True Marriage Equality in Maine -Vote Yes On 1

Same Sex Nuptial is not marriage. Playing house is not marriage.Children want a Mommy and a Daddy. It is cruel and selfish to deprive children of their Dad or Mom by design. Orphans should not be used to justify same sex "marriage". Homosexuality has nothing to do with marriage.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Sam Putnam
• Bill Whitten
• same-sex marriage
• gay marriage
• gay
• lgbt
• Maine
• Jesse Connolly
• No on 1
• Protect Maine Equality
• Prop 8
• Maine Marriage
• Maine Marriage Equality
• Maine Gay Marriage

[MrTrty5]

I... I... Do YOU guys even know what you're talking about anymore? Did she seriously just compare Pedophiles to Gay people? OH GOD!!! IT'S ANITA BRYANT 2.0!!!!!!! D:

[leftbehind81]

@kenballer00 im not sure there are any states that recognize gay marriages from canada etc that they themselves dont allow gay marriage. But either way, you still do not receive the federal tax incentive.

[kenballer00]

@leftbehind81

first off, i was saying as a hypothetical in the future we can make it be recognized by the U.S.

secondly, DOMA does not keep states from making laws within their own state to recognize marriages from Canada or a state that still has gay marriage

[leftbehind81]

@kenballer00 i guess moving to canada is fine. I know a lot of people that do in fact simply move to canada. but moving to canada simply isnt an option for most people. btw, if you move back it will not be recognized by the us because president clinton signed the defense against marriage act in 1996.

[kenballer00]

@leftbehind81

your idea is something to think about but my question to you instead is why not marriage recognition from Canada or a state that still has gay marriage where gay couples can go there and come back to have it recognized by the U.S. instead of legally performing them in the U.S.

this would take care of all the complaints by the gay activists without redefining marriage for everyone else in the process

[leftbehind81]

@kenballer00 then my question is why not simply drop the tax incentive for marriage and increase the tax incentive for raising children. That would even allow for poor families with many children to get a higher tax cut.

[kenballer00]

the qoute i just showed you was from the Skinner v. Oklahoma U.S. supreme court case that the Loving court mentioned right after the qoute they said to make it apparent what they meant. its also the qoute that the Minnesota and U.S supreme court used to justify why gay marriage is not a right based in the Loving case or any case. so it is not just one judge but multiple supreme courts that understand the purpose of marriage

[kenballer00]

even if Baker was never decided, the Loving court was talking about procreation when they said that "Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very EXISTENCE and SURVIVAL". if you actually go back and read the case, you will notice that they referenced another U.S. supreme court case called Skinner v. Oklahoma along side that famous quote. does this quote sound familiar:

"Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race."

[leftbehind81]

@kenballer00 Second, It is not that I can accept or not accept Baker as SC decision. The fact is that Baker is simply not a SC decision and if you spent anytime reading what you reference you would know that. And it doesnt matter anyway other then it proves that you dont know what you are talking about.

[leftbehind81]

@kenballer00 First, I didn't ask you what you believed marriage was and your answer has nothing to do with whether or not you should get a tax break just for having heterosexual sex. I dont know why I bother even responding when you dont even read what I say and go off on your own tangent.