JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

Page 1 of 3 12 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 119
  1. #1
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    5,379

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Given the size of the Democratic majority in the Senate, this looks good for a tenth gay marriage state.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; February 14th, 2013 at 12:18 PM.

  2. #2
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    65,723

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    There are some Democrats that will vote against it but not enough to stop it.

  3. #3
    JubberClubber White Eagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Kerrville
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Widower
    Posts
    10,990

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    A lot of those Illinois voters need to move to Texas.
    BEWARE! Harassing the Indian may result in sudden and severe hair loss.

  4. #4
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct
    The bill passed with 34-21!
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  5. #5
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    So excited ^_^
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  6. #6
    In the air tonight
    Red Storm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    951

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Way to go Illinois.

  7. #7
    Do you lick pussy?
    Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Houston
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    12,066
    Blog Entries
    11

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    This is great news for Illinois and me as I want to settle down in Chicago once I am done with this shit in California.

    And do keep the republican voters out of Texas. My home state is fine without them and it is projected Texas might become a swing state in subsequent elections. Which would be awesome considering the size of the population and amount of electoral votes we have.

  8. #8
    Halleluja! chrisrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,294

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    .
    Some details:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/p...,5929022.story

    Republican Sen. Tim Bivins, a former sheriff from Dixon who occasionally preaches from a church pulpit, argued vehemently against allowing same-sex couples to wed.

    Bivins sought to buttress his position with historical comments ranging from those of Thomas Jefferson, one of the nation's founders, to Jesus Christ and Elijah, major figures in the Bible's New and Old Testaments.

    "We're knocking down one of the basic foundations of society," Bivins said.
    From all indications, opponents of gay marriage such as Sen. Tim Bivins seem to be in a state of panic.

    Hold the phone... bill still needs to be approved by the Illinois House - the votes should be there.
    Last edited by chrisrobin; February 14th, 2013 at 10:38 PM.

    No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. - Eleanor Roosevelt

  9. #9
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Haha, the re is definitely not enough JUB representation in Chi-town!
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  10. #10
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    7,142

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisrobin View Post
    .
    Some details:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/p...,5929022.story


    From all indications, opponents of gay marriage such as Sen. Tim Bivins seem to be in a state of panic.

    Hold the phone... bill still needs to be approved by the Illinois House - the votes should be there.
    The House will be more contentious than the Senate, but they should still have the votes. It also sounds like they won't bring it up unless they know 100% that it will pass.

  11. #11

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    The voting percentage of Senate Democrats was 82.5%.

    Translated in the House, that is 59 votes, which is exactly half of the chamber, necessitating at least one Republican to pass. I think that's likely. The House vote everyone agrees will be slim, even razor thin, but then so it was in Maryland too.

    A House Committee could take up Senate Bill 10 in two weeks.
    Remember too that if the vote in the House is close, some of the Democrats who may abstain/not show up will be more inclined to vote in favor to put it over the edge.

  12. #12
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    Why? It's not a big deal. I'd feel bad for you if you'd be expected to get married because of this.

    Marriage is kind of an absurd institution on its face. The simple fact that people need this "married" label for their relationships is nonsensical.
    Yeah, ok, Ayn Rand. In the mean time, I'm so excited ^_^
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  13. #13
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Marriage equality is about ten times bigger than the actual issue of marriage, as JockBoy87 just implied. Whether you care about marriage - I happen to care - or whether you want to get married somewhere down the line - I happen to want to - is completely irrelevant.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  14. #14

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    I rarely log in to JustUsBoys anymore, but when I come here daily it is to check the progress of Marriage Equality on these forums, specifically the updates from JockBoy87. Kudos to you. Congrats everyone on this win. I'm sure June will be historic.

  15. #15
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct
    The idea that gay marriage will be somehow forced on you is about as ludicrous as the Christians claiming it's forced on THEM. If you don't want gay marriage, you're free to not gay marry.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  16. #16
    JUB Addict CoolBlue71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    State of Michigan
    Posts
    2,101

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    I'll be adding this to the topic . . .

    Obama’s Next Choice on Gay Marriage

    By Richard Socarides
    Feb. 15, 2013 | http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...-marriage.html

    Ever since President Obama’s sweeping embrace of gay equality in his recent Inaugural Address, the question for legal observers has been whether his Justice Department will follow up with Supreme Court arguments to match. The Court is scheduled to hear arguments in two potentially seminal gay-marriage cases next month, and the Administration is facing an important strategic legal decision.

  17. #17

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Stop using the term "equality" when this has nothing to do with actual equality. Allowing a percentage of the population to enter into a discriminatory institution (benefits-wise) is not "equality." For it to be "equality", all people must be offered the same benefits and preferences. Just because it is discriminating against other people does not mean it is not discriminatory.
    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    Why? It's not a big deal. I'd feel bad for you if you'd be expected to get married because of this.

    Marriage is kind of an absurd institution on its face. The simple fact that people need this "married" label for their relationships is nonsensical.
    It is a fucking joke. It is not about labels though. It is about a legal class. People who are married get a fuckload of benefits that singles do not get. Benefits that singles cannot get. Married? You get an unlimited exemption to transfer assets to your spouse. Unmarried? Subject to the normal yearly and lifetime exemptions. Married for ten years? Spousal benefits from social security. Unmarried, but cohabitating for 50 years? Fuck you, you get nothing. Without the status, you cannot obtain benefits even though your relationship is basically the same.

    That what this is truly about. If society became enlightened right now and decided to removed all public subsidies from marriage, then no one would give a fuck about it. They talk about hospital visits and rights (because there no health care proxies, right?) and love, but it is not about that. It is about the subsidies that they do not deserve, but society will not fight against.

    I think it will change eventually. Unmarried/single adults as a percentage of total population are increasing over time. At some points, singles will have the power to eliminate this bullshit.

  18. #18
    stop the bullshit rareboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    35,785

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by Rolyo85 View Post
    The idea that gay marriage will be somehow forced on you is about as ludicrous as the Christians claiming it's forced on THEM. If you don't want gay marriage, you're free to not gay marry.
    It is like an abortion. If you are against them, don't get one.

  19. #19
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by rareboy View Post
    It is like an abortion. If you are against them, don't get one.
    Not even! At least there is an actual moral argument where abortion is concerned. With gay marriage it's not even that. Literally NOBODY is harmed in ANY way by two dudes or chicks marrying.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  20. #20
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct
    Why the suspense? -_- In Washington the House and Senate votes were within a week of each other...
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  21. #21
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    Really, am I? This was me for about two weeks, sometime last fall:



    -I was despondent like that all because my wonderful boyfriend broke up with me all because I would not agree to get married someday.

    If gay marriage becomes a reality, gay marriage becomes the new normal. If gay marriage becomes the new normal, gay men everywhere will embrace it and expect it out of their relationships. Not only that, but society will expect it out of you, too. I don't want prodding questions when I'm 30 about "why aren't you married?!?"

    We've seen effect of these phenomena before. Nowadays, if you aren't sassy and boyishly charming like the little gay boys on Glee, you simply don't measure up as a gay man. This is all part of a greater desire by gay inc. to force its pigeonholed definition of what it means to be gay on our community.

    And you know what's sad? You better believe part of this is so they can create more gay Republicans. I've seen how a lot of these gay rights orgs. are trying to treat the Republicans with kid gloves, kneeling before any of them who vote for gay marriage, conveniently disregarding the fact that even gay-friendly Republicans want to let corporations pollute this planet into an uninhabitable hellscape.

    But it's ok, as you as you line up, let the fashionistas do what they want with you, embrace a robotic attitude, get married, put up your white picket fence, and become a Schwarzenegger/Nixon Republican, you should have nothing to fear!! :c\
    This is absolutely unfair. Straight people have had to deal with exactly the same problems since the dawn of civilization, and somehow they still manage to have relationships. I am sorry you had to break up with your bf, but ultimately, marriage isn't at fault here. Even ignoring all the legal benefits, marriage is simply a symbol. Some people care deeply about symbols, and some don't or even hate them. While it sucks when you click with someone on other levels but for that ONE thing, you can't ask to keep something away from people who, in their majority, want it, just because it was the reason for an unsuccessful relationship.

    It could just as easily have been children. Some gay (and straight for that matter) guys don't want kids. I absolutely want to have kids. If a guy I am dating doesn't want them, then it's an insurmountable deal breaker. What are we gonna do, prevent gay guys from having children?


    Thumbs up for the video selection though
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  22. #22
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Bravo to Illinois. I hope this passes and we can add yet another state to the growing list of those that realize equal treatment under the law is the best way to go.

  23. #23
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    7,142

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    It's highly relevant. Some of us don't want to have to conform to the marriage label, yet it will be forced on the gay community by fiat now that gay inc. have decided it's the most important battle of our time.



    See what I mean? The thought police have already determined I am a "troll" just because I don't want to have to deal with "marriage" and all of its baggage.
    No, you're being called a troll because you're insulting those of us that DO want marriage, or DO see the marriage equality battle as signifying bigger and better things to come.

  24. #24
    JUB Addict DigitalFudge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    5,800

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Can't believe this even needs to be debated

  25. #25
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    7,142

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by DigitalFudge View Post
    Can't believe this even needs to be debated
    It doesn't. Some gays don't seem to understand that it isn't actually about marriage. I pity them.

  26. #26
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    7,142

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    Thanks for the civil response. I get where you're coming from.

    I guess I'm just resistant to some parts of the modern gay movement. I'm probably generalizing too much.

    (glad you liked the video too - not to get OT but I'm stoked for the 2013 comeback)



    Why does that make me a troll, and how is anything I've said "insulting"? I haven't insulted anyone - I've posted my honest opinion on this.

    I wasn't coming at this from a perspective of "you gays don't deserve marriage" like some douchebags (including some GAY MEN with internalized homophobia). I just wanted to reject "mainstreamization" of gay life in the 21st century.

    Why is that so horrible?

    I also find it ironic that the people most vocal about "trolling" are the ones being the most specious, snide, and instigating in their responses. Typical.
    Spare me. You have insulted people in this thread several times. You plainly don't understand the motive behind the battle for marriage equality, and your analysis and criticism is superficial at best.

  27. #27
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct
    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    I read somewhere (sorry, I don't have the source so this is probably meaningless to you now, but humor me) recently that more and more gay men (i.e. younger ones) are expecting to have kids, so yes, that has changed things. I don't think it's for the worse (I think gay adoption is a great thing for people willing and able), but it's definitely changing things. Doesn't that poke a huge hole in your argument if true?

    It would have been sufficient to say that the desires of gay men who want to continue to see their lives as alternative lifestyles don't get to trump the desires of those who simply want equal rights.

    By making some conjecture about how the overarching opinions of the gay community might not have changed, you really went out on a limb, and not a very sturdy one at that.
    But that's not really a pressure, that's culture changing and people changing with it. Those who do it will WANT to. Those who don't want to will be exactly where they are now. So I still don't see a problem.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  28. #28
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct
    Also, I don't think he's trolling. Lets not get knee-jerk with the "troll" label.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

  29. #29
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    65,723

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    GOing to face a tougher road in the house. In addition to Republicians,there are several Democrats who will also vote against the bill. I'll celebrate when Gov. Quinn signs the bill and not until then.

  30. #30

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by GiancarloC View Post
    It has fucking everything to do with equality. Don't go making ridiculous demands of people on here. Marriage entails many different rights and that is most definitely about equality under the law. [...] And "just because it is discriminating against other people does not mean it is not discriminatory"? What kind of distorted logic is that?
    It has nothing to do with equality. Equality is not creating a class that receives preferential treatment over everyone else. That is inherently unequal. Giving tax breaks and other benefits to people for arbitrary status--like "married"--is not acceptable in egalitarian societies.

    It is worse because the benefits are completely unavailable to those who engage in practices that society does not like. Read the decision for Reynolds v. United State (1878) (the one about polygamy). The claim is that polygamy is bad because is not "western". This is not implied either. It is referred as "odious" and something from "Asiatic and African" cultures. There is no danger in polygamy. People just to not like it because it is something that the "other" does. Good christian americans are not polygamists.

    If it is wrong to discriminate against same sex partners, then it is wrong to do the same against multiple partners. The hypocrisy here is mind blowing. I do not even understand what type of intellectual disorder is required to hold such views.
    Quote Originally Posted by GiancarloC View Post
    Leave it to the au-contrarians. They always have something to complain about... never mind they seem to project the image they are unhappy that they can't get a boyfriend (as far as this topic is concerned).
    Yeah, that is it. People against the institution of marriage for reasons of inherent inequality and discrimination are upset that they cannot get a boyfriend. For reals.

    If only they could get laid, then they would change their minds.

    This is the most valid argument I have ever read. It should not be ridiculed at all.
    Last edited by itsmejeff; February 16th, 2013 at 09:31 AM.

  31. #31

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    Right. I was discussing earlier that the Senate Democrats voted at about the rate that would mean one vote short in the House. Also I posted an article that suggests this will depend greatly on urban Republicans for passage.
    If need be Quinn will pull a Cuomo and crack the whip on this and meet with fence-sitting legislators (he did the same with the civil unions bill, which also barely passed the House).

  32. #32

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by GiancarloC View Post
    It has absolutely everything to do with equality under the law, and it isn't about creating a class of anyone so they would receive preferential treatment.
    if it was not, then no one would care about marriage at all. People are not seeking the social benefits that come from marriage (whatever they may be). They want the tax breaks, subsidies, and other benefits. There are of a lot of benefits as well (http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...its-30190.html). All things that singles cannot get ever. No preferential status? Clearly. This is about the benefits of married status. Instead of being adults and calling for benefits to be eliminated, the selfish want to get in on it.

    The entire point of "gay marriage" (that is what stupid people call it) is to gain benefits that unmarried people do not get. It is not about equality (as it does not even support the ability of all adults to enter into a union). It is about greed.

    This is ignoring modern social theory and evidence of lack of monogamy among homosexual males too.

  33. #33
    Sex God tigerfan482's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Columbia
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    862

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    if it was not, then no one would care about marriage at all. People are not seeking the social benefits that come from marriage (whatever they may be). They want the tax breaks, subsidies, and other benefits. There are of a lot of benefits as well (http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...its-30190.html). All things that singles cannot get ever. No preferential status? Clearly. This is about the benefits of married status. Instead of being adults and calling for benefits to be eliminated, the selfish want to get in on it.

    The entire point of "gay marriage" (that is what stupid people call it) is to gain benefits that unmarried people do not get. It is not about equality (as it does not even support the ability of all adults to enter into a union). It is about greed.

    This is ignoring modern social theory and evidence of lack of monogamy among homosexual males too.
    The equality part comes from the fact that marriage benefits do already exist but are only available to select pairings of adults. Married individuals don't receive preferential treatment, but they do receive different treatment in terms of inheritance, hospital visitation, legal protections, etc. It's not just about taxes and subsidies. Assuming for a moment that there aren't any two people out there who want to enter into marriage as an indication of love and commitment, every benefit listed on the site you linked is available via marriage to two consenting opposite sexed adults. They have a choice whether to get married or not. Same sex couples do not have that choice is many areas of the country. You can argue how many people are involved in the marriage all you want, but the fact boils down to the system that currently exists allows any consenting adult man and any consenting adult woman to enter into marriage and enjoy all of those benefits while any two consenting adult men or any two consenting adult women cannot. Marriage equality means that any two consenting adults, regardless of sex, can make the choice to enter into a marriage, regardless of motivation or benefits derived.

  34. #34
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    7,142

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    It has nothing to do with equality. Equality is not creating a class that receives preferential treatment over everyone else. That is inherently unequal. Giving tax breaks and other benefits to people for arbitrary status--like "married"--is not acceptable in egalitarian societies.

    It is worse because the benefits are completely unavailable to those who engage in practices that society does not like. Read the decision for Reynolds v. United State (1878) (the one about polygamy). The claim is that polygamy is bad because is not "western". This is not implied either. It is referred as "odious" and something from "Asiatic and African" cultures. There is no danger in polygamy. People just to not like it because it is something that the "other" does. Good christian americans are not polygamists.

    If it is wrong to discriminate against same sex partners, then it is wrong to do the same against multiple partners. The hypocrisy here is mind blowing. I do not even understand what type of intellectual disorder is required to hold such views.

    Yeah, that is it. People against the institution of marriage for reasons of inherent inequality and discrimination are upset that they cannot get a boyfriend. For reals.

    If only they could get laid, then they would change their minds.

    This is the most valid argument I have ever read. It should not be ridiculed at all.
    How much was the last check you wrote to NOM?

  35. #35
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    23,026
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by RazorzEdge88 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by JB3 View Post
    Spare me. You have insulted people in this thread several times. You plainly don't understand the motive behind the battle for marriage equality, and your analysis and criticism is superficial at best.
    Where had I insulted anyone before your criticism? If you could point to one instance, I'll send you Cubs season tickets.
    I see the presentation of an alternative viewpoint. And while some readers may take offense to that viewpoint, I do not see an obvious or apparent attempt to insult [at least prior to the “joke” post].

  36. #36

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    The equality part comes from the fact that marriage benefits do already exist but are only available to select pairings of adults. Married individuals don't receive preferential treatment, but they do receive different treatment in terms of inheritance, hospital visitation, legal protections, etc. It's not just about taxes and subsidies [...] Marriage equality means that any two consenting adults, regardless of sex, can make the choice to enter into a marriage, regardless of motivation or benefits derived.
    Why should people have to enter into a relationship to receive the benefits? Why can two people who desire to enter into a legal agreement not do it? Those are the problems.

    Again, this "equality" is inherently unequal. Saying that it is acceptable because anyone can do it does not make it right.

    I do not have an estate that is taxable (with student loan debt, I have a negative net worth). But let's say that I did. Why should I be required to jump through hoops to transfer my estate tax free? Because I am not in a contract with anyone? Do you really think that people should be required to enter into a contract before dying to avoid taxes and those who do not should be denied that ability? How does that make any sense? Because all singles have the option to enter into a marriage that they do not want? Makes sense. You realize that is not just losers who are not married, right? There are many successful adults who are faced with social and financial disadvantage due to not being married. Some of them are coupled. Others alone.

    No one would argue that the 15th amendment created voting equality while allowing for the denial of voting rights to females. Maybe we need another 100 years before society will see the error regarding marriage.
    Quote Originally Posted by GiancarloC View Post
    The nonsense argument that there is preferential status is based on selfishness and naivete. The legal rights that are entailed by marriage are clear and evident.
    And those rights are clearly discriminatory. The preferred status is only offered to people in specific types of legal relationships. Logically, one cannot be opposed to limiting extension of rights to people who are in same sex relationships while limiting them for those who are in other types of relationships or no relationship at all. If it is wrong to limit some people, then it is wrong to limit anyone. You cannot justify different treatment based on something that does not matter because the law says that it is okay.
    My viewpoint is not being selfish, and rather the selfish viewpoint is the one you have posted and posted alone.
    "Give me tax breaks because I am in a contract with someone" is not selfish? Sorry, but that is the definition of selfishness. Recognition of a relationship (which should be treated as a business relationship) is not the same as providing benefits from public funds to certain people. Past establishment and social acceptance does not make it right either.

    It is not even like a change in law would benefit me. I have no plans for life. I just abhor the state denying rights, benefits, and privileges to anyone for arbitrary reasons. How is that selfish?
    This isn't about gaining benefits. This is about having the same rights as heterosexual married couples and being treated equally under the law.
    It is about gaining rights. The intelligent person--[Text: Removed]--would look at the state of marriage and conclude that any different treatment based on married status is wrong. The problem is not only allowing some people in. The problem is having the different treatment in the first place. "I deserve it because they have it" is not a valid justification for anything. It is child-like thinking.

    Who says that anyone should not be allowed to be married? I have no problem with anyone marrying anyone else (assuming able to enter into contract). My issue is that the people wanting "gay marriage" are just furthering establishing discrimination into law.

    As for your "the law says" and "definition" bullshit: the law is wrong and so are you. The case about polygamy which you would not read ([Text: Removed]) is racialist and discriminatory. But that is the legal decision. It created precedence. Is it right? Not at all. Anyone with any critical thinking skills can see that. Would you really be so supportive of a court that claimed homosexuality is wrong because it is from another culture and not viewed as compatible with American values? You keep coming back to the justification that discrimination is okay because the law says that it is okay.
    Last edited by opinterph; February 16th, 2013 at 09:31 PM. Reason: removed interpersonal baiting remarks

  37. #37
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    23,026
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    Equality is not creating a class that receives preferential treatment over everyone else. That is inherently unequal. Giving tax breaks and other benefits to people for arbitrary status--like "married"--is not acceptable in egalitarian societies.
    I think perhaps the early motivations to create marriage benefits revolved around the concept that they encourage and support values for the society that were/are considered “wholesome,” or beneficial. Rather than view the legal benefits as “preferential treatment,” I suppose it is just as suitable to label them as some type of reward for conforming to this idea that families help the nation to become and remain prosperous and strong.

    Tax breaks for married persons are not entirely dissimilar to the mortgage deduction available to homeowners. That deduction represents unfair (unequal treatment) because it rewards persons who participate in the housing market – which is arguably another thing that benefits society, prosperity, etc. Persons who reside in apartments or other rental housing are also quite likely to pay mortgage interest, though the mortgage is associated with their landlord~ who writes the costs off as an expense of doing business. Thus, the mortgage deduction is unfair, though it ostensibly functions to encourage the so-called “American dream.”

    Marriage contracts, per se, are regulated at the state level, but federal tax advantages are offered from the federal level. If I correctly understand the basic elements of the viewpoint you’ve presented, the government has no legitimate reason to become involved in the personal relationships of its citizens and certainly should not offer benefits that advantage certain associations at the expense of others – because that promotes inequality, or preferential treatment.

    Does my understanding of the viewpoint you’ve expressed reasonably coincide with the principles you intended?

  38. #38
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    23,026
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    Read the decision for Reynolds v. United State (1878) (the one about polygamy). The claim is that polygamy is bad because is not "western". This is not implied either. It is referred as "odious" and something from "Asiatic and African" cultures. There is no danger in polygamy. People just to not like it because it is something that the "other" does. Good christian americans are not polygamists.
    Polygamy has always been odious among the northern and western nations of Europe, and, until the establishment of the Mormon Church, was almost exclusively a feature of the life of Asiatic and of African people.

    – Chief Justice Waite


    Quote Originally Posted by itsmejeff View Post
    If it is wrong to discriminate against same sex partners, then it is wrong to do the same against multiple partners. The hypocrisy here is mind blowing.
    It appears that the prohibition of polygamy originated in English common law and that the basis for its ban, at that time, relied upon an understanding that the practice of multiple marriage partners is inconsistent with the principles of Christian marriage.

    The case of Reynolds v. United States, 98 US 145 (1878) essentially affirmed that protection of “the family” permitted enactment of specific legislation that was exempt from protection of religious freedom under the First Amendment.

  39. #39
    Halleluja! chrisrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,294

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by tigerfan482 View Post
    Bravo to Illinois. I hope this passes and we can add yet another state to the growing list of those that realize equal treatment under the law is the best way to go.
    At least the Illinois House doesn't have a Boner!

    No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. - Eleanor Roosevelt

  40. #40

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    I don't sense the same kind of enthusiasm in Quinn, but I hope he will follow in otherrs' footsteps, and as you say "crack the whip." Illinois doesn't have "whips" by the way, they have deputy and assistant leaders. Regardless of what you call them, they could all use a good cracking
    Probably because he doesn't need to as much. In New York they had more to overcome, plus it really says a lot that Republicans there have openly said that they want it passed ASAP and out of the way.

  41. #41

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    I think perhaps the early motivations to create marriage benefits revolved around the concept that they encourage and support values for the society that were/are considered “wholesome,” or beneficial. Rather than view the legal benefits as “preferential treatment,” I suppose it is just as suitable to label them as some type of reward for conforming to this idea that families help the nation to become and remain prosperous and strong.
    The government does not exist to reward "good" behavior. It is not your mom. The treatment is clearly preferential. Not allowing the same type of tax or social security benefits to singles places them at a financial disadvantage.
    Tax breaks for married persons are not entirely dissimilar to the mortgage deduction available to homeowners. That deduction represents unfair (unequal treatment) because it rewards persons who participate in the housing market – which is arguably another thing that benefits society, prosperity, etc. Persons who reside in apartments or other rental housing are also quite likely to pay mortgage interest, though the mortgage is associated with their landlord~ who writes the costs off as an expense of doing business. Thus, the mortgage deduction is unfair, though it ostensibly functions to encourage the so-called “American dream.”
    Except it does not. It provides an incentive for wealthy persons to purchase high value properties. Those who are most in need of assistance to purchase a home are the individuals would see the fewest benefits (it is literally tens of dollars per month; not much in terms of purchasing even a low cost home).

    In both cases, those with the most see the most benefits. They are most able to take advantage of what marriage provides.
    If I correctly understand the basic elements of the viewpoint you’ve presented, the government has no legitimate reason to become involved in the personal relationships of its citizens and certainly should not offer benefits that advantage certain associations at the expense of others – because that promotes inequality, or preferential treatment.
    The government should enforce contracts between people.

  42. #42

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    House Executive Committee will hold a hearing and vote on Senate Bill 10 on February 26

    http://www.washingtonblade.com/2013/...marriage-vote/

    There are 13 members on the committee, and eight are Democrats.
    Great news! I assume this means they have the votes to pass it if they are calling for a vote.

  43. #43

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by JockBoy87 View Post
    If a floor vote gets scheduled quickly I think it will be downhill from there.
    Word is a floor vote will be scheduled either on March 1st, or else the following week on the 6th or 7th.

  44. #44

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    If anyone can get this passed...it's Illinois! and it would be a huge momentum

  45. #45
    JUB Addict Ninja108's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    65,723

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Like Jockboy87 said,it is important for people in Illinois to call their local reps and make your viewpoints known.
    Also,keep in mind a couple of the holdouts are on the Democratic side,just like they are in RI and elsewhere. Do not assume because a person has a D next to their name that they will vote for this bill.

  46. #46
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    7,142

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by scream4ever View Post
    Probably because he doesn't need to as much. In New York they had more to overcome, plus it really says a lot that Republicans there have openly said that they want it passed ASAP and out of the way.
    It doesn't even matter. Quinn couldn't 'crack the whip' if he wanted because his own party hates him. (and for good reason) He's an impotent and ineffective leader. The only reason he got elected was because his opponent was just that bad.

  47. #47

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by JB3 View Post
    It doesn't even matter. Quinn couldn't 'crack the whip' if he wanted because his own party hates him. (and for good reason) He's an impotent and ineffective leader. The only reason he got elected was because his opponent was just that bad.
    Um, he was able to do just that with the civil unions bill.

    Remember that the vote for the bill is moving foreward in the House. The leaders in the House stressed that the bill would not proceed without sufficient votes.

  48. #48
    Halleluja! chrisrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    9,294

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by scream4ever View Post
    Um, he was able to do just that with the civil unions bill.

    Remember that the vote for the bill is moving foreward in the House. The leaders in the House stressed that the bill would not proceed without sufficient votes.
    If the House approves, Quinn will be there with his pen. However, Illinois has other fish to fry. There's a $22 billion shortfall in their pension plan. Keep the faith.

    No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. - Eleanor Roosevelt

  49. #49
    JUB Addict
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburbs
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Dating
    Posts
    7,142

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    Quote Originally Posted by scream4ever View Post
    Um, he was able to do just that with the civil unions bill.

    Remember that the vote for the bill is moving foreward in the House. The leaders in the House stressed that the bill would not proceed without sufficient votes.
    Quinn didn't push the civil union bill through. He's about as responsible for getting that law passed as he is for the marriage law. (that is to say, not at all) Any other recounting of how that law was passed does a great disservice to the lawmakers that DID work tirelessly to get the support to get it passed.

  50. #50
    Execuvette Rolyo85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Boystown, Chicago
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,931

    Code of Conduct

    Re: Illinois Senate Marriage Equality Debate

    I here something about first week of March.
    That we are capable only of being what we are, remains our unforgivable sin.
    - Gene Wolfe

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.