E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Photo courtesy Tracy Johnson
Donna Johnson, left, and Tracy Johnson at their home in Raeford, N.C., in 2012.
When her spouse was killed in Afghanistan, Tracy Johnson drove across town to her mother-in-law’s house — clutching her marriage certificate — so she could hear the Army’s formal notification. No one from the military came to her door.
She later watched as the American flag that cloaked the coffin of her spouse, Donna Johnson, was offered, not to her, but to Donna Johnson’s mother – the next of kin, as U.S. law stipulates. She was denied death benefits, she said, that are standard issue to heterosexual spouses of service members who die in action: free health care, tuition assistance, and monthly indemnity compensation of about $1,200.
And then there was the ring. On Valentine’s Day 2012, Tracy Johnson placed that band on her wife's finger during their marriage ceremony in Washington, D.C. Last October, as Johnson escorted her wife's body home from Dover Air Force Base, the Army asked Johnson to carry the wedding ring, designated as a “personal effect.” After arriving in Fayetteville, N.C., Johnson was obliged, by a federal statute, to deliver the ring to an Army officer who then provided it to Donna Johnson’s mother who, in turn, gave it back to Tracy Johnson. She wears it on her finger today.
“I’m not considered ‘family’ (by the military). I’m not considered a spouse and I’m damn sure not considered a widow, by definition,” said Johnson, an Army National Guard staff sergeant who served in Iraq. “We didn’t marry for any of those benefits. We married out of love.
“And I’m not standing up here, whining: ‘Woe is me.’ We were adults, big girls, and we knew what we were getting ourselves into. But it doesn’t mean I have to stand idly by and see all this happen to somebody else who’s in a same-sex marriage (in the military).”
Johnson's experiences were mandated by the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, which defines marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman. The 1996 law — followed by the Department of Defense and all federal agencies — bars same-sex military spouses from benefits made available to the heterosexual spouses of service members: dental and medical insurance, discounted military housing, and military ID cards, which allow spouses to visit on-base commissaries, child-care facilities and movie theaters.
Under DOMA, military leaders were not allowed to officially acknowledge Johnson, who believes she may be the first same-sex spouse to lose a partner to combat following the 2011 repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” (DADT) — the policy that kept gays from openly serving in the armed forces. (Donna Johnson’s mother specifically asked Tracy Johnson to accompany the body home, allowing her a seat on the plane.) The only federal employee who openly referred to the dead soldier as Johnson's “wife,” was President Barack Obama, who sent Johnson a letter of condolence, she said.
On Thursday, Obama's nominee for secretary of defense, former Sen. Chuck Hagel, told congressional members during a confirmation hearing that he is "fully committed ... to doing everything possible under current law to provide equal benefits to the families of all our service members."
Furthermore, during his inauguration address on Jan. 21, Obama spoke broadly of gay rights, saying: "Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law."
Battle for equality
For now, current law stipulates that, following the military death of a same-sex spouse, the branches first must notify the “primary next-of-kin” — in Donna Johnson’s case, her parents. If U.S. troops list a same-sex spouse on their emergency-contact forms, that spouse eventually will receive word from the military — after the blood family is told.
“It is not like, though, it’s a day or 'x' number of weeks later. It would be almost immediately,” said Nathan Christensen, a Pentagon spokesman. “They (branch officers) would talk to primary next-of-kin first and relay the information. And then, whoever the (other designated person is), they would call them very soon thereafter. So we’re talking minutes or hours as opposed to days, weeks or months.
“DOMA is still the law we uphold. Even though that (DADT) repeal has been taken care of, there are certain benefits that are not applicable across the force,” Christensen added.
But pressure is mounting on the Pentagon and the White House to change that notification policy — and the other gaps in same-sex spousal benefits — by writing an executive order or a DOD-wide regulation.
Same-sex advocacy groups described the Jan. 25 electionof same-sex wife Ashley Broadway as Fort Bragg’s 2013 “spouse of the year” as a mandate to the military to figure out a way to override DOMA. That same day, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Obama is contemplating how benefits could be administratively extended to the spouses of gay service members, the Washington Blade reported.
'Just like all the other Army wives'
“No military spouse should have to hear second-hand that something has happened to their service member,” said Stephen Peters, president of the American Military Partner Association (AMPA), a Washington, D.C.-based support network for lesbian and gay military families.
"No military spouse should have to watch the flag that is draped over the coffin of his or her service member folded and handed to anyone else,” added Peters, whose husband, Marine Corps Maj. Alasdair Mackay, returned safely in January from a one-year deployment to Afghanistan. “Our families live through the daily fear of worrying about having something happen to their service member while they’re deployed. But we do it without access to the same supports and benefits that other military families get. Our service members, they go to war for our country for equality, yet their families are treated as if they aren’t important, as if they are somehow second class.”
Courtesy of Stephen Peters
Marine Corps Maj. Alasdair Mackay and Stephen Peters were married in New York City during Christmas 2011 before Mackay deployed to Afghanistan.
The AMPA asserts that Tracy Johnson was the first — and only, to date — same-sex spouse to lose a military wife or husband in combat. It's possible, however, that another same-sex spouse suffered that type of tragedy before DADT was rescinded and when members were not open about their sexual orientation — even if they were legally married.
Tracy Johnson was not listed on the emergency notification form that service members fill out, she said. Because DADT had been revoked, Donna Johnson assumed that Tracy would receive the same benefits that are granted to all military spouses — for example, being the first person to be notified by the military should a wife or husband die in combat, Johnson said.
"Donna didn't even realize she had to put me down. She thought I was automatically extended that benefit as her wife — just like all the other Army wives who are the first ones to notified," she said.
'What's right is right'
The point is moot — even if Tracy Johnson was listed, due to DOMA she still would not have been the first person that military officials would have visited in the hours after Donna Johnson was killed.
In June, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on the constitutionality of DOMA.
Near Fort Bragg, N.C., Johnson holds tight to a fine philosophical line — honoring her wife and the Army while questioning the law. She describes how individual Army members privately treated her “with respect and compassion”, giving her an American flag — though not the same flag atop the coffin — during a private ceremony before Donna Johnson’s funeral. She lauds Donna Johnson’s family for supporting her, insisting that she sit with them in the front row during the memorial service.
But Donna Johnson’s mother, Sandra, is not so charitable with her summary of the events.
“Tracy’s unit supports her, her family supports her, and she was given support by the community itself. Why can’t the federal family be supportive?” Sandra Johnson asked. “I know: It’s the law. But what’s fair is fair. What’s right is right.
“The family is already going through grief. You don’t keep putting a knife in the wound and make it deeper. She’s dead, she’s gone, she can’t be brought back. So why are you treating this family, and treating Tracy, with this indignation?”
Related: Spouses club relents, says lesbian Army wife can be 'full member'
Leave a Comment:
...and wrong, is wrong!
You knew it going in that the military doesn't recognize gay marriages, and you did it anyway. That's the way it works.
And now the munchers and rear admirals are looking for free handouts at taxpayer expense.
The fact is that taxpayers subsidize marital relationships because they benefit society -- continuation of the species. I do not want my tax dollars to subsidize carpet munchers whose union provides no benefit to society whatsoever.
Free handouts, really? Could I not say the same about your spouse? Your kids? Newsflash - gay people pay taxes too - and probably often more than you do. Unequal is unequal and none of your ignorant moralistic blathering will change that.
The law is the law. Don't like it? Change it. Isn't that what our soldiers fight for? You start making exceptions to the rule of law and you end up with chaos. I know a few laws on the books I'd personally like the powers that be to ignore but I'm sure there are many citizens that wouldn't like it.
Civil Unions for everyone... government out of the marriage business. Anyone should be able to form these contracts. The government should recognize these unions.
Joe C.... one of them died for this country you ass...the other one serves this country.... that's the @!$%#ing benefit they provided. If that relationship makes them do their job that much better; that's the benefit.
How many front line soldiers are distracted because their wife just had a baby?
Any time someone says this is not about money, know immediately "It is about money."
Let’s start with the facts. The person they loved and shared their live with has died in service to our country. They could have objected and made their life miserable and made them a less efficient soldier. They didn’t and what they did is support them, give them a reason to work harder for their country and made them a better soldier. Now they have lost their partner as a result of that support. They deserve to be compensated!
Governments promote what they determine to be the good of society by laws and taxes. Laws providing taxes and seizures is why we don't have polygamy today. But if you support your statement then you would also support polygamy. In that matter the government would owe all, say ten wives, the same benefits. This thought about getting the government out of the marriage business is complicated. If a person can marry a same sex spouse the reasoning behind the institution is no longer applicable and a person should also be able to marry several people after all don't we live in a free society. And why can't farmer Joe marry his cow? Get the government out of the marriage business and let people marry who they want and as many as they want, this is a free society without societal laws about marriage.
What's right is right and it's about time our government started to recognize and follow that.
Recommend adopting civil union parity and drop the assault on the sanctity of marriage between man and woman. Then I can support survivor benefits. True marriage is the foundation of civilization and should not be undermined by gaysuse another term. Thanks!!!
Don, lets start with the facts.
These women ran to a state that recognized same sex marriage, because their state does not.
They joined the military knowing that the feds do not recognize same marriage.
They got married knowing that the military does not recognize same sex marriage.
NOW she wants the rules changed because things didn't happen the way she wanted?
I'm sorry her partner died overseas, but the rules should not be changed. No one believes when they send their spouse or child overseas that they will not return. I have a son and a husband who are both active service, so I do understand this. In your mind you know, but not in your heart.
@Janine; I agree with most of what you said. But people are not trying to change the rules because of what they “want”, they are trying to change the rules because the rules are wrong and should be changed. These people love each other, support each other and deserve the rights that go along with that love and support. This is one of the steps towards changing those rules. And it is long overdue.
History has shown us there is no "separate but equal."
Surprise! That won't depend on your support.
Again, your view that doesn't affect how the world turns.
Gay couples are not recognized currently in the military so this person will likely never see any survivor benefits.
Dick nope, that is not what the "reasoning" is. In fact, you showed no reasoning power at all. Consenting adults want to get married. One wife or husband, not ten or twenty. Just because they both happen to be male or female doesn't mean that voids the polygamy law and let's all get married together! Nor does it mean why not marry your pets, pets can't consent. All of the arguments against gay marriage are based on a religion. The Netherlands became the first country to allow gay marriage in 2001, their society has not fallen apart and in fact is thriving as it always has. Most countries that don't allow religion to rule is much further along than the US in terms of progress and the happiness of their citizens. We are viewed as backwards, unintelligent hicks, thanks to the few troglodytes who openly and speak out about and even blame all of Americas problems on gays. Here's a news flash. It is none of your business what other people do. I don't give a damn who my neighbor is married to as long as they aren't forcing me to join them. If my other neighbor is cheating on his wife, again, none of my business. Most of the worlds problems would be solved if people stopped trying to force their religion on people and also if they kept their nose out of other people's business.
Dura Lex Sed Lex
(The law is hard but it is the Law)
nothing is more perverse than the homophobes and their work to hate and discriminate.
Time to recognize real love and quit crying about your desire to hate.
I was in the Army, went to war, and there were LOTS of gays and lesbians there, and people in the army didn't give a shlt.
you haters who are to weak to even join the military will get over it too.
From the article:
How stupid are these women? There's no way they passed the proficiency test to enlist. Those recruiters need to be investigated, it wouldn't be the first time they were caught helping on the tests in order to fill there quotas. Too stupid to realize DOMA was against all this? Can they comprehend anything they read or see on the news? Apparently not.
Just hold on a little longer. SCOTUS will indeed rule against DOMA and California's gay marriage ban (voted on by the citizens BTW) and give a multiple page stupid explanation like turncoat Roberts did when they upheld Obamacare. Just keep crying those big crocodile tears and wringing your hands in grief, they'll get around to you.
The polygamy argument is a strawman, as gay marriage is about the gender of the party contracting, not the number of people wanting to enter the contract.
Answer this for me... Why doesn't straight marriage lead to polygamy? After all, polygamous marriages are heterosexual argeements, not homosexual ones, therefore for if the gender of a party in a marriage contract is going to lead to polygamy it's much more likely it would come from straight marriage.
Furthermore, there is NO "sanctity" of marriage. Marriage is nothing but a legal contract, not to be confused with Holy Matrimony. That's why Atheists get married, and anyone can get a certificate tomorrow without invoking any God and/or religion.
And what some of you people are saying, is that gender discrimination is okay and a rational basis for denying people the same benefits you receive.
You all are awesome. Really.
We must stop the moral decay of our nation, in an attempt to appease and give-in to the demands of a very few.
Living a gay lifestyle has never been normal and never will be, although it is becoming so common, most seem to think it is ok and should be accepted.
Our nation has many problems, but meeting the demands of gays and accepting their immoral and ungodly lifestyle by passing laws condoning this practice is not.
We don't have to pass laws "condoning" things. We're a free society, we need a reason to make things ILLEGAL not LEGAL. And, I hate to break this to you, but your sanctimonious, bigotry and subjective definition of "moral" are NOT good enough reasons.
I think unabashed hatred and forcing your religion on others is "moral decay", therefore YOU shouldn't be allowed to get married.
I'll accept your "moral" arguments against gay marriage when you apply the same arguments to divorce. Divorce is the leading cause of marriages ending.
And I'll accept your religious arguments when you also advocate to execute any women who is not a virgin when she gets married. After all, that's what the Bible says to do.
@kkwilson
Not too knowledgeable about the ancient Greeks and Romans, are you?
I think we should also allow me to marry the cute goat down at the petting zoo. Stop your hate and bigotry! This is a civil rights issue!
Just as soon as that cute goat has legal capacity for informed consent. I'll tell you what, see if that goat can take out a mortgage. As soon as we have goat home ownership, you can marry it.
Don't worry. I'm not judging you. What you choose to do with goats in the privacy of your home is none of my business.
Sarah-3043284
The polygamy argument is a strawman, as gay marriage is about the gender of the party contracting, not the number of people wanting to enter the contract.
Answer this for me... Why doesn't straight marriage lead to polygamy? After all, polygamous marriages are heterosexual agreements, not homosexual ones, therefore for if the gender of a party in a marriage contract is going to lead to polygamy it's much more likely it would come from straight marriage.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a large part of the world polygamy is the norm and the United States has always frowned upon it. In fact it was through force of arms that the government changed the polygamous practices of the Mormon Church.
Personally, I consider myself a fiscal conservative but the DOMA was one of the dumber laws made in the last 20 years. If we are going to champion personal responsibility then we have to respect other's choices even if we don't agree with them.
Joe C
How old are you...... 8yrs?
GROW UP!
Since when is not liking homosexuals have to be based on some morality issue? I don't like homosexuals because I think that when they get older, and can not have sex with people their same age, that they seek out children to molest. I don't like homosexuals and it is not because of some religious belief. I simply do not like them, I don't have to have a reason not to like them any more than I have to have a reason why I don't like cabbage.
“And I’m not standing up here, whining: ‘Woe is me.’ We were adults, big girls, and we knew what we were getting ourselves into... REALLY??? Then what is she whining about??? Grow up.
I am sorry for your loss but
Judging by your reaction, no you didnt. If you feel that you and AMPA can get the military to change their policy, Kudos.
Don Quixiote had his wind mills....and you have yours.
Logan,
Well the reason you just gave for not liking them is completely bunk...
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/winter/10-myths
http://www.livescience.com/13409-myths-gay-people-debunked-sexual-orientation.html
Tell me, what is different about gay people that they'll resort to pedophilia when they, "can't have sex with people their own age any longer", while straight people won't. And when exactly is the cut off age, where they can no longer find people their own age to have sex with.
Jay,
I'm guessing they're whining about not having equal rights, based on the gender of party in their marriage contract. I'm also guessing you too would be whining if this was happening to you.
Spouse, Absolutely disgusting!
The fact still remains that our government does not recognise same sex marriage.. period. These two knew that and the survivor says they didn't aledgedly get married for money but rarther love. But now it's about the money. The DOMA defines marriage as beign between one man and one woman. Pretty stright forward. .
There is no purpose in the eyes of the government for gay marriage. There is no possibility of the marriage producing more tax payers for additional revenues. It is about the money. In addition the survival of the human race depends on reproduction. without reproduction human life ends in one generation. Thats what nature intended wheather you chose to believe and accept that or not. We can write and re write the laws of man all we want but we will never be able to re-write the laws of nature and nature has a way of fixing things when we try.
Again, we're a free society. We don't need a purpose to allow things, we need a purpose to NOT allow them.
Nor is there when infertile people get married, people who don't want children, or people who are too old to have them. Yet we allow them to get married. Plus, we allow people who aren't married to have children.
Sperm from gay men can still fertilize eggs, and eggs from gay women can still be fertilized. Also, see my above paragraph.
Really? The laws of nature now govern us again? I guess it's back to the caves for us! Survival of the fittest and what not. If anyone ever breaks into your home to club you over the head and drag off your wife and daughters, I certainly hope you won't call the police and invoke the laws of man, as that would just be part of the nature of humans.
Those civilizations crashed and burned. Whoops!
Yes, because of gay people??? Of course every other society since the dawn of age has also had gay people, and even ones that have strongly denounced them have also collapsed. Sooooo, whoops!!!
Seriously, find me one academic study that's credible, and shows that gay people were the cause of the fall of Rome and Greece.
Situations like these are exactly the reason gays should not be in uniform, especially when they choose to act on their desire to marry. I really don't have a problem with gays in general. But, I do have a problem with their lifestyle and their behavior, especially effeminate men chasing after other men like a woman would. I can ignore this most of the time. But in this case, I can't. A Soldier's behavior should NEVER become an issue for their chain of command. When it does, consequences are necessary.
This woman should get the $250+K survivor benefit and other pay entitlements if the deceased had this in her will and an agreement with her parents. If she didn't - woe be to her because her spouse didn't communicate her wishes. Under the law, the survivor has nothing coming to her and she and her 'spouse' knew this. They could have bought other insurance to ensure benefits were guaranteed if something happened. I am sorry for an oversight on their part but the military is not wrong.
The government only recognizes marriage because it promotes a healthy population growth. Our economy is based on a growing population. You also don't want children raised out of wedlock as it does not benefit them and can be a drag on the economy. Given this, benefits to married people are there so that they can maintain a minimal amount of security and well being while raising their families as married couple usually survive on a lower income while having higher costs. It is impossible for gays to have children. You can adopt or do IVF but still, they are not both or either spouses child. I am sure what it comes down to is money. It's not that homosexuals are second rate citizens... its just that the benefit isnt there to give them those.... benefits.
don't need no stink'n license to get kinky...now get your kink on...
Fire,
Infertile people get married, as do people who don't want children, or people who are too old to have them. Plus, we allow people who aren't married to have children. There's no benefit, according to you, to allow any of that either.
Also, sperm from gay men can still fertilize eggs, and eggs from gay women can still be fertilized.
Fire,
Also, sperm from gay men can still fertilize eggs, and eggs from gay women can still be fertilized.
You would do this?
I have to object at the ignorance displayed in some of these comments. For one, the military does not reflect "free society" or is it even remotely a suitable place for social experimentation. The military is the most serious people profession of them all. Many people, not just the individual directed, could lose their lives if every individual does not do exactly as ordered. Unit cohesion is a top priority for every commander. The lack of it can make or break the unit's ability to complete the mission. Obviously, the mission is the #1 priority of any unit.
That said, there is no time to deal with individual problems that interfere with accomplishing the mission. If square pegs must be rounded to fit, they will either be rounded to fit or they will be thrown away. There is no negotiating around this fundamental requirement. Basic training is a fundamental program to separate the square pegs from the round ones and to round the square pegs into round ones. If the rounding is unsuccessful, the failing pegs are cast out.
It remains to be seen if openly gay Soldiers can be rounded to fit into the unit. They may be able to fit better into some units than in others. In every circumstance, they will either sink or swim, among their other brothers/sisters in arms in the unit to which they are assigned.
No other country which allows open service has had any problems at all, but for some reason you think our dumb bigots are more cowardly and fragile than theirs.
Maybe it would be better if we just banned cowardly and fragile bigots from the military? That way we'd have a far more professional workforce with better unit cohesion.
Dick... the two gay women in this story are worth 100 of you.
As far as the government "promoting".... what are you going to do when they "promote" banning guns.... or "promote" some thing you care about? Our government should be in the business of making sure people are treated equally. Polygamy isn't equivalent to traditional marriage... gay marriage is directly comparable.
Some of the things said in this thread are disgusting.
Are they both wives or is one a husband? How do they pick which is which if one is a husband and one is a wife?
Tom,
Donna died fighting for her country. That means you. So one of the two nobel people you are talking about is a "was". Grow up. Leave your grade school jokes aside for a moment, and read the article, and imagine how you would have felt if you had been treated the way Donna has been.
They were both women, so I would that they both used the term "wife" although lots of folks use the neutral "spouse" title. By the way, from your comment, I doubt you have half the huevos that either one of these brave women had. Hang it up Tom, as a fellow male, I'm ashamed of you.
I did not dishonor neither I just asked a simple question that I'm sure many are asking. IRT to huevos I have served 25 years active duty, retired and am still supporting OIF in Afghanistan since 2009, downrange to all the nice places like Kandahar, Helmand, etc. Haven't been home in 13 months...I've paid my dues and then some but it is my choice and my right to ask ANY QUESTION I WANT. If you want to compare huevos come on over!
It started when one said "I'll be frank with you"
There is right and there is wrong...and then there is the LAW. She was treated according to LAW.
End of Story...
but this is NOT national headlines news worthy. This is NBC's staffs DAILY DOSE OF GAY NEWS. There are so many other important issues to worry about. THIS STORY IS NOT HEADLINE NEWS ANYWHERE BUT NBC. Feel free to look at top headlines at Reuters or the AP etc etc.....oh and this won't be even any news at Al-Jazzera
Exactly Shos. How many others have served and died overseas? Is there a headline story for each of them? NO.
I commend all those who serve our country. This woman put her life on the line just as many have before her. My husband and son are both active service military.
But she knew, and her partner knew, that the military doesn't acknowledge gay marriages.
The United States Government does not recognize Gay Marriage, There is no recognition for gay marriage for military benefits,Social Security Benefits or Federal Income tax filing status, President Obama pandered for the gay vote by claiming he was about equal rights for gays but he has not actually done anything besides pandering.
Personally I wish they would then the Gay married folks would also be subject to the marriage penalty when it comes to filing income taxes and then they could enjoy all of the benefits of being treated equally.
tom,
I would assume it would be determined by who was the receiver or who has committed to altering their gender to reflect masculine qualities. E.g. crew cut, wearing very tight sports bras, shaving their faces to promote hair growth. It's much easier to determine this with gay males.
Let’s start with the facts. The person they loved and shared their live with has died in service to our country. They could have objected and made their life miserable and made them a less efficient soldier. They didn’t and what they did is support them, give them a reason to work harder for their country and made them a better soldier. Now they have lost their partner as a result of that support. They deserve to be compensated!
You don't get it, do you? There's no need to have a "husband" and a "wife". They can be both be husbands, wives or spouses.
They are people who serve our country and one made the ultimate sacrifice, that deserves our thanks and respect. call them both patriots.
One of them just died in service of this country for you... I hope some of you aholes choke on a bone
You've got a lot to learn...far too much for this venue. If you are honestly curious, get yourself to the public library and start reading.
Sea, as the wife and mother of active service military I DO respect the loss of this brave soldier.
I commend all those who serve our country.
But that respect has nothing to do with this issue at hand. These women knew going in that the Feds didn't accept their relationship.
NOW the survivor expects to be treated differently? No
What is 'right' is 'right'? How about what is 'wrong' is 'wrong'.
Live the lifestyle if you want but it is still not right and correctly so is not recognized as a marriage.
Janine it's obvious from a majority of other posts above yours that many of you ( though perhaps not you personally)treat gays very differently n general. So I have to ask, why is your investment in this article that you think is not newsworthy and why do you care about what benefits she might seek or expect?
As CLEARLY stated in the article, the widow is not seeking anything. She is not expecting any compensation. She clearly says she knew what she was getting into, and she clearly says she is standing up so that this doesn't happen to someone else in the future. Posters here say "don't like the law, change it" and that's exactly what Johnson is pushing for.
Also CLEARLY stated in the article, it is the mother of the deceased that wishes for her widow daughter-in-law to be fairly treated like any other military wife.
The widow expects to be treated fairly and with respect, Janine. That is not too much to ask.
Perhaps the easiest way to fix this is to allow every service member to designate the individual they want to be considered "next of kin." Those whose marriages ARE recognized by the federal government would need to get their spouse's approval for designating anyone else, much as is done for 401(k) and other retirement benefits. That way, everyone is protected.
I don't see how anyone could object to this. After all, it expands choice and shouldn't conservatives be in favor of that?
why is it that no matter what changes all they want is this, then when this is achieved all we want is something else. and so on and so on. What's next? Use to be all they wanted was to serve openly in the military. Now they want benefits that apply to married personnel only. This isn't civilian life, pay advantages for married personnel in the military include comrats for food and BAQ/VHA for housing costs among other things. To pay this to same sex marriages would cost a great deal and open up the military to fraudulent marriages of single personnel in the military to collect extra funds and live off base at taxpayers expense.
Cul, you know nothing about me, or how I treat gays or anyone else.
I think all peoples should be treated with the respect they deserve. As an American citizen, tax payer and mother and wife of servicemen I have as much right as anyone else on this post to speak my mind.
If that bothers you, TOUGH.
tomf59 @2.2 The response from maninjapan to your question of who's the husband is typical of the supporters of gay rights, sometimes the loudest barking coming from the straight people who somehow have an undocumented and muddy agenda to do all they can (on paper or computer screen) to help the cause, as if it will somehow redeem them for other sins in their life that we don't know about. Don't ever give in to ther gnashing teeth and hate accusations. Being raised in a Christian atmosphere and following the Bible brings out the most hate, for they MUST deny God in order to relieve their conscience. Don't ever let them stomp on you, stomp back. According to many of them, (the ones who recognize there is a God), God is Love and He loves everyone and will treat everyone the same. This is a denial of the White Throne Judgement told about in the Book of Revelation, but they must deny it. They wouldn't be so vocal if they lived in the middle easr.
Another gay person determined to have recognition of their ideology.
So was Rosa Parks. End of story?
1) If this soldier had been married to a man instead of a woman, it would have cost the same amount. What you seem to be saying is that you are depending on there being gays in the military in order to help reduce costs.
2) How is same-sex marriage any more like to be fraudulent than a marriage between a male and a female?
Barry-NJ,
Wow! That's gotta be real confusing come Father's Day, Mother's Day, Spouses Day...
There's a big difference. No hetero male would marry a female friend so she could get benefits. For a multitude of reasons. Just ask any of us. Two best friend heteros would cause that's what you do for your bro. That's fraud. I wouldn't put it past two hetero guys.
Barry-NJ
Just what I was thinking.
Also, she was treated according to the law. You can not blame those involved for following it. However, it's a law which needs to be changed. With luck or should I say justice, the Supreme Court will strike it down. Perhaps once the do, this widow will receive retroactive benefits.
As many in this country would tell you seperate is not equal. Lets extend all people equal rights under the law regardless of color or sexual prefrence.
Wow, you know every heterosexual man in the country? Your Christmas card list must be a mile long. How about you show us some evidence that what you say is actually true?
Its the Law....plain and simple. Case closed!!
Tell you what, if gays keep pumping their sh*t (...no pun intended;) on America, then dammit I want to be able to marry as many ladies as I want (God knows there will be plenty of hot, lonely, hetero females with all these gays around!)....hell ya! I think fair is fair!!
ok, new daily checklist:
1. check birth control cost on...let say 25 wives to be conservative;)
2. viagra
3. 5hr energy drinks
4. Many big beds
5. Build bigger house
6. Build bigger driveway
7. Build boxing/wrestling ring (for when they get mad at each other)
....to be continued.
Jamie,
The polygamy argument is a strawman, as gay marriage is about the gender of the party contracting, not the number of people wanting to enter the contract.
Answer this for me... Why doesn't straight marriage lead to polygamy? After all, polygamous marriages are heterosexual agreements, not homosexual ones, therefore for if the gender of a party in a marriage contract is going to lead to polygamy it's much more likely it would come from straight marriage.
NBC likes to create news and push the agenda of its management. When the facts of a story don't fit their desired narrative, they selectively edit and twist them to fit. Sickening.
If you get your news from NBC (or the New York Times, for that matter, they're just as bad) for whatever reason, then hopefully you also seek out the real story elsewhere.
@sarah....(you sure like using the word "strawman" a lot!! lol) Do you even read what you write? This is no argument, it was a simple statement that if people, that claim gay orientation, can defect from society's norm as we know it, than why cant I have my thirst quenched?:) Oh wait, not aberrant enough for your liberal brain?
Jamie,
No, too ignorant for my liberal brain. The answer to your question is the answer to the question I posed you, which you conveniently didn't answer.
Answer this for me... Why doesn't straight marriage lead to polygamy? After all, polygamous marriages are heterosexual agreements, not homosexual ones, therefore for if the gender of a party in a marriage contract is going to lead to polygamy it's much more likely it would come from straight marriage.
We're talking law here. In order for something to be part of a "slippery slope" and remain logical, you have to show a connection and because we live in a free society it can, logically, only be applied to constricting rights, not expanding them. Ergo, the slippery slope argument can be used AGAINST making things illegal, not FOR making things illegal. It's more logical to say banning gay marriage could lead to a reinstatement of a ban on interracial marriage, as they both deal with marriage between protected classes, i.e. gender and race and if we give the government the power to ban one it can perceive that it has the power to ban both.
Get it? I'm guessing your answer will be some snarky comment because you're embarrassed to own up to your ignorance, but I'll just take it as a no.
From your comments it's pretty clear that you're a greedy bigot who thinks she deserves special rights and privileges, and that gays should be treated as 2nd-class citizens who are denied the same rights you enjoy.
Other than that we really don't know much about you.
Wow,
These women fought for our country, and we repay them with contempt?
I am proud of Tracy and Donna Johnson. I am ashamed of DOMA.
Thank you for your service and for your sacrifice. And Thank You Mr. President
for once again being the leader that we elected you to be and for doing the right thing
I am proud of their service as women but they are not married and they do not get benefits for being married....
If you did a little research you would see that they left the state they lived in to go to a state that allowed marriage and then went back to a state that did not recognize and were in the national guard in a stated that did not recognize it and in the military that did not recognize it there for they were not married, sorry!
If obama goes ofter the marriage issue he is just proving that is is because he has been bought and paid for by the GLBT organization that has given him hundreds of millions of dollars!!! More political corruption!!! and that he does not care about the majority of the people just the homos who bought him!
maninjapan78
I guess you're ashamed of God having defined marriage between one man and one woman too? I guess you believe whatever man says is right is right and whatever man says is wrong is wrong? Do you believe adults should marry children? How about giving benefits to people living together? How about people who want to marry their pets? Is there any lifestyle you find immoral or do you believe that people should live however they want?
Mike, God gave a tablet containing 10 "rules" that shouldn't be broken. People ignore them all the time. Such as adultery. Leviticus tells us that adulterers should be put to death. Doesn't happen any more.
John 8 tells a story about a woman brought before Jesus... the moral of this story is, "Let the one without sin be the first to throw the stone..." The accusers all left.
The point is, times change, people change, and the only reason you are clinging to this one man, one woman, thing is RELIGION. Well, not everyone espouses to your "religion" and your beliefs.
If you are so without sin, then, by all means, continue denying equal treatment to these people, be they women or men. I believe another thing Jesus told us is that, we should not judge what people do lest we be judged by the same standard. These people are devoted to each other the same way that you are devoted to your wife. Let them have the same benefits that you enjoy.
Mike, marriage is the joining of two CONSENTING ADULTS. Children are not adults. Animals can not legally consent.
Marriage is a CONTRACT so it is bound by CONTRACT LAW and the definitions of a contract under the law. Minors signing or entering into ANY contract make the contract either void or voidable (depending on the particular state and their laws regarding contracts) unless there is an adult responsible for the child also entering into the contract. Dogs, cats, hamsters, gerbils, guinea pigs, fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians, weasels, horses, sheep, cows, pigs, et. al. can not enter into a contract either because they lack the necessary mens rea to form consent. Two people living together can enter into a contract that one inherits everything and that they share expenses. In some states, Common Law marriage still exists which states that after X years of living together the two people ARE married under the law and in order to sever the relationship they must be legally DIVORCED first. Your argument is invalid based on contract law. Have a nice day.
Mike
Unless they harm another living creature, all adults who are mentally competent should MOST CERTAINLY live however they want, with absolutely 100% equal rights and responsibilities under the law.
No adult should ever be forced to live according to another person's beliefs.
You are apparently a Christian, and I firmly believe that gods are superstitions created by primitive humans to explain what was, to them, inexplicable. Why should you have power over me?
You don't. Get over it.
Marriage is between a Man and Woman ... plain and simple ... any other marriage is perverted and performed by enablers of perversion.
Man perverting Man ... Woman pervertingWoman have three strikes against them Nature ... Society and GOD. Three strikes and you are out.
You are an Adult quit perverting us ... that is getting it!
How, exactly, are you being perverted by two people that you don't know getting married? That makes absolutely no sense.
patter123
You say that, "No adult should ever be forced to live according to another person's beliefs."
What do you think laws are? We all have to abide by laws and are accountable to someone else here on earth. Why do you atheists have a hard time believing we also have to answer to someone higher than our government?
Something can't come from nothing as you atheists want to contend. The toothpicks did not evolve from tree branches that fell from trees over billions of years. Your computer did not evolve from over trillions of years from nothing. Neither did this this planet or people who live upon this planet.
The earth did not just happen to evolve from tiny bits of atomic particles that flew across empty space and just decided to come together in the perfect location necessary to support human and animal life. Human cells and DNA are more complex than anything man will ever dream of.
Atheists don't want to believe in God, because it interferes with your lifestyles. You want to live life as you want and don't believe you will be held accountable for how you lived your life here on earth. That is real foolish considering you are accountable to the laws of the United Sates and any other country you may visit. You are accountable to your employer. You are accountable to pay taxes and obey speed limit laws. Children are accountable to parents and teachers, but we are not accountable to a God, who created us in His image?
Life has no value to atheists which is why they not only support homosexuality and the murder of unborn children. Atheists believe life has no more value than a rock, tree, or ant. Atheists believe that if you blew up a Home Depot, a subdivision of homes who evolve over millions of years. And atheists mock Christians for believing God created us in His image and came and revealed Himself to us and made it possible that our broken relationship with Him could be restored.
God came to earth as a man and died for our sins. I know you atheists don't believe there is a God, so I'm sure you don't believe in something as sin. But we were all born sinners; that is why we sin. We all have sinned and are not good enough for Heaven. The payment for our sin is eternal separation from a Holy, Just, and Righteous God.
When you die you will no longer be able to deny the existence of God. You will spend an eternity separated from Him not because of your sins, but because of your rejection of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. You are right though about Christians not forcing Jesus upon you. God will not force Himself upon you or any other atheists or person who decided to reject Jesus as the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
I'm not forcing you to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. That doesn't mean I'm going to remain silent about the truth. You have the right to reject the belief of God's existence. You even have the right to criticize Christians for our beliefs. I too have the right to share what I believe, even though you disagree.
I've dedicated my life to defend your freedom to believe whatever you want. I'm not only willing to die for what I believe in, but willing to sacrifice my life so that others may enjoy the freedoms given by God and man.
NMEast
Thanks for your liberal theology. Those the only 2 verses you know? How about these:
1 John 2:3-4 - And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 - "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."
Romans 1:26-27 - "Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."
Matthew 19:1-10
19 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.
3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”
4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh]? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”
8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”
10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”
Acts 17:30
30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.
Romans 2:4
4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?
1 Peter 2:24
24 “He himself bore our sins” in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; “by his wounds you have been healed.”
Romans 3:23
23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Romans 6:23
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 5:8
8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
1 Corinthians 15:1-4
15 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
Acts 2:21
21 And everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.
Acts 2:38-39
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
John 14:6
6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 1:12
12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—
Now, what I believe:
We all are born sinners which is why we sin. Homosexuality is a sin as is adultery, lust, fornication, pride, lying, cheating, stealing, coveting, envy, idolatry, and not loving others as yourself. We are saved by grace and not by our good deeds or works. There is no other way to God, but through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. We are all called to repent. We are to repent or turn from our sins and toward Jesus Christ, the only Righteous one there is.
God never intended for imperfect and sinful Christians to remain silent about sin, but not be hypocrites; saying one thing and doing another. Many heterosexual men and women have made a mockery of marriage. Many Christian men and women have not honored God in their marriage relationships either. But you are doing homosexuals a disservice and putting their souls in danger of Hell by telling them that they are not sinning, just keeping living their homosexual lifestyles; God will accept them. He will not accept people who refuse to acknowledge and repent from their sin. Am I sinless? No, there was only one perfect, sinless person, who walked this earth and I'm not He (Jesus).
I'm a sinner saved by grace like everyone else, who repents and accepts Jesus as Lord and Savior. Does that mean we are sinless after that? No, but when we have the Holy Spirit living within us; He convicts of sin and enables us to know truth (what is right and wrong). Jesus is the Judge and will judge sinners one day. Telling people they are sinning is not judging them.
Ezekiel 3:16-22
16 At the end of seven days the word of the Lord came to me: 17 “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the people of Israel; so hear the word I speak and give them warning from me. 18 When I say to a wicked person, ‘You will surely die,’ and you do not warn them or speak out to dissuade them from their evil ways in order to save their life, that wicked person will die for their sin, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. 19 But if you do warn the wicked person and they do not turn from their wickedness or from their evil ways, they will die for their sin; but you will have saved yourself.
20 “Again, when a righteous person turns from their righteousness and does evil, and I put a stumbling block before them, they will die. Since you did not warn them, they will die for their sin. The righteous things that person did will not be remembered, and I will hold you accountable for their blood. 21 But if you do warn the righteous person not to sin and they do not sin, they will surely live because they took warning, and you will have saved yourself.”
22 The hand of the Lord was on me there, and he said to me, “Get up and go out to the plain, and there I will speak to you.”
Mike,
Your religious beliefs have blinded you to science at a very rudimentary level. Take the erroneous and simplistic assertion you make (out of nowhere and with no proof I might add) that "Something can't come from nothing as you atheists want to contend."...
In fact, in the real world it has been discovered and demonstrated that energy and particles spontaneously flicker in and out of existence in a complete vacuum (your nothingness) without any outside influences. In other words, at a very fundamental level something can indeed come from nothing.
But beyond that initial misconception you go on to paint a set of completely erroneous pictures of the evolution of matter and planets and life on earth, relying on some religious doctrine written thousands of years ago.
In turn, then use that same doctrine to assert some morality about the wrongness of sexual proclivities of other adult humans whose private activities have zero bearing on your own behavior and try to claim a wholly fabricated and unprovable divine authority as your rationale for denying those adults their constitutionally protected civil rights.
I think you might want to sit down, relax and have a nice cup of STFU and spend time actually learning some science instead of maintaining your willful ignorance.
I can't resist responding.
Actually, quantum mechanics has shown that matter can spontaniously form. It soes so all the time and has been observed. Look up quantum vacume fluctuations and casimir effect for more detail.
Your interpretation of evolution is laughable.
No the planet didn't evolve, but the people did. The cact that you lump together non-living things with organisms to refute evolution shows you have no understanding of the subject matter.
Planet formation is an understood science. All mass has gravity, and as such any density fluctuation will result in particles being drawn together. It is serendipitous that our planet formed in a habitable zone, but we are seeing that most solar systems have planets in the habitable zone. So clearly this isn't such an improbable event.
Ummm, no it isn't. We are understanding DNA and microbiology pretty well (although we still have a ways to go). Scientists are nearing the point of generating entirely synthetic life.
Not really. Besides sleeping in on Sunday, my life wouldn't change much if I followed the rules laid out by god. I don't beleive in it because the evidence illustrates that a personal god is improbable.
I hold myself accountable. My family, friends and society hold me accountable. Belief in god is a cop out, and I'm more moral than the vast majority of god-fearing people.
I can find evidence of my employer, government, parents... not so much a god. So yes, it's foolish.
To the contrary, life has more value to an athiest than you religious folks. After all, we only get one shot at it.
False, and saying so makes you appear even more foolish.
I love this argument! It illustrates the person arguing it has no idea how evolution works because they 1) simply refuse to understand, or 2) are incapable of understanding it.
Yep, just like I'd mock a grown person who believes in the tooth faerie. After all, books have been written about the tooth faerie too.
Any actual proof? No? I thought not.
Nope, sin is a concoction of religion. I do believe in a moral code however. And many sins are wrong. But then again, so are many other religious elements (like selective discrimination).
If you say so.
Your right. Because I'll be dead. As in not existing.
Blah blah.
Neither is the homeless guy on the corner talking about aliens. I think you two are a lot alike.
First thing you have said that isn't crazy.
But yet still restrict people other rights?! Whats up with that?
Then let people have equal treatment under the law.
EngEsq,
Merci beaucoup.
EngEsq, you are my hero!!!
BUt God doesnt Change. God knows best for his people, and what works. When we try to make things work with out God it seems to fall apart.. Look at America since were trying to have a society as God as our foundation anymore , its going down hill pretty fast. What better way do you think it is for a family to have a father figure and a mother figure ? Children need to see what its like for parents and their roles, as a father and mother, responsibilities, masculine, feminine qualities. Not all this gender neutral garbage. A man is a man, and a woman is a woman. They are not the same by any means.
Why do people always use this line to justify thats its ok for people to sin. How about finishing the rest of what he said . Read the last words in Bold.
So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
Why are you even bothering to quote and or reference the bible when you just said above..
. "Well, not everyone espouses to your "religion" and your beliefs "
Why would you say something like that, then go off half quoting scripture, ripping half one liners out of context to try to distort and prove a point that isnt even a point ?
How easy it is to do that when people have agendas. Please use all of a passage to get the real point across. Sin No more .. Hes telling her that she is forgiven, but he also wants her to stop doing the sins she was doing. SO regardless of what sin we are doing, lying, cheating, stealing, slander, kill, worshipping false gods, Homosexuality, knock it off and sin no more.. Of course we are not perfect and we will sin, but we should be abstaining the best we can from sinning and not freely doing it.
The only recognition that the spiteful, evil, and ironically-named Defense of Marriage Act deserves is full and forceful ignorance by all branches and aspects of government, swiftly followed by a repeal. It reflects every sort of wrongful exclusiveness the United States (and its military) ostensibly battle against.
(psst...it's "Woe is me", not "Whoa is me".)
NOT!!!!!!!!!!
If they were to stupid to know that going in then f%$k them.
If they thought the Army would change for them, ROTFLMAO!!
Not exactly how I would phrase it Desoto...but accurate. They knew the risks of being in the military. That it could mean deployment for one or both of them. They knew that the military doesn't recognize gay marriage, but they did it anyway.
While I commend their service to our country, I don't believe that the miiitary should treat the survivor any differently.
Game kid, "Whoa dude!" I thought the same thing. Woe is the writer of this article because they cannot even use the proper spelling of the word. So much for being professionals.
The fact that something exists doesn't make it right. It also doesn't make it permanent. Just as the 'don't ask don't tell' rule was repealed they have every reason to believe that the DOMA would be repealed. The fact that they joined knowing that this was in place doesn't make them stupid, it just means they believe that people will eventually see that this law is wrong and change it.
@DesotoKim, that's just like saying if Rosa Parks was too stupid to know she was going to have to sit in the back of the bus, then f%$k her. Donna Johnson clearly says in the interview:
“And I’m not standing up here, whining: ‘Whoa is me.’ We were adults, big girls, and we knew what we were getting ourselves into. But it doesn’t mean I have to stand idly by and see all this happen to somebody else who’s in a same-sex marriage (in the military).”
Good for her, standing up for what's right.
I don't have to have a reason not to like homosexuals. It is not based on any religious beliefs. I don't have to have a reason why I don't like cabbage either. Homosexuals just can't accept the fact that people don't have to tolerate them any more than they have to tolerate str8 people, which a lot of homosexuals don't.
Although from your comment history it's clear that you have some rather silly religious beliefs which are likely the source of your homophobia, given that you're a JESUS freak:
The funny thing about you homophobic JESUS freaks is that your Jesus was very likely a gay dude.
All this crap about "Oh we didnt even know I had to be put on the ECT" and "We thought I would get the same benefits because they repealed the DADT policy" is just that, crap. Everyone had to be breifed on the repeal and what it all ment. I sat through a week of classes and discussions about it and all that was covered.
Wouldn't even a hetro spouse have to be on the emergency notification form? Every thing I have ever filled out asks spouse and then it asks person to notify in an emergency and I have to fill both out. Having had an in-law that was incompetent to handle legal issues for her husband our family had to list her as the spouse and another family member as the emergency notification person. If they had to ask her for anything she would not have been able to give any consent of anything even though she was the spouse. I would never leave something as important as this blank and just assume they would get it right.
Perhaps they should have given some lessons in reading comprehension during your week-long classes
Quoteth the article:
"The point is moot — even if Tracy Johnson was listed, due to DOMA she still would not have been the first person that military officials would have visited in the hours after Donna Johnson was killed."
So what she's saying is that the rest of the same-sex couples aren't adults? Talk about self contradicting. Oh, and I suppose you're turning down any benefits you might receive after the fact: correct?
@MmmMmmBeer,
Perhaps they should have given thee less hops in they last consumption. She doesn't have facebook, text message, or Internet? Worst case scenario, the mother of the deceased could have notified her. I'm guessing she probably might not have been to happy with her daughter's sexual preference either: let's see them write a bill to change that.
Society will NEVER agree on ANYTHING together.....Fact of life....Be it politics, religion, gun control, straight versus gays, etc...Time we just all shut the Hell up, and live our own lives to where we see fit.....And piss on everyone else....
What next - Poor America.
If two people marry they should be entitled to the same benefits as the next couple... it should not depend on whether they are a heterosexual couple.
@Shipwrecked
So, to make America better, we should not give out benefits to any spouses for military?
Yup, I guess you should push for that.
Just go back in the closet and shut the door!
No "itiswhatitis" she is not saying, as you put it, "So what she's saying is that the rest of the same-sex couples aren't adults? Talk about self contradicting. Oh, and I suppose you're turning down any benefits you might receive after the fact: correct?" NOT CORRECT! What she is saying is EXACTLY what she DID say.
Which was she did not want the same thing to happen to OTHER same sex spouses. As you obviously COULD NOT comprehend "And I'm not standing up here, whining: 'Woe is me.' We were adults, big girls, and we knew what we were getting ourselves into. But it doesn't mean I have to stand idly by and see all this happen to somebody else who's in a same-sex marriage (in the military)."
"spouse" absolutely disgusting!
First off condolences for the loss of your loved one and Thank You for your sacrifice.
This is another example of what equal rights is about.
These are not special rights...they are equal. If your not Gay or Lesbian, it shouldn't bother you at all that we are allowed to marry.
Pay attention to keeping your own hetero marriages together....They have a failure rate of over 50%, so us taking advise from the bigot hetero community....I don't think so.....You the last ones that should be giving advise on marriage.
Hey Steve, aren't you done watching broke back mountain for the thousand's time?
Benefits are determined by legal status, and a marriage is legal and recognized only when the couple consists of one man and one woman.
A majority of states have already held votes and formally rejected and prohibited any change to that definition.
judgemark
No Value
Inflammatory
Reported
Please review the policies and guidelines for posts on Newsvine. No personal attacks.
Steve you are like all homo's, big whining snivelling baby's who want every body to think they are normal when your freaks of nature period! Piss on your sensitive feelings and grow up!
Jim5769
Yes they have. Now we have 2 cases in front of the US Supreme Court that very well may change that. We'll know more in June or July.
None the less more and more states are going to be recognising same sex marriages and under the state to state laws when it comes to marriage, while some states may not allow them they, can not deny them, as they are required to acknowledge them by law as a legal marriage.
This was tested in the courts when states tried to pass laws prohibiting whites from marrying blacks, and was found unconstitutional. The courts found marriage in one state is legal in another and shall not be denied.
Marriage was ordained by God, not the current administration of the antichrist! There is no way two men or two women will ever be recognized as married in a world where God comes first!
judgemark
No Value
Inflammatory
Reported
Continued misuse of posting guidelines may get you suspended for a day or expelled from using Newsvine, by blocking your IP address.
Steve you are of no value! You have been reported! Big baby crawl back into your closet where the world will be better off not knowing your perverted ways. your homosexual ways are inflammatory to God and will get you expelled from heaven, so how's that goof ball!
1) It was never a traditional right for two people of the same sex to marry in the United States--regardless of what color they were--not even when the States were just colonies.
2) Skin color is not interchangeable with sex. A man is a man, no matter what color. You make the common fallacious argument of false equivalency.
3) States have already denied recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other states. This is the big problem with saying that it was an issue for individual states to decide. I've always said this was a matter that would have to be settled at the federal level--and yet federal law already exists on the matter. The only question is whether the federal gov't has the authority to limit marriage to one man and one woman--a question on which the Supreme Court has already ruled in the affirmative.
Hey Steve, do you honestly think I care about getting expelled from a stupid online chat line that means absolutely nothing and will never in a million years ever change somebody's view or values! Grow up you little B---ch and quit tattling telling like your 5 years old. Maybe that's what happened to you anyways.
apparently the community is nothing more than a bunch of effing Fags and lesbians!
Hi blondeness,
I'm sorry to be so direct, but just who the heck do you think you are to deny multiple partner families the same rights you want only extended to couples? The reason people (not me) have said that homosexual marriage should be lawful is because these people love one another. I think this is all a very dumb way to make laws, but this is what people like you have wrought. So, since love is the defining characteristic within a relationship in determining whether the people within it should be able to marry, then I say we should let any couple or group of consenting adults do exactly that.
Can you imagine the confusion? So there's a $1,200 monthly indemnity for survivors of soldiers...What if a soldier has, say, 12 spouses. Should each get this amount? If not, why not? And please, I truly ask you please, do not merely argue that marrying more than one person is illegal. That was the argument made by many people against homosexual marriage and you gave it no quarter.
Not that it matters now since this war has been lost, but when "civil unions" were all the rage among conservatives in order to stave off the left's inexorable push for homosexual marriage I argued in public speeches that our present outcome was the only outcome possible. That if we wanted to prevent homosexual marriage we had to deny civil unions too, and we would have to come up with a better rationale than simply saying "well, because it's illegal and always has been".
The answer was that marriage is a societal construct that was designed to benefit and improve society. If there is an argument among homosexual marriage advocates that homosexual marriage would improve and benefit society then I think many conservatives would have joined the cause. But no argument has ever been made that I am aware of, certainly it is not a public opinion if the argument exists. And so the law is being altered based upon how people feel.
This has two corrosive effects. First, it is what I would call despotic. In other words, there is no rhyme or reason to why we are doing it, just that because we want to we will. And, second, if the purpose of marriage is no longer to benefit and improve society (as is implicit in the claim that marriage should be allowed based solely on one's love for another, or others) then the value of marriage to society is diminished, marriage itself is diluted, and, assuming that there was in fact a societal benefit, it will be reduced. In other words, society will be made worse, not better, by making law this way.
What a shame that homosexual marriage advocates didn't want to argue their case from my perspective. Could it be because there is no argument for homosexual marriage from my perspective? If so, then we are simply left with the despotic outcome mentioned above.
Down the slippery slope. In case no one noticed the government is broke and can barely afford to give death benefits to a spouse with children. You don't need benefits. Get on with your life and find another "friend."
Talk about Obama and politicians opening Pandora's box. Gays rant and rave and whine and nauseate most of us-no matter what the polls say.
Jim5769
Please see the docket for the US Supreme Court for this year. They are hearing 2 cases on this issue.
When you sign up for the military.....YOU SIGN A CONTRACT.....and in that contract it stipulates the conditions for benefits to be awarded. You have NO CASE after the fact......If you dont like what is being offered...DONT SIGN....otherwise petition BEFORE SIGNING anything......
Everyone except this lady knows what happens when you assume.
And even if the law is changed in the future, it WILL NOT be retroactive to include her. The military added some spouse educational benefits about eight months after my wife retired from the Military, and I can't get them after the fact. If it requires them to hand out money, they aren't going to include you, so they can save that money.
7minutes2midnight
You also have the right to have your marriage (contract) acknowledged by the Government.
The thing that alot of people dont understand about the repeal of DADT is that is just saying you can be gay in the military without punitive actions. Thats it, nothing else. It doesnt cover any gay rights at all. Hell alot of married couples dont even know there is a order or regulation on marriage. An Adult would of done the reseach, because the lack of action on a adult matter is childish!
The DOMA will be upheald IMO because as this case indicate the primary reason gays want it replealed is money. NOT civl rights. Not equality. MONEY. The gay community wants to suck more money from the government without contibuting in the same manner as normal couples do. Yes I said normal because that IS what a couple consisting of one male and one female are, normal. When the court see's the real purpose of the push for same sex marriage and the finacial burnden that will be placed on the government they will throw out these cases. The healthcare bill was found to be constitutional ONLY because it was a tax and raised money not because it was constitutional in any other manner. When the court views the costs assosiated with allowing gay marrige they will be convinced we should not endorse them.
Avenger- You have me confused here. How is it that gay marriage will cost any more than heterosexual marriage?
Government should not be in the marriage business. Separate church and state
Civil unions for all couples- it is a legal contract in the eyes of the government and nothing more. If a church wants to excumunicate someone for a same sex marriage, let them; like they do with divorce... but the government lets people get divorced.
Gays should have the same legal right to form a union with a partner. Our government should protect that right---regardless of religious feelings on the matter.
judgemark banned, grenade-trolling, slurring 'fags', generally awful commenting, 4 days off suspension.
Mark- Nicely said but how can you take religious beliefs out of government decisions when the government is filled with religious people? Humans are hateful. Always have been, always will be.
Our government had plenty of Christian Influence in the past. Our founding fathers seen religion as an important part of our society. That doesnt mean the government woudl enforce it, just that it plays a role in our lives.
“And I’m not standing up here, whining: ‘Whoa is me.’
Sure you are. You're not a husband, you're a lesbian. A homosexual. Get that through your thick skull.
That flag and those death benefits are not yours.
Deal with it.
- 26-year enlisted veteran. Two tours downrange.
as a veteran, i would have hoped your service was in defense of our nation and it's constitution, to include defending the rights of your fellow citizens. all rights, not just those we pick and chose to support. and being that DADT was repealed by the commander in chief, no matter how much you or i may disagree or dislike, then these fellow citizens were and are allowed to serve and defend our country. therefore they deserve the respect of being treated as the equals they are.
by the way, you served for 26 years, and were only downrange twice? that's not impressive...
- 23 year enlisted veteran, downrange a lot more than your thick skulled azz...
BD - it doesn't matter where he served; the point is he did serve. Get over yourself. You serve where you are told, not where some know-it-all, says you should have served.
Zheng - CK made a point of making the remark first as if that suddenly entitled him to make a case-closed statement about these women's rights. People like CK are embarrassing to those of us who did serve not to mention Americans in general.
Just because DADT was repealed doesn't mean the laws (here being Regulations) are changed. What this writer and many people here including CK-696406 ( a supposed 26 yr vet) failes to realize or just don't know about is when you are in the Military you life under 2 sets of Laws Civilian and Military. They do not always mesh. Military Regulations and UCMJ are Facist because if they were Democacy Rules the Military could not survive in a Democracy. CK if you wore all the strips you show in your Avitar you are one stupib NCO that the Military doesn't need. Being a former US Army NCO, if we were stationed togather I would have smoked you like a Cheap Cigar.
CK---right on, brother!
I'm not prejudice,and I do feel as human we are equal, but in the eyes of the law as specified in our history, marriage between a man and woman is legal and under God, it's legal and moral. But it seems in this time, people wants to changed these laws to fit their "new" lifestyle. It is what it is! If you decide to live in a different lifestyle, that's your decision and you have to live with the consequences. but you still have to live according to the law, no ifs ands or buts. I applaud and am very proud of anyone who fought(or is still fighting) for our country, but I think that we still should abide by the laws and decrees of this country. After all, isn't this what we are fighting for? I pray for all who lost their life in this war and I asked God to bring peace and comfort to their families/friends. Changing things or protesting things because it doesn't fit your lifestyle or agenda is pure selfish and in this world, that's all we see is selfishness.
CK, I have known several people in my life that enlisted because they were not bright enough to get a decent paying job. Enlisting doesn't make you special, what you do while in the service may make you special.
CK--- any soldier who dies for their country is worth 100 of you mf. Did you spend your 26 years hiding behind a wall?
4everphillyfan... reread your own post.
"protesting things because it doesn't fit your lifestyle or agenda is pure selfish and in this world, that's all we see is selfishness."
Why should there be "consequences" to loving another human being.
Gay rights may be against your religion, but it's not against mine. In this country, we have freedom of religion. We [should] support all rights regardless of our own feelings about them... otherwise, if we should find ourselves in the minority on an issue--- what can we expect our own treatment to be? "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".... who said that again?
I wonder is the military now going to start recognizing people who live together and are not leagally married!!!
Because these two were not legally married... They flew to a state that let them get married and then flew back to a state that did not recognize their illegal marriage and were in the national guard where it is also illegal so I am sorry but they were not married!!!!
If anything they should be charged with an Article 15 for violating the law!!!!!
I really agree with the Chief that it is amazing how she is stating that she is not whining about it, as she goes out and finds a lib news agency that will push her homo agenda, and whines to it!!!!
I agree with you, whats this world coming to.. They knew it wouldnt be reconizied but did it anyway because the feel they should be able to do what they like. I dont disagree with same sex marriages getting treated as married, but the law is the law. if you want it to benefit you, you wait until its changed.
Vet with 32 years service
Years back, when my husband and I were still just dating, he went MIA for about 6weeks. I was a basket case, but since I was only a girlfriend, I got NO Info at all from the military. And had he died, I'd have gotten no benefits, even though he had I had been together for a while.
They knew what could happen. They took the chance. But the military isn't going to change just for them.
Actually the military did change when DADT was repealed but there are still some problems, like treating all spouses equally, to work out.
The problem with treating military same-sex spouses the same as hetero couples is that it is still illegal to be married to a person of the same sex on a Federal level. When it changes on a federal level then it will change their standing on benefits. Though it has been noted by politicians that one reason they still restrict benefits to same-sex couples is over saving money.
Annon, when and if they change the "Regulations" they will get their money and benifits but they will be retroactive up to a date and back claims will be paid up to date. So it is not saving nothing.
Excuse me, people fly to other states ALL THE TIME to get married - Vegas comes to mind immediately, I myself am a resident of TN and got married at the NC coast (since my state has no beachfront real estate).
Fact of the matter is, they were LEGALLY wed and has the marriage certificate to prove it (re-read the opening paragraph).
MmmMmmbeer,
This is what garrie actually wrote:
"They flew to a state that let them get married and then flew back to a state that did not recognize their illegal marriage"
I'm not sure if it's true. I agree. People travel all over the world to get married. Some states still do not recognize same sex marriages.
It is not illegal to marry someone of the same sex under Federal law. The Defense of Marriage Act just refuses to accept those marriages as valid for benefits and married status, but they are still legal.
DOMA will be reversed by legislation or struck down as discriminatory within the next few years. The question isn't if, but when.
As badly as the GOP is trying to increase its base beyond the core it now has dwindling in demographics and little chance of winning back a majority, they may actually be the force to make the change. It's no secret. The GOP wants the Latino votes, the women's votes, and the gay votes. Expect to see changes towards immigration reform with amnesty, a softer stance on women's health issues including backing off on abortion and birth control, and elimination of the DOMA to happen before the 2016 election. The GOP mainstream is already raising funds and organizing to pick off the far right challenges from their ranks.
Anyone in the military knows what a sham the repeal of Don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue, don't harass was.
The entire arguement against allowing benefits to gay married people is set up on an entirely failed arguement.
People aren't trying to say that the law should be violated for just this one person. They are saying the law itself is wrong AND this kind of legal action can cause the law to be revoked.
The Constitution guarantees equal treatment under the law. NOT allowing the recognition of entirely legal marriages is absolutely an unequal treatment under the law.
Her marriage was valid. It doesn't matter that she lived in a state that wouldn't recognize the marriage. The marriage itself was valid. Therefore it is unequal treatement under the law for her to be treated differently even though she has a legal marriage.
Most arguements against gay marriage rest on false premises and assumptions. ALL remaining arguements against gay marriage fall back to religious arguements. While many argue that our nations was founded as a Christian nation, it is very clear that our founding fathers explicitely intended to deny any religion the ability to control our laws, and that because all religious beliefs were to be allowed, that no one religious belief could trump all others for control of our legal system.
These facts deny the validity of religious arguements against allowing gay marriage. This is because to support one religious belief over any other to allow unequal treatment under the law is a violation of the Constitution.
DOMA will most likely be deemed unconstitutional under these facts, as allowing gay marriage does not force anyone to be gay, nor does it force one to believe that gay is right, nor does it alter what a religion can or cannot do. And it certainly does not damage one's existing or future heterosexual marriages.
Mormons and certain Christian variations cannot consume caffeine or alcohol, cannot smoke cigarettes and so on, yet these are not illegal based on these religious restrictions. Jews and Muslims cannot consume pork. Those who chose to follow those religions chose not to imbibe - and the rest of us are free to imbibe if we so choose. Why is 'anti-Gay' compliance with the Bible any different? Is it merely because these restrictions aren't 'popular enough' with the population to give them sway like anti-'gay' is?
@former Marine Sgt
What's that river in Egypt named again?
Not exactly. Federal law doesn't recognize same sex marriages. That's a state issue.
Not really, a lot of them are based on statistics. It's been shown that most gay couples have open relationships and aren't exclusively monogamous. Most arguments in favor of gays are based on intellectual dishonesty, bias, and the "swept under the rug, but they won't notice that" factor.
Where? The first amendment talks about the government not restricting freedom of religion, but nothing about keeping the church out of the state.
No one has the right to marry someone of the same sex so how is there unequal treatment?
More of the aforementioned "swept under the rug" factor. Doma does little else except provide a federal definition of recognized marriage. It's disingenuous to argue that the slogans and political pressure exerted by the gay movement, will not be used by pedophiles, polygamist, and bestials.
So you're saying that pork, alcohol, and cigarettes are beneficial? When did religion become pick and choose?
What,
The underlying fallacy supporting your entire purported argument is that you disregard the Constitutional right to equal treatment. The US Supreme Court has long held that marriage is a "fundamental" right. This precedent is unavoidable and would require legal/mental gymnastics to find against. As such, this "fundamental" (yes, very important term of art there with specific legal meaning,) right must be applied equally, because anything less is discriminatory and violates the very precepts that are foundational to this Republic. Ultimately, this will work its way up the courts to the Supremes and, under an honest Constitutional analysis performed under the existing formula, eventually this discrimination will fall. It may not be under the present sitting court, but it is going to happen, it is inevitable.
I believe that gays should be allowed to marry and receive the same benefits as heterosexual couples.As to the indemnity issue of $1200.00 monthly I disagree with that for all military widows or widowers.These women were married for 8 months and there should be some rules and regulations on how long people are married before that type of compensation is paid.No wonder this government is crying about paying Social Security to qualified,taxpaying people.Now it all becomes perfectly clear why our system is broken.
There is no guarantee of retroactive payment for anything. Even when the gov't "shuts down" and forces employees to show up and work for free (or be furloughed), there is no guarantee that they will get paid for the period of time that the gov't was shut down.
Congress would have to authorize retroactive payments, which I do not see happening.
In those decisions, the courts never even entertained the idea of such a thing as same-sex couples trying to get married. They were explicitly discussing heterosexual marriages between one man and one woman--trying to claim "skin color" is interchangeable with the sex of one of the parties is a false equivalency fallacy. A man is a man, and a woman is a woman, no matter what their skin color.
Furthermore, SCOTUS has also upheld that marriage is between one man and one woman, and that the federal gov't is able to set that limit in the best interests of society. That's how the Utah Territory was forced to ban polygamy (which was legal) in order to become a State and join the Union.
I don't pretend to know how SCOTUS will rule on this matter (they don't seem too concerned about applicable precedent, logic, or facts in many of their decisions in recent years), but it is certainly not as clear cut as you tried to make it sound.
itiswhat....
1. The Nile...what does it have to do with the article? Or were you trying to be cute?
2. For now. But Federal laws have been overturned before.
3. How many relationships do heterosexuals have before marriage? 57% of men/54% of women have admitted to infidelity while in a relationship. 74% of men/68% of women admit they would be unfaithful if they knew they'd never get caught. The heterosexual divorce rate is what...51%?
4. Read the Treaty of Tripoli...it clearly states the U.S. government is not based on the Christian religion. And, the Supreme Court, through precedent, has upheld the separation of church and state.
5. There are now seven states (I think) where same sex couples DO have the right to get married. And it looks like that number may get bigger soon.
6. We're talking about consenting adults, not children or animals. But I can see where you'd draw that conclusion, since heterosexual marriage let Jerry Lee Lewis marry his under-age cousin (not to mention all those other adult-minor straight couples, like that teacher in Washington who slept with her 13yo student and had his baby), and allowed the Mormons to practice polygamy (not to mention people in Biblical times - how many wives did Solomon have? And he was favored by God,).
You are whining you are not entitled to those benefits and the Military is upholding DOMA you don't like it get the F**K out sick of the homosexual agenda trying to be forced down other people's throat. The military is not meant to be catered to all of your wants and needs and is not a gravy train with biscuit wheels.
N - A Military member DIED protecting your right to free speech. Show some respect when you use that RIGHT if you know how.
I didn't say nothing against the soldier that made the ultimate sacrifice I respect that try to stay on topic. They went to D.C. to get married went back to North Carolina knowing that state didn't recognize gay marriage she said they married out of out love. Yet she said is not whining yet that is exactly what she is doing they are upholding DOMA and her partner didn't have her on her SGLI page two for benefits it's cold but it is what it is. Why doesn't she cry a little louder homosexual's think they are entitled the world they both knew the rules. If she doesn't like it she should leave the service the Army isn't going to change everything for one person DRAMA Queen. Stop being so hysterical you sound stupid!!
Take a chill pill N. You actually sound like the hysterical one here.
N.... Everything you said in your original comment was direspectful of the soldier who died. "Gravy train with biscuit wheels"?
Wasn't disrespectful just called out her partner's B.S.!
I am so SICK of the BIGOTS whining that their influence is WANING as the American people have RE-ELECTED President Obama who SUPPORTS marriage equality and has stated that he wants to see gay and lesbian Americans be treated like any other red-blooded taxpaying people in this country. They fight and die for it too so WTH is the problem with EQUAL benefits across the board? Israel, England, Germany, Australia, Canada and many more all have openly gay service people and treat THEIR citizens fairly... why doesn't America?? BIGOTS. DOMA was passed by a crowd of BIGOTS and Clinton knew he was cornered politically. Then we had "Dubya" and his congress run up our national debt thru the roof. Finally, we're starting to recover... even business leaders are telling Repubs to stop blocking progress and let America grow again. The only thing that is on the gay/lesbian agenda is to be treated FAIRLY like heterosexuals in every aspect of life. Is that too much?
I have the means and the ability, to kill! I choose not to...They have the same ability!.. They choose to live a perverted life, where I have to witness it and it's fallot. I love my son, but don't want to sleep with him. Why because it's a pervesion. Any same saex that has a attraction for the same...is a Pervert!.. It is my write to say it, teach it to my children, and live by it! It's called the constitution!
That's your opinion and teaching your children to be bigots may not even succeed since their peers generally SUPPORT equal rights for gays and lesbians in every aspect of life - they just don't make a big deal out of it because it doesn't need to be. BUT, haters need something so you cling to your hatred and the rest of us will move on with the real world. Hating people or calling them perverted because of a religion or some backwoods teachings will always be around and has been the cause of most of crimes commited against gay or gay-perceived people. Yes, people who bigots ASSUME are gay or lesbian are beaten or robbed or raped or murdered and they may not even be gay or lesbian! But, bigots are determined so cling to your hate and teach your children. Hopefully, they will learn differently from the world around them and IGNORE YOU. You may experience losing one or more relationship based on just how dedicated you are to your hatred. Best wishes!!
Harry, just because a person doesn't approve of a lifestyle tht doesn't make them a bigot or a hater. Nor does it mean that we approve or support anyone beating up on anyone else.
I do not support gay Marriage. I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman. The Military and Federal law supports my view. So do Miliary benefits.
These women knew this when they moved from one state to another to marry. They knew it when they joined the guard. They knew it when one was deployed.
They are not legally married under the law and as such the survivor does not receive any military benefit.
Jarhead go back to school moron it is Right not write.
I don't fall for that trap being labeled as a bigot due to your own CHOICE of being Homosexual. You made the decision to live an abnormal life style and to defy the very basic laws of mother nature herself. Then if that's not bad enough, homosexuals compare themselves to the days of old south where slavery was permitted and ATTEMPT to convince others that they're suffering the same as black people did which the two are so far apart it's beyond laughable. Yes, damn right, I WILL teach my kids that being homosexual is WRONG and without a second thought.
I don't feel sorry for you, because you can't fix stupidity. I do, however, feel sorry for your children.
Sympathy and sorry have no correlation based on morality or is that too much for you to understand?
What I have to ask here is where do people think Child Molesters are always a Gay Couple? When I read incidents of Child Molestation the adult is, in most cases, a single person.
When they use that "disapproval" to deny rights to contributing, productive, law abiding citizens of this country, it most certainly does.
I wonder how many politicians really are in agreement of gay marriage. They want the vote.
I believe using the words perverted, perversion and Pervert (note the capitalization) in one short paragraph does point to someone being a bigot.
Jax. Nowhere in my postings will you see me use such terms as perverted, perversions, etc. So don't include me in your rant of bigotry.
Janine - I was commenting on your reply to Harry's direct response to 99jarhead99's post at 10.1. You did not use those words, 99jarhead99 did and your reply came across as a defense of his post. His post really was bigoted, no two ways about it.
(Edited to add another sentence.)
6 dogs.... And anyone who wants to equate homosexuality with child molesting...... Child molesters are typically white heterosexual males. (6dogs, I know that's not what you were saying, I'm just expanding on your comment) People seriously need to do their research.
As for the military benefits.... You are all correct. The federal law does not recognize same-sex marriage, which means that she is NOT entitled to those benefits under the law. Is it right? NO.....
I don't give a rat's hind end of you disagree with same-sex marriage. It's not your life, nor is it your soul to answer for or defend.
You think gay sex and gay relationships are disgusting? Don't have one!!! But I will be DAMNED if I will sit silently by while you call gay people child molesters, and continue to withhold equal rights because of your own ignorance. SCOTUS will over-turn DOMA. It is inevitable. It is the right thing to do. And if YOU don't like it, Jarhead and Bob...... YOU get the f**k out!! Last I checked, this is the UNITED States of America, and every single person has a right to equality and the pursuit if their own happiness. So let's keep it UNITED and stop the fear-based hatred. You might be surprised how normal a gay person actually is if you would sit down and talk to one.
@Kiaunna
Well maybe next time, before the "I'm mad as heck and ain't taking it anymore spiel", you could learn to use quotes. You're a prime example of what's wrong with the gay rights movement: 99% fluff, 1% logical fallacy.
Federal policy wasn't intended to cover being ego-dysentonic. Just about every "gay" fight with any organization involves one organization with rules everyone must follow, and one gay person who can't tell themselves apart from their orientation, determined to circumvent those rules. I'll bet those "spouses" had sex in the missionary position everytime....Per the military that's the only way you're allowed to have sex.
Neither is murder or drunk driving accidents, but just because we aren't personally involved doesn't mean we have no personal responsibility.
Relationships are plural, not singular. Gay sex is disgusting, but so many people are so caught up in the ridiculous "equality" argument, that no one ever considers what is being asked to be treated equally. It's been statistically shown that many homosexual do molest children, with a higher frequency than heterosexuals, and no one has a right to marry someone of the same sex. Or, maybe you forgot about a rational test basis.
Not if the Supreme court interprets the constitution based on the heritage and tradition of the nation it won't. Let's not forget that most gay legislation passes during "lame duck" sessions. Them get out? Are you even in the service? Please! Even the pursuit of happiness has limitations. Something about the other person's nose. Talk to gay people? If you're post is an example of what you call a conversation, I'll pass.
@ItIsWhat!t!s I posted a link for a study based on my "99% fluff, 1% logical fallacy." in another comment thread.... you should read it..... Here it is again..... Just for you..... LOL
ht tp://ww w1.csbsju.edu/uspp/CrimPsych/CPSG-6.htm (all you have to do is remove the spaces.)
And.... I don't recall saying I am gay? Although, being gay doesn't define a person, though it is a LARGE part of who they are.
Equating homosexuality with murderers and drunk drivers.... Not even in the same ball park.
"Gay sex is disgusting".... Then don't have gay sex. I'm sorry your experience with gay sex was so unpleasant... You have tried it right? Otherwise you have no room to judge whether it's "disgusting" or not...... Right?
I will hand you your hat to eat when SCOTUS does the right thing... And also, I will buy you a ticket to the middle east so that you can live amongst others who hate people who aren't like you and them.
But please, do read the article I posted..... Every statistic was repeated in the 15+ articles I read while deciding which ones to post here. (within a percentage point or 2)
In the mean time.... Do have a beautiful day. And please, for the sake of peace, Try to be loving and tolerant, as your savior taught that you should be.
Go back in the closet and shut the friggin door...
Kiaunna,Great comments.
itiswhat...in nine states, and the District of Columbia and two Native American tribes, same-sex couples DO have the right to marry. Your comment about the USMCJ allowing only the missionary position is outdated and erroneous. Gay sex is disgusting? They don't do anything that a lot of heterosexuals don't do. A sex survey released a few years ago divulged that most gay men didn't engage in anal sex, or did so very rarely, and that it was on the rise amongst heterosexuals. As for oral sex, I can't speak for women, but no man in his right mind doesn't like a BJ, and a lot of straight men get off on seeing two women get busy with each other. Heterosexuals do not have a leg up when it comes to sexual morality.
“We didn’t marry for any of those benefits. We married out of love."
And they live in a state that does not recognize gay marriage
and one is serving in the Military and is under the DOMA act.
They didn't marry for any of those benefits,,but now that one is dead the survivor will try to get all she can.
And a heterosexual survivor would be any different? Puh-leeze!
They were living in a state that did not recognize same sex marriage not by choice, but because it was where they were assigned in service of their country. What makes their service to this country any less valuable than the service of a heterosexual? These two women were, and one still is, contributing, productive, law abiding citizens of this country in a committed relationship and deserve the very same benefits that many non-productive, non-contributing, non-law abiding citizens receive simply because they are heterosexual.
Some people are just far too focused and interested in what goes on in the sexual behavior of a same sex relationship. Buncha freaking Gladys Kravitzs.
@DOCJT - I agree with you. What people do in their homes is their business. If same sax marriagge is legal in one state then it should be recognized in all the other states. What these 2 women have done for our country is important as individuals as well as a couple. We would not persecute a hetero couple so why a gay couple. Actually, she should get the death benefits and this country should stand beside her to make sure other same-sex married couples get them too. As far as I'm concerned, religion should have nothing to do with any of this. Church and state need to be separate.
Each State has it's own laws. Only Federal laws are valid in all 50 States. We live in a union of States that make up the United States of America. You need a refresher course in American Government, which is a required course in High School.
American Government:
The Government High School course focuses on the United States' founding principles
and beliefs. Students will study the structure, functions, and powers of government at
the national, state, and local levels. Integrate the six social studies standards of
essential content knowledge and four process skills will be integrated for instructional
purposes.
Marriage has nothing to do with what people do in their homes. It is a public, not a private, institution.
This is where all the confusion starts, beginning with Lawrence vs Texas.
We are NOT talking about private behavior. And it should be increasingly obvious that we are very certainly talking about a PUBLIC matter.
There are some things that are most inappropriate when done in public. Talking favorably about homosexuality is one of them.
Marriage serves a social good. Married couples serve a social good. Homosexual acts do not. Homosexual relationships do not.
All the pseudo-scientific bull excrement notwithstanding, there is no legitimate comparison of these two things. This is not a "civil rights" issue. It is a "survival of humanity" issue. Caving in to the demands of the homosexual perversity of the sexual deviants who demand PUBLIC recognition for their degenerate behavior brings social chaos and the end of the world. It cannot lead to any other thing. Sad that so many people are completely blind to the truth of this.
You won't need to take my word for it. You'll see it happen with your own eyes.
You don't have to believe in God for Him to destroy you for your godlessness, all you wicked nations.
He said He will.
He will.
1-800-WHaa....They knew this when they started their perverted ways,,,,
Jarhead, so far you've shown you're illiterate and a bigot. Gee, your mother must be proud.
Yet another homosexual using the word "bigot" again more-over, bet your mother is proud of your chosen life style.
Uh, DOMA was repealed. Try to keep up.
Bob, its not a CHOICE. You are either born gay or not. However education is a choice, one you have chosen to not avail yourself of. I would suggest you choose to go back to school and LEARN because I doubt your mom is proud of the dumbass son she had.
Bob, your use of bold faced type indicates a sort of hysterical insecurity of not being noticed...I wonder if you wear a sock in your pants too.
Cathy V--yours is the usual liberal emotional response. DOMA baby--read all about it.
DOMA has not been repealed. You're thinking of DADT. Try to keep up.
One of the first things you do when you report to a new command, or... prepare for a deployment is you designate who is to receive your death benefit..ie...insurance money when you die. The woman who was killed should have made changes to her Page #2 (???) to make sure her new "wife" received what was do to her. Since this wasn't done, the "wife" gets nothing. Correct me please if I'm wrong, but even if you are married, but you still designated another person to receive your insurance, the spouse will not get the death insurance (money). So...the military might be cold hearted, but the blame is on the dead service member who didn't update their paper work prior to departing for deployment. 20 yrs USN RET.
You are correct
You can designate "by law" which is what most people do. Unfortunately it seems she wasn't aware or was misinformed that "by law" wouldn't give the benefits to her spouse.
If you designate "By Law", it can held up in courts if someone want to contest it. I advised new soldiers to designate their primary beneficiary by name. Also, anyone who has a vested interest in the deceased can be named as a beneficiary.
Until the laws are changed, there is nothing that can legally be done to fully protect the rights of a same sex spouse.
You are absolutely right and furthermore you can now designate if you want someone notified of different levels of "wounded". During each of these events, a primary beneficiary is selected. Normally a spouse or child, but even a married person can select another to receive death gratuity.
I believe in this case the "widow" is talking more about the Social Security and survivor benefits by the military. She cannot receive the educational benefits or survivor pay but can receive the 400k life insurance. I really don't know why there is an article nearly everyday about a homosexual couple who is crying over benefits and are usually pointing the finger at the military. It is federal law, not military law that we abide by. Just like marajuana in WA or CO can be a state law (just like same sex marriage), service members cannot use the drug because they fall under federal charter.
This female says her partner and her DID NOT marry for those benefits....they married for love so why now is she whining when she obviously understood their so-called marriage was not recognized in the state they chose to live in and the policy within the military? Was this female the wife or the husband? Daily these Gays are cramming thier chosen lifestyle down our throats so everything in the USA has to change to suit their demands...why? GOD created male and female for a reason which some of us still BELIEVE but we are called haters so why? Are straight people no longer allowed to voice their opinion and live life according to how we believe? I read the other day how two females had a baby together so how was that possible as the last I heard it takes a male and female to achieve this. Gays have the same rights as all the rest of us....grow up, get a job and pay taxes. Wake Up! America. What has happened to "IN GOD WE TRUST".........He doesn't make mistakes people do!!!!!
In god we trust LOL God would have to be real to trust him.
AngryWhitemale
You're not real!
If "god" doesn't make mistakes, how did Satan and his followers come to be?? Since "god" didn't have the jews, a catholic church, mormons, hindus, islamists or whatever of these religious groups on earth only 2,500 years ago, where did the "souls" of the millions who worshiped other gods go to???
Said with sarcasm: EVERY NANOSECOND these heterosexuals are cramming their chosen lifestyle down our throats so everything in the USA has to change to suit THEIR demands... WHY? The GODDESS created Gays and Lesbians for many reasons: fashion, music, design, architecture, dance, great food... everything that adds color to a dull world and all at the low, low cost of NOT breeding in an overpopulated world! WOW! And, even adopting and foster parenting all the UNWANTED children of the heterosexuals. What a deal. So what's to hate?
I wonder how many heterosexuals would whine if NO benefits were allowed for spouses or families. After all, the American taxpayer LOSES money for every married serviceperson and more so for those with children as there are NO GAINS to the defense of our country or military readiness. However, the military/defense budget MUST include a tremendous amount of additional, but totally unnecessary expenditures for healthcare, housing, commissary and other military benefits for spouses and children who DO NOT fight for our country. Would it be fairer to put that on the table to be fair? It would help pay down our deficit. Just as our tax code gives special PRIVELEGES to MARRIED COUPLES that singles SUBSIDIZE. I've been wondering about that since I was paying taxes (14yo).
SIMPLE: Anybody married should get the same treatment. Sound fair? Best Wishes to all.
I notice that the phrase "cramming it down our throats" is used a lot by people who want to deny others their basic rights as human beings.
What happened to "In god we trust"??? Lets not pretend that this phrase was something that showed up anytime in our country's early history.
"In God we trust" was adopted as the official motto of the United States in 1956 as an alternative or replacement to the unofficial motto of E pluribus unum, adopted when the Great Seal of the United States was created and adopted in 1782.[1][2]
Discriminating against people for their sexual orientation denies them their constitutional rights. It's not about "pandering" to everybody's preferences any more than supporting the second amendment. Do you think that those with guns are "whining" about threats to their right to bear arms?
Funny, how it's only minorities who are thought to be "whining" when they point out inequality or violation of the constitution. I guess everybody else is just "standing up for their god-given rights."
I'm going out on a limb here and saying they did it to buck the system. To have their cake and eat it too.
@Harry,
According to the bible, which did God create, Lucifer or Satan? If you don't know the correct answer, you really don't need to be commenting.
Could we get some statistics? I've heard of sex taking minutes, but nanosecond sex? That's new.
Why should they have to when they can actually make families without artificial means?
Please, how many kids do these lesbians have?
sea2see, I've noticed that, too, and have thought it ironic. Freudian slip, maybe?
Getting married isn't a basic human right. And same sex marriage is only allowed in a handful of States. It isn't recognized in States that don't have have same sex marriage. Marriage between a man and woman is recognized in all 50 States.
Sorry tracy honey but your homo relationship isn't recognized by DOMA, more importantly it isn't recognized by GOD. She evidently didn't "love" you so much by not leaving you her insurance money, which she could have done. Oh well, you are free to find another perversion relationship.
God is not real also God and religion have nothing to do with marriage.
I don't give two cents for what your vindictive, petty, hate filled, uncaring god might instruct you. MY higher power states that love between consenting adults is love. Just because you have been taught by ignorant people in charge of your "church" to hate people doesn't make it right, nor does it make you a Christian since Christ stated "He who is without sin, cast the first stone" and "as you do unto those lesser than you, you do unto me". I suppose you also don't eat pork or seafood other than fish, wear garments of mixed fibers, work on Sunday (this includes mowing the lawn, washing dishes or clothing, cooking anything, shopping and anything other than sitting at home) and that you keep separate plates for meat and dairy. If you're going to claim a biblical basis for your hate, you have to follow ALL of the laws in Leviticus. If you claim that those don't apply to you, then NONE apply to you. If you're going to claim that ANYTHING that Paul wrote is your justification then you're not a CHRISTian but a PAULian.
This country has freedom to worship or not worship as your conscience dictates. Enshrining ANY religious opinions as law is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Making a law regarding marriage that is based in Judeo-Christian-Muslim beliefs elevates one to the state-sponsored religion and our Constitution FORBIDS that. If your belief forbids you from marrying someone of the same gender, then don't marry someone of the same gender. but you can NOT forbid someone who believes differently from marrying someone of their same gender based on YOUR belief. If you truly ARE Army, then you are in violation of your oath to "Protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic". If you are all for violating the Constitution then YOU are a domestic enemy.
Dat's rite! MARRIAGE was INVENTED to transfer property, wealth and family titles... it was not for love or the church or a blessing.
@ ArmySF: Your sickening response to somebody else's loss of their loved one proves you are a sick, twisted, perverted person. Your lack of respect for another human being is pathetic and warrants an apology, but I'm sure you're BENEATH it since you so ready to call somebody who serves our country and wants to be treated fairlly a pervert. You insult the Army, if you were in it by not upholding the very constitution and bill of rights we fight wars for AND the "SF" would be a supreme insult if that's for San Francisco which is the Gay Mecca of America. You're definitely in need of some new ideas.
I'm sure you've experienced your "Kinsey" moment even though I doubt anybody would indulge you! The world is not black and white, but a spectrum of colors and when you can catch up with the 21st century maybe you will enjoy the color TV, too. (multi-entendre intended)
You and everything you see and don't see was created by God.
1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
1:6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
1:7 And God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.
1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
1:9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.
1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being. Genesis 2:7
And God blessed them. And God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Genesis 2:28
So you follow the "Old Testament", Mike? So you also don't eat pork, shrimp, lobster, clams, mussels, crabs or scallops since they are deemed "unclean", right? You don't wear clothing made of mixed fibers (like cotton/polyester or wool/cotton or silk/polyester)? You don't perform ANY work on SATURDAY (since that is the Seventh Day - look at your calendar and also when the Jewish people go to Temple)? You follow ALL the laws in Leviticus?
FYI - I do not follow your religion. I have studied it quite a bit along with other religions, but I do not follow it; so, quoting from your holy literature will not influence me in any way. All it does is convince me that you have no basis for your opinion other than a faulty understanding of your own religion and a faulty understanding of the laws of this country.
You and everything you see and don't see was created by God
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
So by your own logic and "proof", God created Homosexuals and declared them good.
Thanks for clearing the debate up.
On what day did He create the hatred, prejudice, and bigotry that so many who claim to love God show to their brothers and sisters?
sea2see ... And God gave Man and Woman free will.
Thus God gave man the choice to pervert and and Man choose to pervert thus homos and lesbians and Jerry Sanduskies were given the choice to pervert us.
FACT: You are born with blue eyes and the color of your skin.! Uless raped ... you "choose" every sex partner you have sex with ... Plain and simple ... black and white ... no grey area ... Case closed.
CAT ... DUH Could you tell me where wearing clothes in any party of the Old Testament mean an abomination punishable by death? DUH God gave the Jews laws of hygiene so they would not fall sick or disease themselves.
God gave his Word and his Laws about homosexuality ... Man lying with Man is an abomination ... punishable by death ... so man would not destroy himself.
If all men and women were homosexual survinving without artificial intervention ... Mankind dies. Homosexuals are not needed for mankind to survive.
If all mankind was heterosexual without artificial intervention, Mankind survives.
... Plain and simple ... Black and white ... no grey area ... case closed.
NATURE IS AGAINST HOMSEXUALITY ... PEOPLE THAT IS CALLED NATURE without GOD
GOD IS AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY.
SOCIETY IS AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY OR EVEN IN THE UNITED STATES THE VAST MAJORITY OF STATES HAVE SAID HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE IS ILLEGAL.
NEED I SAY MORE.
FACT people do not chose to be gay, if that were the case I'd rather be a lesbian than to put up with most of the men out there but alas I wasn't born that way!
. And God gave Man and Woman free will.
Yes as was done in Matthew 16:19
Which reads.
.
19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be[a] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[b] loosed in heaven.”
Which gives man the free will to choose what is right and wrong on earth so it will be the case in Heaven
To quote you....
Plain and simple ... black and white ... no grey area ... Case closed
We have the right as a society to decide if this is right or wrong, a right given us by God if you beleive in the Bible.
So since that hurdle is out of the way....what is your excuse now?
If it's a choice, how many heterosexuals choose to be straight?
johnny & mike....
Judge not lest ye be judged- mathew 7.1
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone-john 8.7
uh...53% of Americans support same-sex marriage....so it's not society at large that anti-gay...just some pockets of religious bigots and older homophobes that haven't found in themselves the courtesy to die off yet.
Cat, so if we're going to get rid of the general Christian/Jewish doctrine of Men marrying only Women, and women marrying ONLY men, when are we going to allow Muslim men to have more than one wife?
And when the Feminists hear of that, they will want more than one Husband?
Culheath, Where is that poll that says 53% support it? That's new...two weeks ago MSN had a poll and over 70% were against it.
Not all Muslim sects practice polygamy, just like some so called Christian sects do practice polygamy.
However, that is an absurd comparison, because of the legal issues involving more than one partner as a legal spouse.
Cat - When studying scripture, one must look at the Old Testament Covenant relative to the New Testament Covenant. Jesus and the New Testament addresses your questions: God's cleansing power - Acts 10:1 and 11:18, Rom. 14 and 15. Burdened by the law and Jesus sets them straight - Luke 14. One day not holier than another, but an attitude of thanksgiving is what God desires - Romans 14:5-6 and Colossians 2. Keep reading and learning which casts away ignorance.
There is no such thing as god, and quoting words out of a bible which was written by a man isn't the word of god. When god actually writes a book and has it notarized, then I'll believe he wrote a book.
When is he going to appear to everyone, rather then having church shysters who claim to be the voice of god, spew their weekly diatribe to the sheep in exchange for 10% of their income? What is god doing with all that money up in heaven? Keeping the Sun turned on?
Use the google machine
Harry-3603195
You are a bigot for hating and disagreeing with people who believe it is morally wrong for people of the same sex to have sexual relationships or be married. The fact is that you and every other homosexual came into this world through a heterosexual relationship. No gay person was ever born from a homosexual relationship. No man has ever gotten another man pregnant. No woman has ever gotten another woman pregnant either. When our nation changes our laws to make it legal for adults to save sex with 9 year children like Islam, will you think that is alright as long as your government says it is?
Homosexuality is not pedophilia. In fact 90% of most pedophiles are HETEROSEXUAL adults. Pedophiles like children, the sex of the target doesn't matter. Its the age that turns them on.
OMG. I am APPALLED at some of these comments!. They are soldiers! Your shameful diatribes amaze me, as she could have been the same person that dragged your (military) Azzes out of the line of sniper fire, or from an incoming RPG! Not to mention, she was defending your right to spew this garbage from your heartless, shameful, inconsiderate, 'holier than thou' mouths. If you are the future of America, we are all in deep shi#! I am a Gulf war veteran, a female, and I have been married to my wife for four years. May Mrs. Johnson rest in peace, and her WIFE find solace, and be treated with the DIGNITY and RESPECT she deserves!
Dearest Dona: THANK YOU!! Your service to our country is greatly appreciated!! I praise your relationship with your wife and believe it as another "inalienable right" which has been denied along with marriage and children for gay/lesbian couples. The more loving two-parent homes for unwanted heterosexual offspring, the better for the children, the couple and our nation. It means love for all concerned and SAVES scarce resources for all the unwanted children. If more haters were taken out of our legislatures and government so that we can eliminate all these ridiculous barriers to adoption/foster parents, many more children would have stable environments. What these uneducated people don't understand is sexuality isn't taught; it merely develops as an individual grows and without pressure to perform in any fashion, boys and girls will develop naturally rather than by being pressured into a mold of acceptability by anyone's standards.
BEST WISHES!
Dona, from one gay vet to another, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. I wish you and your spouse the best of luck in the future.
HARRY ... you are a pervert or an enabler of perversion then against two consenting adults ... a son who is 21 years old who is in love with his mother who is 45 ... That is your idea of love and healthy marriage.
Grow up.
I am appalled that your goal as an adult is to pervert your children and America
I notice that it is the "religious" types that spew the most disgusting fantasies about incest and bestiality, I do wish they would get their minds out of the gutter and type with both hands!
Whether you agree with their lifestyle or not, they loved each other, supported each other and were family. That is more than can be said for a lot of military spouses (or marriages in general)!!! How many heterosexual women are receiving military benefits on behalf of their husbands, while cheating, lying and betraying them??? Why are these women or any other persons who identify as homosexual, required to abide by the same laws as everyone else, but not entitled to reap the same benefits? And don't tell me marriage is between a "man and a woman" to better society or mankind or whatever other b.s. people hide behind, because there are heterosexual marriages that do not result in nor are intended for procreation! And for all you religious nut-jobs...you are & have been killing each other for thousands of years all across the globe because you think everyone else is wrong and that you're better than them! Get over yourselves! EVERYONE is entitled to be treated fairly & equally as HUMAN BEINGS!!!
What ... Yeah incest is love in your eyes two consenting adults ... 21 year old son and 45 year old mother.
I notice that it is the "religious" types that spew the most disgusting fantasies about incest and bestiality, I do wish they would get their minds out of the gutter and type with both hands!
Wrong.... WTH are you blathering about?!?! Same-sex marriage is not the same thing as incest!!
What, no one is arguing that they loved each other. That's fine.
According to the story they married, joined the military KNOWING that the military does not recognize their union.
NOW she wants the rules changed.
I commend both of them for their service to our country, but they aren't going to change the rules JUST for them
The "rules" need to be changed for all of the same sex couples in this country, military and non-military. It begins with one couple standing up for their rights.
No doubt she is being treated according to the law. The question is, is it a just law?
When DADT was repealed the just thing to do was to extend spousal benefits to all spouses. This problem brings to light the unfairness to LGBT spouses who have suffered a loss as great as any husband or wife of our brave troops. As a military retiree I know only too well that taking care of the family is almost a important at taking care of the solider. If we allow service equality it must extend to the spouse. Her spouse volunteered and gave the ultimate sacrifice, accord them both the honor and dignity they deserve.
LGBT partners are a reality and the law must keep up with that reality. There were times and places that interracial marriages were illegal too and no doubt there are people who are still against them but that isn't how we give rights to people in America.
VERY LOGICAL... but, don't expect anything to get through to people who just want to hate somebody different. Races still have issues, but most people aren't caught up in it as much. Sexism and Sexuality are two of the last hurdles we face. If Republicans don't believe we should reinstate the Violence against Women Act, The Assault Gun Ban, don't want equal pay or reproductive rights for women and want to reinstate DADT and maintain DOMA doesn't that tell you which party responds to America's needs? This is something that can be changed by everyone calling and complaining to congress. Obama is doing what he should have four years ago... taking it to the American people. We can make things happen!!
seasee ... Perverts can defend this country but that does not give them a right to pervert their country
I think you are a pervert and you didn't need gay people influencing you to be that way.
How are they perverting the country???? Believe it or not you are not required to be gay, or commit any 'gay acts', just because other people do.
sea2see: "I notice that it is the "religious" types that spew the most disgusting fantasies about incest and bestiality, I do wish they would get their minds out of the gutter and type with both hands!" Then, "I think you are a pervert and you didn't need gay people influencing you to be that way."
Sound familiar to your indictment of anyone who dares to disagree with YOUR POV???
Sea, getting rid DADT had nothing to do with spousal rights. It was to allow gay military to serve their country and not worry about being tossed out if it were found out they were gay.
Gay spouses had no rights under military law before the removal of DADT and still don't. That hasn't changed.
They have the right to be treated with the common curtesy and respect that any other spouse in this country has.
That's "Woe" is me, Bill, NOT "Whoa"
"Whoa"... indeed!
Is a strong command of the english language too much to expect from people who are paid to be "writers"?
Another taker
Really would you say that about any other military widow or widower or just the ones whose marriage you don't recognize as valid?
SeaSee my son is in the military and I hope he does not pervert and tarnish the name and pervert his country by being a pervert.
I hope he follows the UCMJ on equal opportunity and treatment because if he repeats what his sicko father says he'll be out the gate.
I do hope he isn't a pedophile, a rapist, or is in to animals or dead bodies. I hope you don't influence your son to be a sicko like you are and he is a fine solider and he returns safely.
In this month’s issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, researchers provide empirical evidence that homophobia can result, at least in part, from the suppression of same-sex desire.
Just food for thought for Mr. Wrong Ain't Right.
frivolous
You say, "In this month’s issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, researchers provide empirical evidence that homophobia can result, at least in part, from the suppression of same-sex desire."
So if someone believes it's wrong for a adult to have sex with a child, it's because they really want to have sex with children?
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid!!!
Good Lord...... Stop equating homosexuality with pedophilia!!! The VAST majority of pedophiles are white, heterosexual males.
Here is a link...... a study..... read the discussion at the end for the "in a nut shell" results of the study..... every single one I found has the same or similar numbers within 1-2 percentage points.... 88% were hetorosexual!!!!!!
http ://ww w1.csbsju.edu/uspp/CrimPsych/CPSG-6.htm
I Thank her for her service, and say Sorry for your loss. However that is about the end of it. She new there bond was ceremonial only and was not recognized by N.C. as the lived at Ft Bragg and she new that the military would not recognize there bond to each other. Nuff said. There is no money coming for your loss, it is no different then if you had not gotten your marriage in another state. Sorry just because one state allows it doesn't make it recognized by all or by the Fed. I did not get married for money, I did however get my wife insurance and your wife/partner could have done the same.
did it say she didn't get insurance money that she was allowed to specify for her? The article talks about medical insurance that doma forbids her to have, but I didn't see a mention of other insurance?
I'm sorry, I cannot resist correcting the MANY typos in your post.......
"I Thank her for her service, and say Sorry for your loss. However that is about the end of it. She knew their bond was ceremonial only and was not recognized by N.C. as they lived at Ft Bragg and she knew that the military would not recognize their bond to each other. Enough said. There is no money coming for your loss, it is no different than if you had not gotten your marriage in another state. Sorry, just because one state allows it doesn't make it recognized by all or by the Fed. I did not get married for money, I did however get my wife insurance and your wife/partner could have done the same."
Good Lord people..... If you want to look like you're making an intelligent post, with an intelligent argument, (which this person actually did)... Make sure you spell check or proofread your damn comments!!!!
FYI
The ellipsis after Good Lord people should look like this. ... (only 3). You got it right the 2nd time though, but I'm not sure why you needed it.
"Good Lord people.....If you want to look like you're making an intelligent post, with an intelligent argument, (which this person actually did)... Make sure you spell check or proofread your damn comments!!!!
Kiaunna Ledian Evrae
My bad. I missed the very first error. Please forgive me.
"I'm sorry, I cannot resist correcting the MANY typos in your post......."
Use a period after I'm sorry. That's a completed sentence. Once again that ellipsis error has reared it's evil head. :)
Touche!
I don't support gay marriage, but I believe these people do have a legal union and as such deserve the rights awarded to them as any other legally recognized civil union. This points out that the federal laws and the UCMJ have not caught up to the DADT repeal and the permitting of same sex civil unions. The president and congress need to finish what they started rather than trying to control our firearms, treating us like we're all stupid, blood-thirsty nut jobs.
There isn't much more the president can do by himself on this. Either congress would need to repeal doma, for example (which isn't happening since the "small government" GOP controlled house would never support that), or more likely SCOTUS this year will deal with it.
From a previous poster:
"One of the first things you do when you report to a new command, or... prepare for a deployment is you designate who is to receive your death benefit..ie...insurance money when you die. The woman who was killed should have made changes to her Page #2 (???) to make sure her new "wife" received what was do to her. Since this wasn't done, the "wife" gets nothing. Correct me please if I'm wrong, but even if you are married, but you still designated another person to receive your insurance, the spouse will not get the death insurance (money). So...the military might be cold hearted, but the blame is on the dead service member who didn't update their paper work prior to departing for deployment. 20 yrs USN RET."
Hern ... a perverted contract is no contract ... like a mother and son marrying each other in your eyes should be legal? DUH
Wrong you are never right and you are the biggest pervert here!
You seem to be very obsessed with incest. Just saying.
What?-379417
WHAT? That is right; what? I guess I'm one of your "religious nut jobs", because I believe in a Creator rather than some make believe explosion that created everything from nothing. I guess I'm a "religious nut job because I believe live has value, meaning and purpose as oppose to your belief that we are mere accidents without any more value than a rock or that life has no meaning or purpose to it.
How many people you know came into existence as a result of a homosexual relationship? None. How do you get something from nothing? You can't get something from nothing; it's something you homosexual atheists made up because belief in God interferes with your homosexual lifestyle.
You hate those of us who are willing to publically disagree with your false beliefs and lies. You have been deceived into believing a lie. You are no accident; you were created by God for a purpose. Your life and all human life has value.
Romans 3:23
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Romans 8:38-39
For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 10:9-10
That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
1 John 5:13 - These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
John 5:24 - Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that hears my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
John 3:16 - For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Romans 10:13 - For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Ephesians 2:8-9 - For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
John 20:31 - But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.
John 10:28 - And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any [man] pluck them out of my hand.
1 John 5:16-17 - If any man see his brother sin a sin [which is] not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. (Read More...)
Hebrews 9:27 - And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
Titus 3:5 - Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
2 Thessalonians 3:6 - Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walks disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.
2 Thessalonians 2:14-15 - Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Read More...)
Ephesians 2:10 - For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin [is] death; but the gift of God [is] eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Romans 5:8 - But God commended his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Romans 4:25 - Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
Romans 3:10 - As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one
On what day did He create the hatred, prejudice, and bigotry that so many who claim to love God show to their brothers and sisters?
Sea2See ... God created hatred, prejudice and bigotry when he first created man and gave Man ... free will! honey. That is when Man was allowed to choose to be perverted ... prejudiced ... and bigotted ... like homosexuals. Because homos are bigots and hate people who teach them right from wrong.! ;)
Wrong Ain't Right - come , my son, leap out of the closet in a dainty Plie. Everyone who disagrees with the homosexual agenda (including sex with children, see NAMBLA manifesto) is a bigot. The Moslems, Chinese, Africans have it right - and I notice you never, never call them bigots. Why don't you go back to your park bench across from the elementary school and dream of what might be.
sea2see
God didn't create hatred, prejudice, and bigotry. Sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ is showing love. You are telling people living in sinful relationships it's ok; it's not, it is sin. Jesus will judge those who refuse to repent from their sinful lifestyles. You are not showing Christians or anyone else love by denying the truth of God's word. We all are sinners and homosexuality is just one of many sins that are committed by people that God will judge.
He has already made a way of escape for that judgment. Jesus died in our place and took our punishment for our sins. If we repent, confess our sins, and accept Him as Lord and Savior of our lives, we will be forgiven.
2 Corinthians 5:15
15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again.
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 1 John 1:9
JUST FYI.... Every single reputable LGBT organization has turned their backs on NAMBLA. Because the LGBT community does NOT advocate sex with a child...... Period.
I would hope so.
While I don't understand homosexuality I think its wrong to say every gay man is a pediphile. The problem is a large amount of pediphiles seem to be gay men.
Why that does not seem to be the case with lesbians is beyond me.
Actually, AngryAmerican55... 88% of pedophiles are heterosexual males. I posted one of the studies in another comment above. It is true, however, that the instances of lesbian pedophiles is nearly non-existent.
That is not the reality of the situation.
Thank you for posting the scriptures, God's word is sharper than a two edged sword. Lord Bless You Mike!
"Because the LGBT community does NOT advocate sex with a child"
But Liberals want to "normalize" pedophilia.
Kiaunna Ledian Evraevia Facebook
Actually, AngryAmerican55... 88% of pedophiles are heterosexual males. I posted one of the studies in another comment above. It is true, however, that the instances of lesbian pedophiles is nearly non-existent...................your studies.research and blah blah blah are flawed...how can you say that a man who wants to have sex with a member of the same sex...even if it's a child....is NOT A HOMOSEXUAL...you and your college BS studies are delusional..88% of your head is up your ass
Pedophiles are interested in the AGE of their victims, the gender of the victim is not relevant to them.
While a pedophile can also be homosexual in addition to being a pedophile , just because their child victims are the same sex as them doesn't make them homosexual. Often the gender of the victim is just what happened to be easiest to get to.
Wrong Ain't Right banned, first extended appearance in years, spent most of it calling other Viners perverts.
The article starts out saying she had the marriage certificate at hand "clutched in hand". Then the article moves into details about benefits. What I am not reading about how this soldier was killed. There lies a story perhaps in another article, im not aware of giving of this nations story of another fallen hero. It only seems to be projecting the issue of benefits and LGBT moral issues, which I do not believe in. With that being said I only see an agenda story being played out here nothing more. Semper Fi...to our fallen soldier (s).
But they want you to believe it's not about the benefits. Bullsh*t.
very good points
it's all a behaviour choice, based upon narcississitic tendencies and emotional trauma
everyone is born with what is called sin and people make choices everyday
There are those who will follow the bible as God's word
and there are those who follow the teachings of Aleister Crowley " Doest what thou wilt is the whole of the Law"
Exactly, just like being left-handed.
Imbecile.
being attracted to someone of the same (or different) sex (your sexual orientation) is NOT a choice. You're clueless. lol.
He thinks he speaks for GOD talk about narcissistic tendencies with a touch of megalomania!
Glenn, do you choose to be straight?
most of the mental midgets in here have been programmed by the union teachers cabal so they believe the (born gay) bull@!$%# line
75th: lol, that was some rebuttal. lol.
"whereas the scientific consensus is that sexual orientation is not a choice"