Marriage and other LGBTQ Rights

[chappy]

The world needs more protests about the silliness of certain Russian laws, imo.

Yes, I'm aware that I've become a silly hetero cliche. I don't know why it works that way, but it does.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by Fusion_power

jwb, Polyamory was the word I meant. I just tossed it in as a sidenote for the general conversation.

Nice article about a polyamorous relationship.

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by xilman

Nice article about a polyamorous relationship.

Thanks for posting this link. It makes a fascinating case study, very rare in that so few such set-ups are documented but maybe more commonly occurring than is recognised.

This group has clearly identified what I also believe to be far and away the most important factors in a good, lasting love relationship: openness, honesty, and the ability to discuss potentially out-of-the-box situations with your partner. Or, in this case, partners.

The article also introduces a wonderful new word in the English language, one which I intend to start using:

"Compersion," explains Tom, "is the little warm glow that you get when you see somebody you really care about loving somebody else and being loved."

EDIT: I've just googled and noticed that "compersion" is not a new word. It was unfamiliar to me before.

[Brian-E]

It seems that senior politicians are coming out with ever more ingenious arguments against opening marriage to same sex couples. This one leaves me quite speechless with awe.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...x-8773982.html

Ana María Jiménez Ortiz, a congresswoman for the Mexican political party PAN, has caused outrage by saying that gay people should not be allowed to marry because they don't face each other during sex.
According to Mexican media reports Jimenez Ortiz told supporters during a forum on whether to legalize gay marriage in the state of Puebla that “marriage should only be considered in those relationships in which the members have sex while facing each other.”
"A marriage should only be considered amongst people that can look at each other in the eye while having sexual intercourse," Jiménez Ortiz said. "Something that does not happen in homosexual couples."

[kladner]

It's nice to see others in an arrangement that I idealize and aspire to. It's not something you can make happen, but something you can allow for. I have long felt that jealousy is an expression of insecurity to which one does not have to submit.

A sort of corollary for me is that love is not a zero-sum proposition. That is, the love one feels for Person A does not diminish the love one feels for Person B. And, if A and B also cherish each other then there's just more to go around.

I love defining "cheating" as "lying". Openness and honesty are everything.

You want to know
How it will be
Me and him
Or you and me
You both stand there your long hair flowin'
Eyes alive your mind still growin'
Sayin' to me, "What can we do now that we both love you?"
I love you too
I don't really see why can't we go on as three


You are afraid
Embarrassed too
No one has ever said such a
Thing to you
Your mother's ghost stands at your shoulder
Face like ice a little bit colder
Sayin' to you, "You can not do that, it breaks all the rules
You learned in school"
I don't really see
Why can't we go on as three


We love each other
It's plain to see
There's just one answer
That comes to me
Sister lovers water brothers
And in time maybe others
So you see what we can do is to try something new
If you're crazy too
I don't really see
Why can't we go on as three

"Triad" -Grace Slick

[chappy]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...&ir=Gay+Voices

It's a classic case of you didn't tell us we couldn't do the right thing.

[jasong]

Haven't posted in this thread for a while, no idea what's been going on in here. I was getting a bit uptight about things, so I've taken a long break from this thread.

Anyway, I wanted to talk about auto-hypnosis and politics, specifically as it relates to me and my liberal friend. Full disclosure, one could argue that my communication with the Holy Spirit is auto-hypnosis. I fully understand the opinion that it's just my mental illness making me hear the Holy Spirit even though I don't agree with it.

The problem with my friend is that he is convinced that hating homosexuality automatically equates to hating homosexuals. So I've been trying to find behaviors that he despises without hating the person who exhibits them. I hang with him because he argues in the ways that my brain keys into. While many people object to trying to put people into neat little categories, that's how my brain works, and he thinks in a way that makes compartmentalization easy. I know it may make me sound like a bad person, but that's just how I deal with the world.

In my mind, homosexuality is a sin, but it's just one aspect of a person. I believe when the Bible says homosexuals don't go to heaven, it's only talking about people who fully embrace the lifestyle, rather than people who simply suffer from temptation. It's like with my pedophilia urges, if I treat it as a negative aspect of my personality that I continuously have to deal with and actively reject, then God will view me as a non-pedophile. And it extends to the other things as well. Someone could be a mass murderer, but if they get into the mental state where they realize what they did was wrong and decide to never do it again, then they are forgiven and are not a murderer in God's eyes. Though, obviously, there are still consequences to deal with.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by kladner

"Triad" -Grace Slick

Correction: David Crosby wrote the song. He got shoved out of the Byrds because the song was too "edgy" for the other members.

[only_human]

Treasury and IRS Announce That All Legal Same-Sex Marriages Will Be Recognized For Federal Tax Purposes; Ruling Provides Certainty, Benefits and Protections Under Federal Tax Law for Same-Sex Married Couples

IR-2013-72, Aug. 29, 2013

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) today ruled that same-sex couples, legally married in jurisdictions that recognize their marriages, will be treated as married for federal tax purposes. The ruling applies regardless of whether the couple lives in a jurisdiction that recognizes same-sex marriage or a jurisdiction that does not recognize same-sex marriage.

The ruling implements federal tax aspects of the June 26 Supreme Court decision invalidating a key provision of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act.
Under the ruling, same-sex couples will be treated as married for all federal tax purposes, including income and gift and estate taxes. The ruling applies to all federal tax provisions where marriage is a factor, including filing status, claiming personal and dependency exemptions, taking the standard deduction, employee benefits, contributing to an IRA and claiming the earned income tax credit or child tax credit.

Any same-sex marriage legally entered into in one of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, a U.S. territory or a foreign country will be covered by the ruling. However, the ruling does not apply to registered domestic partnerships, civil unions or similar formal relationships recognized under state law.

Legally-married same-sex couples generally must file their 2013 federal income tax return using either the married filing jointly or married filing separately filing status.

Individuals who were in same-sex marriages may, but are not required to, file original or amended returns choosing to be treated as married for federal tax purposes for one or more prior tax years still open under the statute of limitations.

Generally, the statute of limitations for filing a refund claim is three years from the date the return was filed or two years from the date the tax was paid, whichever is later. As a result, refund claims can still be filed for tax years 2010, 2011 and 2012. Some taxpayers may have special circumstances, such as signing an agreement with the IRS to keep the statute of limitations open, that permit them to file refund claims for tax years 2009 and earlier.

Additionally, employees who purchased same-sex spouse health insurance coverage from their employers on an after-tax basis may treat the amounts paid for that coverage as pre-tax and excludable from income.

Another thing that may be huge is many states' tax returns closely follow federal tax returns in structure and calculation of deductions, exemptions, etc.
The Huffington Post notes:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3837444.html

The policy only applies to married couples, and not those in domestic partnerships or same-sex unions.

So this is now another way that a domestic partnership is not equal to a same-sex marriage.

[jasong]

No idea what a domestic partnership is supposed to be. Maybe that's what I've been advocating without knowing the term.

Technically, I don't object to same-sex marriage, it's the same-sex sex that I have a problem with. If the law can define things in a way that doesn't reference homosexuality, than I'm okay with it.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by jasong

Technically, I don't object to same-sex marriage, it's the same-sex sex that I have a problem with. If the law can define things in a way that doesn't reference homosexuality, than I'm okay with it.

In the voice of Robin Williams: "Ever been to sea, Billy?"

Things can get complicated in rarefied environments....