeman5790, could you help explain to me how by UnitetheFight's logic the government doesn't recognize marriage equality? I'm a little confused by what you said, especially as part of the US Government does recognize marriage equality (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, New York and District of Columbia)
SeanChapin1 2 years ago
Good point.
UnitetheFight 2 years ago
What I'm saying is, the movement for marriage equality is separate from your argument.
I'm not accepting the status quo - I'm asking to be included in a government institution that already exists that currently EXCLUDES the LGBT.
I'm not saying you should accept the status quo either. What I AM saying is, don't confuse the movement of marriage equality with a whole separate movement that you could start by having the government undefine marriage. Those are separate issues.
UnitetheFight 2 years ago
well, I cannot accept marriage equality as long as the government provides tax benefits to married couples. the federal government cannot just start recognizing any marriage, all of the brother sister couples, dog and owner couples, polygamists etc, would then come out of the hills just in attempt to get those federal tax benefits. do you see what I'm getting at?
dudeman5790 2 years ago
No, I don't. Brother/sister couples are biologically harmful, dogs aren't sentient beings that are self-aware to make a commitment such as marriage, polygamy is a choice while being gay is not (just ask the APA). I'm sorry, we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I see no logic in your statements.
UnitetheFight 2 years ago
I think dudeman does have a point. For the cause of gay rights, it is a middle ground which also takes the wind out of the oppoanants sails and can still ensure gay marages and will still put it on an equal footing. Tax credits should be given to all and those wont happen if law centers them around the traditional married family unit.
JustB3NJI 2 years ago
Awesome speech. He is so right...I am tired of hating. It's time to start loving again and especially one another.
karmadeiw 2 years ago
WE ARE ALL BEHIND YOU 100%
paulahare2 2 years ago
Once again Thank You
tommy2tone 2 years ago
Great speech. I so hope you are able to deliever this speech Wish I go be part of the march
tommy2tone 2 years ago
Awesome speech, but I hope your sentiments can go beyond America too :)
ramette99 2 years ago
Very nice, SEan. Thank you for sharing this inspiration. I look forward to marching with you.
jeynu1 2 years ago
Have a good march! I would come, but I live a bit far away (in Cologne, Germany). You should come to the pride parade over here sometime :)
Great vid! 5 starred, favourited and shared on Facebook :D
ramette99 2 years ago