DOMA musings

[michaelb]

Well, the nine old men six old men, two old women and one wise Latina have said that married folk of any gender can now have all federal rights and privileges. I heard on a radio program today that this also applies to marriage based immigration benefits as well. In fact, the program was interviewing a couple of lesbians about it. The program was going all out to make them look like they had been victimized and/or were some kind of heroins or something. You know, the old "My wife has to work menial jobs because she has no green card and she has to stay in the shadows and we've both been living in fear that any day she could get deported" song and dance. They had already hired their lawyer to handle AOS for the illegal one and the lawyer was quite sure it would be granted. Gay or not, shouldn't she be getting a 5 or 10 year ban for being here illegally in the first place? Oh, wait, I forgot, she's "special" ....in TWO ways!

So, just wondering, who is going to file the first gay K-1 application? Also, is IMBRA now extended such that US citizens aren't allowed to contact foreigners of either sex without the background check etc.? 

[rocket]

I sudgest we take back our country.  Our President appointed these Judges that allowed this to happen. They wont stop here. Gay movement.

I am voting next time.   Its alot like the movement of the Jijad Muslims.  2 evil movements against are country. 
Dont be scared Guys speak Up.      Face it things are changing fast all over and none is Good.

[bcc_1_2]

Damn guys I got way too much going on to meddle in other people's personal lives. Why get all up in arms about the potential for gays to commit visa fraud as if straight people aren't already doing it. I'm all for getting our fiscal situation in order as I think I ought to be able to put more away for retirement and my kid's education... women using sex as a weapon in relationships, excessive spending in all facets of government regardless if it is a liberal or conservative program... crazy religious people that do violent [snip]... I can talk about that.... but when it comes to two goofy looking ladies munching rug... I just don't care. There is more important stuff going down that actually impacts my life. If an American rug muncher wants a tica and she's got the finances to keep her off the public doll... so be it.

[robert angel]

Damn guys I got way too much going on to meddle in other people's personal lives. Why get all up in arms about the potential for gays to commit visa fraud as if straight people aren't already doing it. I'm all for getting our fiscal situation in order as I think I ought to be able to put more away for retirement and my kid's education... women using sex as a weapon in relationships, excessive spending in all facets of government regardless if it is a liberal or conservative program... crazy religious people that do violent [snip]... I can talk about that.... but when it comes to two goofy looking ladies munching rug... I just don't care. There is more important stuff going down that actually impacts my life. If an American rug muncher wants a tica and she's got the finances to keep her off the public doll... so be it.

Don't sweat it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gzVL3zHxdU   <--- Seems in someways, with everyone twittering and tweeting about how small some chick's outfit is and who's doing who, that the movie clip here from 1910!! was amazingly racy and imagine this-----'suggestive'!
 
Tamer but still tasty version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTaSID6BG5w
 
 
 

[V_Man]

I am not pro-gay marriage but to be brutally frank, marriage in the western world was broken long ago. I can't get all worked up about gay marriage when for decades very few did anything to retain marriage as a meanful comittment for both men and women.
As I understand it, in the USA marriage still entitles one to certain limited advantages/privileges. For most of the western world, de-facto relationships are treated the same as marriages. So perhaps in the USA more people feel there is still something to defend.

I would prefer that all that effort was spent reforming current marriage and divorce laws.
However as long as divorce remains easy to get and with dire consequences for men, then any talk about "defending" marriage for gays rings completely hollow to me.

That said, I am yet to hear of a single rationale to allow gay marriage that does not also apply to polygmy. So either (a) it is wrong to discriminate and any bunch of adults can marry or (b) it is OK to discriminate and only a man and a woman can marry. I say, it must be one or the other.

[bcc_1_2]

That said, I am yet to hear of a single rationale to allow gay marriage that does not also apply to polygmy. So either (a) it is wrong to discriminate and any bunch of adults can marry or (b) it is OK to discriminate and only a man and a woman can marry. I say, it must be one or the other.

Many libertarians have their own personal views on the subject but when it comes to government they want it staying out of the bedroom. I've heard the argument you are making before and it just doesn't hold water. I don't want to get into it too deeply but what I can say is anything is possible if the large majority of people want it. If group marriage becomes highly socially acceptable (and it wont... not in my lifetime) then it is possible that you'll see it. We live in a republic... and the government is supposed to represent the will of the people. You now find yourself (as do many others) in the minority on this subject. And in the years to come gay marriage will be the standard across the country. There is nothing you can do about it, and if you think you can... then you are just not living in reality. I find there is just no sense in getting all worked up about it. I've got enough going on that I just don't need to.

[Ray]

So, just wondering, who is going to file the first gay K-1 application? Also, is IMBRA now extended such that US citizens aren't allowed to contact foreigners of either sex without the background check etc.?

Good questions...
　
No surprise here on that part of DOMA being overturned. Hell, Emperor-In-Chief Obama had already declared it unconstitutional and has been actively ignoring the law anyway.
　
I was recently told that the military had already started giving full spouse benefits (medical, commissary, exchange, survivor benefits, etc., etc., etc...) along with dependent ID cards to "committed" gay couples with one active duty member. HOWEVER, committed heterosexual couples living together can not receive the same benefits, ONLY same-sex couples.
　
Can any active service members out there confirm this recent policy change?
　
I would fully expect some form of "affirmative action" policy from the administration/leftist courts in order to make up for past "discrimination" against gay couples. Expect to see priority, head-of-the-line visa processing for same-sex couples for the next 50-60 years or so.
　
What really got me was the outright cowardice of on the part of the Supreme Court. Instead of ruling whether or not same-sex marriage was a constitutional right, they wimped out by saying it was up to the states to decide. BULL SHYT!
　
By refusing to rule on the case of California's Prop 8, they essentially told the people of California that their vote on the matter doesn't count, despite their stupid declaration that it was up to the states to decide.
　
Californians voted, the state supreme court upheld the vote, and one openly gay federal judge threw out the vote. Now the Federal Ninth Communist Court of Appeals told California County Clerks to begin issuing same-sex marriage licenses immediately.
　
So where is the will of the people in all of this? It isn't. The SCOTUS said the plaintiffs in the case had no legal standing to bring the complaint to the court. But because the leftist gay governor and the leftist state attorney general refused to appeal the gay federal judge's ruling, NOBODY else in California has legal standing to file an appeal with SCOTUS? So in actuality, it is up to the Democrats in power to decide, the will of the people be damned. How freaking democratic is that?
　
This gay marriage bullshyt has nothing to do with the will if the people or the choice of the states. The gay agenda will be shoved down our throats whether we like it or not, and THAT is the whole point of the opposition’s complaint.
　
Watch closely what is happening in California because that is how the nation is going with the leftist whackos now in power.
　
Ray

[Bob_S]

I didn't mean to end discussion on this.  Just moved it over here since it covers all interested groups, not just the Latin side where it was first posted.

BTW, already it seems K1 visas will be added for gay couples.  It doesn't bother me if someone like a George Takei wants to get a visa for his Canadian husband (assuming he was Canadian just for the sake of argument).  I just wonder if they will be subject to IMBRA laws like everybody else or if they'll get a pass, being a politically correct sub-group and all.  Do you think it will even get any media coverage when some 60+ y.o. guy brings over his 18-y.o. ladyboy "fiance" and starts pimping him/her out?

[bcc_1_2]

ladyboys will be coming over for sure... but I also see butch women bringing over hot chicks too. some beat middle aged dyke will bring back some hot piece of ass... and then what will the feminists say?

[mambocowboy]

ladyboys will be coming over for sure... but I also see butch women bringing over hot chicks too. some beat middle aged dyke will bring back some hot piece of ass... and then what will the feminists say?

the feminists won't say anything. In their eyes only hetero males, especially white hetero males, are oppressors...

[bcc_1_2]

the feminists won't say anything. In their eyes only hetero males, especially white hetero males, are oppressors...

wrong answer haha... the feminists wont say anything because they'll be bringing back the hot piece of ass 

[Ray]

I didn't mean to end discussion on this.  Just moved it over here since it covers all interested groups, not just the Latin side where it was first posted.

BTW, already it seems K1 visas will be added for gay couples.  It doesn't bother me if someone like a George Takei wants to get a visa for his Canadian husband (assuming he was Canadian just for the sake of argument).  I just wonder if they will be subject to IMBRA laws like everybody else or if they'll get a pass, being a politically correct sub-group and all.  Do you think it will even get any media coverage when some 60+ y.o. guy brings over his 18-y.o. ladyboy "fiance" and starts pimping him/her out?

  Maybe not...
　
I would like to hear from a member of AILA on this, but from my understanding of the Supreme Court ruling, only legally married couples are affected.
　
Because DOMA denied federal benefits to same sex couples married in a state where it is legal, fiancées are apparently not included in any benefit changes.
　
I believe that USCIS has already started accepting I-130's for same sex couples who were married here in one of the states where it is legal, but K-1 visa petitions are not being accepted.
　
So if a same-sex couple was married in a legal state or in a foreign country where it is legal, I believe they are going to be able to petition for a spouse with little difficulty.
　
However, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Emperor Obama issues an executive order very soon to allow for gay fiancée visas. In the mean time, I would expect a flood of visitor visa applications for gays/lesbians headed for San Francisco to marry, which of course would be visa fraud.
　
Does anyone know if any of the regular countries of interest on this forum do same sex marriages? I know the Philippines does not. I would be surprised if the Philippine government (CFO) would even approve a lady-boy for exit under a fiancée visa.
　
Ray

[CeeTeeEnn]

Interesting question Ray, and one worth keeping an eye on.

From what I know, no SE Asian country permits SSM or has any plans to introduce it. On the other hand, in Latin America three countries (Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil) recognise SSM and their legislatures now require their officals to perform SSM on demand throughout these countries. Other countries (such as Colombia) recognise Civil Unions as de facto marriages but have no provisions in place to have them converted into full marriage as of yet (some opinions see this as an acceptable compromise but others see it as the start of a slippery slope.) And interestingly, one country seen my some as an excellent destination for seeking women (though perhaps not by the readers of this forum) also has an autocratic president but one who has recently passed legislation penalizing the positive promotion of homosexuality throughout the country (a place where so-called "pride" marches get broken up by both the police and gangs of violent homophobic activists, and where "queer bashing" has become something of a national past-time.)

Interesting how such a profound issue can polarise the world...

[V_Man]

I know of a lady boy being brought into Australia. I assume on a fiance visa. Apparently they questioned it but the supervisor said there was no reason to refuse it.
(in Australia same sex defactos qualify equally as a married man and woman.)

This is a story of a friend of a friend of a friend so I have no idea how true it is but I have no reason to doubt it.
Word is, the relationship broke down after a few years and the lady boy now works as a prostitute. (Which is legal of course).

So my friends, now you may be getting an idea why I can't get excited about gay marriage. Perhaps there is something left of marriage to defend in the USA. Not so in many western countries.

[bcc_1_2]

So my friends, now you may be getting an idea why I can't get excited about gay marriage.

Your logic is sound... I mean if a guy gets married to a sweetie from pattaya there is no way after a couple of years she would leave him and start hooking or stripping. LOL weak sauce.

[Stevieboy]

The LGTB people could care less about marriage rights. They don't believe in traditional "marriage" , which is what they're trying to destroy. They have rights by Civil Unions and they know it. Their agenda is to diminish marriage under God, and redefine the traditional family institution. They're agenda and political power is so strong, they have lobbied to prevent medical or psychological counseling benefits to homosexuals who want to quit the lifestyle, or confused teens looking for help. This woman below admits it, and the audience roars in applause when she does.   
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=n9M0xcs2Vw4

[bcc_1_2]

They have rights by Civil Unions and they know it. Their agenda is to diminish marriage under God, and redefine the traditional family institution.

Separate but equal right... . Drink out of that hose... and stay out of our fountain. You get water too so stop complaining about it!
The traditional family institution has been completely screwed over by straight people. Biology dictates that gay people (unlike say latinos haha) will always be a small minority. The only people worried about gays screwing up traditional family institutions are foil hat wearers, flat earthers, and those secretly in the closet. There is nothing that could occur in culture or government that would make me not throw up in my mouth when thinking about being gay. So this issue simply has no impact on me... other than maybe some gay couple will adopt a kid that some straight couple won't take care of and pay for.
I suppose if you are repressed and in the closet... fear of this sort of thing takes over. Otherwise it has no impact on your life. Things in Cedar Rapids sure changed after gay marriage in Iowa... oh want for all the straight people in the state... absolutely nothing changed.
 

[Stevieboy]

Bcc, It's always easiest and redundant to say conservatives are in the closet themselves and homophobic. So, then your not in the closet. That we've never experienced life outside the shelter of our bible thumping parents. The redundant excuse that because it doesn't affect you personally, you shouldn't make a fuss about it and leave well enough alone. That it doesn't affect our culture? So, you deny what the woman on the video says too?

The gay friends in know don't like what this woman says. They don't care about gay marriage rights and this kind of agenda pushing. It embarrasses them. 

[bcc_1_2]

So, you deny what the woman on the video says too?

What I'm suggesting is that all this gay crap is a distraction. And while you are focused on who hid the pickle where... politicians are squandering my tax dollars.
As soon as gay people have the opportunity to be a miserable as the people protesting their happiness... we can all get back to how lazy people get free money and how corporations like GE make major bank and still don't pay any taxes... and how people like me... pay through the nose. 

[Jhengsman]

What really got me was the outright cowardice of on the part of the Supreme Court. Instead of ruling whether or not same-sex marriage was a constitutional right, they wimped out by saying it was up to the states to decide. BULL SHYT!
　
By refusing to rule on the case of California's Prop 8, they essentially told the people of California that their vote on the matter doesn't count, despite their stupid declaration that it was up to the states to decide.
　
Californians voted, the state supreme court upheld the vote, and one openly gay federal judge threw out the vote. Now the Federal Ninth Communist Court of Appeals told California County Clerks to begin issuing same-sex marriage licenses immediately.
　
So where is the will of the people in all of this? It isn't. The SCOTUS said the plaintiffs in the case had no legal standing to bring the complaint to the court. But because the leftist gay governor and the leftist state attorney general refused to appeal the gay federal judge's ruling, NOBODY else in California has legal standing to file an appeal with SCOTUS? So in actuality, it is up to the Democrats in power to decide, the will of the people be damned. How freaking democratic is that?
　
This gay marriage bullshyt has nothing to do with the will if the people or the choice of the states. The gay agenda will be shoved down our throats whether we like it or not, and THAT is the whole point of the opposition’s complaint.
　
Watch closely what is happening in California because that is how the nation is going with the leftist whackos now in power.
　
Ray

Ultimately Californians and citizens of the US could decide the matter by not voting on people who evolved to their home church's, Trinity UCC, actual position after being President for three years and presumably attending a chapel with the traditional position he adopted right before running for state wide office the first time. I'm not saying the voters knew he was lying and ignored it, okay yes I am. . Both the US an California voted for executive heads who wanted to fundamentally transform the land and now that is happening.


Now the Californian legislature has to move to protect the entire initiative process. Even though the Democrats finally have a super majority and can override the big one, the property tax defending Proposition 13, now according to the Supreme Court someone can shop for a Federal judge until the finally find one, just one, to say any law passed by the people or the legislature is unconstitutional. And if the Governor and Attorney General refuse to defend any law or constitutional ammendment as happened with Proposition 8 or as the President refused to defend DOMA then that one carefully selected federal judge can over turn anything the people do

[Bob_S]

What I'm suggesting is that all this gay crap is a distraction. And while you are focused on who hid the pickle where... politicians are squandering my tax dollars.
As soon as gay people have the opportunity to be a miserable as the people protesting their happiness... we can all get back to how lazy people get free money and how corporations like GE make major bank and still don't pay any taxes... and how people like me... pay through the nose.

While I think you get a bit too much glee from poking the conservatives with a stick, I tend to agree with the libertarian principles of where you are coming from.  Gays are, what, actually 3% of the population?  Far from the 10% they like to claim.  And of those, how many actually want to marry and adopt or make kids?  Ultimately this will impact at best 1% of the population.  That's hardly enough to destroy traditional marriage like that woman in the video claims to be her goal.  If you want to see what is truly destroying marriage, look at the out-of-wedlock birthrates.  Somewhere around 40% nationwide (variable by ethnic group and socio-economic demographic).  The state in its generosity with other people's money has done far far more to destroy the family unit by becoming a substitute male breadwinner than anything radical leftist socialists in the LGBT community could ever hope to achieve on their own.

Now the Californian legislature has to move to protect the entire initiative process. Even though the Democrats finally have a super majority and can override the big one, the property tax defending Proposition 13, now according to the Supreme Court someone can shop for a Federal judge until the finally find one, just one, to say any law passed by the people or the legislature is unconstitutional. And if the Governor and Attorney General refuse to defend any law or constitutional ammendment as happened with Proposition 8 or as the President refused to defend DOMA then that one carefully selected federal judge can over turn anything the people do

I heard that on the John and Ken show, too, but I'm not so sure.  The SCOTUS kicked the gay marriage thing back due to an issue of Standing.  The proponents of Prop 8 were not personally impacted, as such the court deemed them to have no standing.  But if Prop 13 were to be ruled invalid, it would definitely directly financially impact millions of property owners throughout CA which would give each and every one of them Standing to sue in court.  So I understand where you are coming from and agree with it, it's just that Prop 13 is not a good example.

[Stevieboy]

While I think you get a bit too much glee from poking the conservatives with a stick, I tend to agree with the libertarian principles of where you are coming from.  Gays are, what, actually 3% of the population?  Far from the 10% they like to claim.  And of those, how many actually want to marry and adopt or make kids?  Ultimately this will impact at best 1% of the population.  That's hardly enough to destroy traditional marriage like that woman in the video claims to be her goal.  If you want to see what is truly destroying marriage, look at the out-of-wedlock birthrates.  Somewhere around 40% nationwide (variable by ethnic group and socio-economic demographic).  The state in its generosity with other people's money has done far far more to destroy the family unit by becoming a substitute male breadwinner than anything radical leftist socialists in the LGBT community could ever hope to achieve on their own. 

.
I wholeheartedly agree with you of the State's welfare system affect on the community, but that's another thread. I don't agree that the LGBT agenda isn't impactful, when it's all over TV and kids are being indoctrinated in school to think outside the household norm. I, on more than one occasion have heard my 5 year old daughter say socio political things that she learns at school and doesn't even understand what they mean. Propagandizing the children is the oldest trick in the book, and they're successful at it. Here in Austin, we have a Gay Pride every year. I went with a girl I knw for the first time and was shocked at how large and how long it went on for (all day). They practically closed the downtown for just for this event.  Firefighters and policemen in full uniform were holding hands. The mayor and the Chief of Police also walked the parade, as well as Christian and catholic churches, and  Boy Scout troops. That was the first time I realized this movement was much larger and politically powerful in this city than I expected. It felt like I was from another time in the future. Kind of like the cartoon Futurama, but everyone else is gay. 

[beulah]

I am for gays having the same rights as heteros.  I don't want to see it taught in schools and I don't want religions to have to accept gays if the practice is against its teachings. I don't see gayness as a threat to anything, but I'm thankful all my kids are hetero.

[bcc_1_2]

While I think you get a bit too much glee from poking the conservatives with a stick,

When people type or say something stupid I do like to throw it back at them... I'm guilty there. but in my defense you don't see the liberal argument here for me to trash. Guys are getting screwed in the tailpipe if they are making a decent living in this country yet they want to talk about a few queens and a cartoon as the real threat.

[Jhengsman]

.
I wholeheartedly agree with you of the State's welfare system affect on the community, but that's another thread. I don't agree that the LGBT agenda isn't impactful, when it's all over TV and kids are being indoctrinated in school to think outside the household norm. I, on more than one occasion have heard my 5 year old daughter say socio political things that she learns at school and doesn't even understand what they mean. Propagandizing the children is the oldest trick in the book, and they're successful at it. Here in Austin, we have a Gay Pride every year. I went with a girl I knw for the first time and was shocked at how large and how long it went on for (all day). They practically closed the downtown for just for this event.  Firefighters and policemen in full uniform were holding hands. The mayor and the Chief of Police also walked the parade, as well as Christian and catholic churches, and  Boy Scout troops. That was the first time I realized this movement was much larger and politically powerful in this city than I expected. It felt like I was from another time in the future. Kind of like the cartoon Futurama, but everyone else is gay.

Don't think it is just "western" either right now on Filipino TV we have one series about a man on the down low about to leave his wife. Vice Ganda may be the biggest TV star host at the moment. In most other telanovellas you have the heroic bakla who is the brother/sister or best friend of the female lead. On the breakout hit Be Careful With My Heart, Aiza Seguerra plays "kute" a mix of kuya and ate or big brother and big sister for those of you on the Latin side. While the conference of bishops still hold some political power as with single motherhood rates and percentages of people getting tattooed it is only a matter of time as western traditions are being stripped away and the Philippines revert to a place of tattooed people and the "third sex" being accepted.