The platform isn't a list of legislation they want to pass. It spells out their philosophy. You should expect most republicans to promote legislation and use their bully pulpit to promote stable marriages. I think it's undeniable (you science denier!) that good marriages (hetero or homosexual or whatever) lead to success of all kinds. The two incomes alone means likely able to provide better, pay for rotten ObamaCare, and so on. Because many republican voters want hetero marriages boosted, they're going to cater to their constituents. Many democrat voters do too. That doesn't mean they all are against homosexual marriage. It's not that hard to understand. Hiliar was against Gay Marriage before she was for it. It's hard to tell if she's sincere about anything. http://www.pewforum.org/2016/05/12/changing-attitudes-on-gay-marriage/
4 years ago, the platform called state court decisions legalizing same-sex marriage "an assault on the foundations of our society." Seems like they budged from that MUCH WORSE position. http://www.npr.org/2016/07/13/485899139/republican-platform-tilts-right-of-trump-on-lgbt-issues EDIT: Bopp and most other delegates supported language in this year's platform that says children "deserve a married mom and dad," and refers to "natural marriage" as between a man and a woman. Bopp says delegates' concern "has nothing to do with whether or not gays are getting married." Rather, he says, it's that 40 percent of the births in the U.S. are by girls and women who are not married.
“You have the right to a father and mother. If you cannot afford a father or mother, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? ” barfo
Better than the DNC platform: "If you have a baby, we'll pay you more welfare if you stay out of wedlock." http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/03/n...rage-marriage-studies-say.html?pagewanted=all Strict Limits on Welfare Benefits Discourage Marriage, Studies Say
Yeah, if you won't explain the relevance of gay sibling marriage (as opposed to, say, straight sibling marriage), we can't really proceed. It's a shame.
Left wing Brookings Institution. http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2001/06/summer-childrenfamilies-horn Marriage: A Social Good under Attack Although some observers question the propriety of promoting marriage, countless studies demonstrate that children, on average, fare better in continuously married households than in any other family structure. Married adults, women as well as men, are happier, healthier, and wealthier than their unmarried counterparts. And communities with higher marriage rates evidence fewer social pathologies, including crime, educational failure, and poverty, than do those with lower marriage rates. Congress got it right when it said that one goal of welfare reform ought to be to promote marriage. ... Second, when couples do get married, public policy frequently punishes them economically. The U.S. tax code, for example, contains a marriage penalty for high-earner, two-income couples. And the earned income tax credit penalizes lower-wage married couples. Moreover, welfare rules have frequently made it harder for married households than for single-parent households to get benefits. Although few couples sit down and calculate the possible economic effects of getting married, there is a sense, especially within low-income communities, that getting married means you lose "stuff." Couples may not be able to calculate exactly how much "stuff" they stand to lose, but they know marriage, at least financially, is a bad deal. And they are right. According to calculations by Eugene Steuerle of the Urban Institute, a single mother working full-time at a minimum-wage job who marries a man working full-time at $8 an hour stands to lose $8,060 in cash and noncash welfare benefits. Under such circumstances, the wonder is not that few low-income couples marry, but that any do. (So republicans oppose this? Where's the beef?)
Ha! The definition of marriage has not changed. The thing that has changed is, the state will now issue you the license and not check to see if you actual marry. Fine, what every blows your skirt up! Ha! Now no need to see under the skirt or what ever. But they still check close relatives??? When will this change?
He won't answer, so I'll try to extrapolate. Prohibitions on incestuous marriage are presumably based on the increased likelihood of birth defects from incestuous procreation. Gay couples are not capable of generating progeny without an outside genetic source. Therefore the prohibition of incestuous marriage should not apply when both members are same-gender. I can only assume this is where Marazul is coming from on this. Do we know if he has a brother?
I am certainly not defending or agreeing with MarAzul if this is the case, but I assume he is thinking that straight siblings aren't allowed to get married because they can have children together. Gay siblings don't have that problem. I could be completely wrong though.
Yeah, that makes sense. Laws about incest vary from state to state. The main concern about incest, as I understand it, is the concern that parental figures will take advantage of that relationship with their children, even if the children are above legal age. I don't know how problematic that would actually be, but I think that's the main issue, especially considering some states forbid even non-blood-related "incest" like someone with their stepparent. I would suspect that people don't care enough about the nuance on incest to carefully craft laws to allow sibling marriage in cases where procreation is impossible (which can be true for straight siblings too, if one or the other is impotent/can't conceive).
A very important question! Also we need to establish what happens if someone from another planet wants to marry a tree, a rock, and the color orange. barfo
My dad was a great guy and an army soldier that fell out of the picture when I was 8. (He didn't die but I'm not gonna go into detail about it). My mom raised me fine and I got a more stable life from him falling out of the picture because we didn't have to move from base to base every couple years. I'm fine with what happened and I think I became a better person because of what I saw my mom go through by herself. Really, every situation is unique. Yeah, you can cluster kids from straight and gay parents and try to analyze how each kid is doing but every situation is unique. The right parent(s) are able to raise the right kid and fucked up parents will have a fucked up kid. Regardless of gender, that's how it is.
Kids that have married parents are better off than kids that have divorced parents. Are we gonna take issue with divorces too?
