Opinion
Disagree with your neighbor? Don't just stew over it; write about it. Flag as Inappropriate
Posts awaiting your approval 0
Kim Jung un April 2, 2013 at 04:38 am
Not going to lie Kim Jong Un's threats are becoming more intimidating. Does anyone actually think he…Read More will act on his threats? I personally think he is crazy enough to.
shara mulholland April 10, 2013 at 05:03 pm
Really? So they can start banning sports because of injuries.
Just my opinion April 10, 2013 at 11:22 am
One big issue is even though my child plays school sports she plays travel sports so an injury from…Read More travel might not be recorded as travel and go under school making the study wrong. Many children play outside of school how would they make sure they have proper data. Maybe they should document something that they can be sure that the info they use is correct.
Mike Atkins April 8, 2013 at 07:45 am
@Sean, irrelevant, only because parents think their child is the next great athlete and are willing…Read More to pay the thousands of dollars to get them a spot on a team. Typically many of those child athletes would have a difficult time making the HS team without Daddy's money.
Jon Crickmore April 2, 2013 at 09:43 am
Not allowing all FACTS to be made public is an injustice for all citizens.
Malvi Lennon March 28, 2013 at 01:43 pm
In my opinion the reason to keep an investigation private is two fold - protects the criminal…Read More prosecution - proetcs the accused because in our contry innocent until proven guilty.
With the Newtown massacre there will not be a criminal prosecution - and the perpetrator killed himself on site. So what is there to protect? So in my oponion photos showing the victims and reports explaining the injury suffred by each victim speficially should remain seal out of respect for the families of the victims.
However all other information should be release. Particularly because the Malloy administration and many legislators want to pass new laws which will impact every single law abiding gun owner in the state. Politcians are hell bent on doing "something", yet whatever it is they "do" is NOT based upon the FACTS -
Hunter March 27, 2013 at 10:01 pm
Sam, you do make a great argument, and you do so in a respectful way.
I do get your point about if…Read More they mean the same, why aren't they called the same.
But the issue, maybe not for you or me, but for others out there, is that cultural differences are difficult, if not impossible to change. Gay couples, unfortunately by many, will never be seen the same as the 'traditional' male-female couple.
I told you that this issue would generate harsh feelings in many, but I also notice that you have debated like a gentleman, and it's been a pleasure to go back and forth with you.
As to making it all 'Civil Unions' I wouldn't have an issue at all, and maybe you just came up with the answer. After all, as you said, love IS love.
Sam, I've truly enjoyed it and please know that I honestly wish you the best, however this all turns out.
Nice to find someone on here that understands sensible debate.
Sam H March 27, 2013 at 09:50 pm
Hunter - I appreciate the inquiry. As it stands now, a "Civil Union" is *not* equal to…Read More marriage. If laws were to stay as they are now except that all same-sex couples were allowed a "Civil Union", there would be a number of disadvantages. Primarily, civil unions are not recognized by the federal government, therefore resulting in unfair tax ramifications, denial of federal benefits , as well as loopholes which allow companies to deny spousal type benefits to gay couples.
Now let's talk if Civil Unions and Marriage became truly equal in the eyes of the law - zero difference except for the name. In this case, the answer is in your question - if they are exactly the same for the name, why not just let same-sex couples get married? Why segregate them to a "civil union"? By using a different term, you relegate them to a socially second-class status.
Another example of this is - what if you came to this country through a legal immigration channel, and worked very hard and finally became a "citizen" - but rather than calling you a citizen, we're going to call you a "naturalized individual of dedication". You can still vote and have all the same rights - but not the name. They can be identical in the eyes of the law, and still have different connotations. They have different meanings, and no matter how equal they are on paper, they will never be the same. The same goes for marriage.
What do you think about just making *all* legal relationships "civil unions"?
Hunter March 27, 2013 at 09:40 pm
Okay, Sam, answer me this, and I'll honestly listen, because you do make certain points.
If a gay…Read More couple is afforded the exact same rights as those granted a man and woman, via a Civil Union, why is it not enough?
I'm being honest here, Sam, and I'm not trying to be disrespectful.
Voluntary Public Retirement Plan
0 Recommend Richard Waselik