Jon Stewart in High Form-

[RBS51]

First he shreds the banking industry and the treasury dept. Then he goes to new Jersey to show how people whose ancestors had to fight for their rights now believe it is God's blessing that they can demonstrate against gay people advocating their own rights.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/120222/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-tue-jan-12-2010

 

[BenIsForRon]

Yep, it was a great episode. People are starting to get the picture that we need to hit the streets.

 

[BlackTerrel]

I liked the first section - about the banking industry.

Stewart is definitely a liberal though. Gay people can be gay all they want - but I don't see why they should be allowed to marry someone of the same sex. That is not equal rights that is more rights.

 

[RBS51]

I liked the first section - about the banking industry.

Stewart is definitely a liberal though. Gay people can be gay all they want - but I don't see why they should be allowed to marry someone of the same sex. That is not equal rights that is more rights.

When you think about "gay marriage" you can't be superficial.

Marriage is traditionally a religious rite that encourages propagation of the species.

But economically and politically, marriage is different. The biggest issues are the right to confer contractual obligations - health care and rights of spousal medical control are the most important. There is no reason why a legal bond could not be created that would confer the economic and political advantages of "marriage" to a committed couple without touching the "moral" issues (which, by the way, are none of the government's damn business).

 

[__27__]

I liked the first section - about the banking industry.

Stewart is definitely a liberal though. Gay people can be gay all they want - but I don't see why they should be allowed to marry someone of the same sex. That is not equal rights that is more rights.

Um. So saying they can't marry is equal rights? Marriage is a contract between two individuals, nothing more. Forbidding any two individuals from entering into a contract while permitting others to do so is discriminatory, and is in NO WAY equal protection under the law. Do not confuse marriage as a religious doctrine, which is the purview of you and your church alone, with marriage as a contract between two individuals. So long as the state has any involvement in marriage, i.e. tax benefits, etc. the contract must be open to all. This does not mean your church (or my church) has to marry gays, but they should not be forbid from entering the contract.

 

[RBS51]

I liked the first section - about the banking industry.

Stewart is definitely a liberal though. Gay people can be gay all they want - but I don't see why they should be allowed to marry someone of the same sex. That is not equal rights that is more rights.

WRONG - if you love someone they have the right to be your economic and political beneficiary on a non-discriminatory basis.

 

[speciallyblend]

I liked the first section - about the banking industry.

Stewart is definitely a liberal though. Gay people can be gay all they want - but I don't see why they should be allowed to marry someone of the same sex. That is not equal rights that is more rights.

what?? any person haS THE RIGHT TO MARRY ,STRAIGHT PEOPLE DO NOT OWN OR COPYRIGHT THE WORD MARRIAGE IF SO PLEASE SHOW ME THE PATENT OR COPYRIGHT? oops caps, gays have every right to use the word marriage to stand for their union.

why are you so concerned about gays marrying unless someone is forcing you to marry the same sex?? which would be a crime and kidnapping..

really confused on why you think gays don't have the right to marry like straight folks, let me guess cause the bible says so?? well the bible didn't copy right marriage and marriage existed far before bible thumpers...

if a church doesn't want to marry gays that is fine upto that church, but not up to you or me...

dude that is flat out equal rights.. has nothing to do with special rights........ really none of yours or mines business who folks marry..

i am sorry gay marriage has nothing to do with special rights if states wouldn't violate their rights to marry..and by the way gay is not a choice ,if so your bi and choose to be straight..think about it really do actually christians hi-jacked the word marriage(but they never patented or copyrighted it),kinda like the gop trying to hi-jack the tea party!

 

[BlackTerrel]

When you think about "gay marriage" you can't be superficial.

Marriage is traditionally a religious rite that encourages propagation of the species.

But economically and politically, marriage is different. The biggest issues are the right to confer contractual obligations - health care and rights of spousal medical control are the most important. There is no reason why a legal bond could not be created that would confer the economic and political advantages of "marriage" to a committed couple without touching the "moral" issues (which, by the way, are none of the government's damn business).

So what if two buddies want to marry?

why are you so concerned about gays marrying unless someone is forcing you to marry the same sex?? which would be a crime and kidnapping.

I'm not so concerned with it and honestly it is very low on my list of priorities. But I do believe that marriage means a man and a woman.

 

[speciallyblend]

WRONG - if you love someone they have the right to be your economic and political beneficiary on a non-discriminatory basis.

exactly

 

[speciallyblend]

So what if two buddies want to marry?




I'm not so concerned with it and honestly it is very low on my list of priorities. But I do believe that marriage means a man and a woman.

i hear you, and that is fine you believe that but that doesn't mean you get to dictate your beliefs on to others. now if gays were trying to take your rights away to marry a woman. then i would be fighting for your rights..

 

[RBS51]

exactly

exactly, and precisely..... it's not the business of government ( or your buisiness) if they go to bed with each other or not. If they want to confer certain legal and contractual rights to each other they should have the right.

 

[RBS51]

So what if two buddies want to marry?




I'm not so concerned with it and honestly it is very low on my list of priorities. But I do believe that marriage means a man and a woman.

Tryin to make it real, ain't ya? Compared to what?

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Government has no business being involved in marriage whatsoever, whether to allow or to disallow. Likewise, the idea that married people should be taxed at a different rate than single people is repugnant, and likely creates more divorces than it creates successful marriages. Government should not even recognize that marriage exists whatsoever. Government only first got involved in licensing marriage during reconstruction after the Civil War in an attempt to prevent interracial marriages. The practice of government licensing marriages is a holdover from the original form of segregation, and it needs to be done away with.

 

[__27__]

Government has no business being involved in marriage whatsoever, whether to allow or to disallow. Likewise, the idea that married people should be taxed at a different rate than single people is repugnant, and likely creates more divorces than it creates successful marriages. Government should not even recognize that marriage exists whatsoever. Government only first got involved in licensing marriage during reconstruction after the Civil War in an attempt to prevent interracial marriages. The practice of government licensing marriages is a holdover from the original form of segregation, and it needs to be done away with.

Spot on Gunny.

 

[Met Income]

So what if two buddies want to marry?




I'm not so concerned with it and honestly it is very low on my list of priorities. But I do believe that marriage means a man and a woman.

You can believe what you want to believe. You don't have a right to enforce those beliefs on others.

 

[Stary Hickory]

When you think about "gay marriage" you can't be superficial.

Marriage is traditionally a religious rite that encourages propagation of the species.

But economically and politically, marriage is different. The biggest issues are the right to confer contractual obligations - health care and rights of spousal medical control are the most important. There is no reason why a legal bond could not be created that would confer the economic and political advantages of "marriage" to a committed couple without touching the "moral" issues (which, by the way, are none of the government's damn business).

Part of it is this but part of it is the very aggressive gay movement who is always trying to be in your face about it. This is what is giving the gay movement a lot of trouble. Legislated respect simply is not possible.

However obviously I don't care if a gay couple want to enter into a legally binding relationship. Though I do think that demanding the title married is what is driving most of the opposition. Marriage is a very spiritual thing for many folks. It's a traditional union of man and woman. When they gay movement demand that this title they are trampling on people's religious beliefs in many cases.

This is a big source of their pain. If the gay movement would simply title it differently half of the issue would go away. But they press the issue because they want legislated respect....and this is not going anywhere positive.

 

[Met Income]

Part of it is this but part of it is the very aggressive gay movement who is always trying to be in your face about it. This is what is giving the gay movement a lot of trouble. Legislated respect simply is not possible.

However obviously I don't care if a gay couple want to enter into a legally binding relationship. Though I do think that demanding the title married is what is driving most of the opposition. Marriage is a very spiritual thing for many folks. It's a traditional union of man and woman. When they gay movement demand that this title they are trampling on people's religious beliefs in many cases.

This is a big source of their pain. If the gay movement would simply title it differently half of the issue would go away. But they press the issue because they want legislated respect....and this is not going anywhere positive.

Two gays getting married has nothing to do with your marriage. If it does, then something is wrong.

 

[speciallyblend]

Government has no business being involved in marriage whatsoever, whether to allow or to disallow. Likewise, the idea that married people should be taxed at a different rate than single people is repugnant, and likely creates more divorces than it creates successful marriages. Government should not even recognize that marriage exists whatsoever. Government only first got involved in licensing marriage during reconstruction after the Civil War in an attempt to prevent interracial marriages. The practice of government licensing marriages is a holdover from the original form of segregation, and it needs to be done away with.

spot on but not reality ,so for now gays should have the right to marry like straight people until we change the laws. we have to deal with this issue.

gays should have the same rights as straight people to marry no matter if gov is involved or not....

 

[speciallyblend]

Part of it is this but part of it is the very aggressive gay movement who is always trying to be in your face about it. This is what is giving the gay movement a lot of trouble. Legislated respect simply is not possible.

However obviously I don't care if a gay couple want to enter into a legally binding relationship. Though I do think that demanding the title married is what is driving most of the opposition. Marriage is a very spiritual thing for many folks. It's a traditional union of man and woman. When they gay movement demand that this title they are trampling on people's religious beliefs in many cases.

This is a big source of their pain. If the gay movement would simply title it differently half of the issue would go away. But they press the issue because they want legislated respect....and this is not going anywhere positive.

well when states take your right to marry away because you gay and any legal rights . you have every right to be aggressive toward laws that violate equal rights. Liberty for some but not them is not liberty at all. marriage you do not own the word the church doesnt own the word marriage,please show me who patented and copyrighted the word marriage, you know get over it.


if you have no problem with gays? then why are you concerned if they get married you dso not choose what the term marriage means. you can define how you like but that does not give you the right to define marriage for others..
are you forced to marry same sex? no then this issue is mute. they are not going for special rights just equal rights under marriage!!

 

[silverhandorder]

I think marriage should not be politically recognized. So two gay people can say they are married and there is nothing you can do about it.

edit: and a church, hospital or any other private establishment can choose if they want to recognize that or not.