Obama Administration to use foreign aid for gay rights agenda

I am still in disbelieve over that, however what is your stance on the entire issue?

Then I'd argue that the definition of marriage needs to be changed to include people of the same sex. I have been and always will be a supporter of gay marriage. I don't think we should force churches to marry two people of the same sex but I believe they should have the option of marriage.

So much like what New York did, i for one agree.

The difference is that Stalin is using his standards to attack the internal consistency of our equal rights, whereas I don't care about the internal consistency of China's warped system. I won't deny that the US should recognize same-sex relationships (if we're going to recognize relationships at all), but I will not sit by as people claim direct falsehoods about whether or not homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals here.

OH YEAH!!

OH NO!!

Relationships, be it of a union or marital status, should be totally outside of the realm of government control. There shouldn't be any mandated political or legal benefit to marriage or unions.

Well it appears you're good for something after all.

So, basically what you're saying is: 1. Remove "marriage" from the legal system, and institute civil contracts between two people, which must be witnessed by a specific person(s), which still give the benefits and legal standing as what is on the books today. 2. Specific members of religious institutions can be legal witnesses of a civil union, allowing people to "marry" but also allowing same-sex partners to form legal unions as well. I like it.

I don't see the difference at all. In fact, I'm going to offer you the same ultimatum you gave Imperial. Either your are for reforming the US federal government's definition of marriage, or you aren't. And if you are for it then you shouldn't have a problem here.

Side-note: Do I win?

Now that I'm done wiping away my single tear, I want you to know how charming you are.

For the most part, yes, but that's not the point. All that is nice, but it shouldn't be inherently attached to marriage or a union. Those should be completely outside of the government or legal system, and be strictly a religious or ceremonial occurrence. Two people could be free to apply for those benefits under separate documentation, whether they are married or not, if they find it appropriate. No matter what, the two should not be inherently attached.

I am, but at the same time I understand that the statement "homosexuals have equal rights in the US" is true. They aren't mutually exclusive.

Never. You scoundrel.

Kali here is where you are wrong.

*In federal Law, LGBT are not protected against workplace discrimination.
*In 1985 the ability for a LGBT to give blood was taken away and is still taken away (Aids and all that)
* The vast majority of states will not allow same sex partners to adopt.
*You will be dined acceptance s to a catholic school if your parents are gay, on the grounds its sin. Yes it is a private institution i get that but (However they should expel any one who parents had a divorce, whore a condom , birth control, or any other sin)
*No protection to LGBT in the housing market, when it comes down to Lends no protection to LGBTs when purchasing,renting,or leasing a home. Not to mention there is nothing stopping people from kicking homosexual couples out of there community (They have a right to live where they please)
* The boy scouts will not allow gay men to become leaders, or allow there parents (or gay parents) to do any volunteer work for the scouting.

So it's not all equal rights as you claim.

Motherfucker.....

If it makes you any feel better i think you won.

If Catholic schools did that here they would be shut down immediately. The government threatened to shut them down if they didn't allow gay straight alliances.

The people shouldn't have to be a couple, or otherwise engaged in a relationship to receive said benefits at all. They are free to apply for them outside of a religious or ceremonial union or relationship, whatever the nature of that be, but in no way, shape, or form should they be attached, not even within the context of a government mandated "union".

They still don't in most cases, but when the Government get jerstiction over private schools especially catholic ones.