inb4 bigots
[quote]pushharder wrote:
It might be interesting to discuss the Full Faith and Credit Clause in regards to this subject.[/quote]
Wouldn’t it work like handgun permits?
I’m extremely proud of my state.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
inb4 bigots[/quote]
lmao
congrats new york 
Well done N.Y.
I knew the legislation was being considered this week, but hadn’t heard until now that it passed.
Great news for New York! Congrats.
Unfortunately, it will be a while yet before Texas comes on board, which is why we need legislation at the national level.
Oh cool, we’re yet closer to the irreversible destruction of the organized child bearing and raising that marriage was. Upwards and onwards to an incurable case of broken homes, lonely and childless elderly, and the impervious welfare state needed to carry it all. Well, until it runs out of young, well-adjusted, and productive workers to bleed dry. In the meantime, I suppose we should be moving on to championing for the polygamorous. Or hell, whatever size and shape of arrangment consenting adults can dream up. I mean it’s great that we made a public cause out of men lusting after the orifices of other men, stamping the marriage label on it, but there’s other consenting adults with active imaginations out there. Chop, chop.
[quote]forlife wrote:
I knew the legislation was being considered this week, but hadn’t heard until now that it passed.
Great news for New York! Congrats.
Unfortunately, it will be a while yet before Texas comes on board, which is why we need legislation at the national level.[/quote]
While I am personally against gay marriage, this is a decision for the states, not the fed.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
[quote]forlife wrote:
I knew the legislation was being considered this week, but hadn’t heard until now that it passed.
Great news for New York! Congrats.
Unfortunately, it will be a while yet before Texas comes on board, which is why we need legislation at the national level.[/quote]
While I am personally against gay marriage, this is a decision for the states, not the fed.
[/quote]
Unless you grant equal rights at the federal level, the most important legal benefits (immigration rights, joint federal tax filing, social security, etc.) will be denied gay couples. State rights can only go so far.
But it’s a step in the right direction.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
While I am personally against gay marriage, this is a decision for the states, not the fed.
[/quote]
Uh, such an idea is long dead. This is the now sentiment of those who’d watch others shape the entire nation, uncontested and irreversibly.
Woke up this morning and the streets of Manhattan were filled with fire and chanting and face-painted men making sweaty public love. We were warned about this!
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Woke up this morning and the streets of Manhattan were filled with fire and chanting and face-painted men making sweaty public love. We were warned about this![/quote]
Should have listened to the doomsayers when you had the chance. Long live the gay agenda, muhahahaha!
I mean, like, shouldn’t we let the individual states decide if they want to allow black men to marry white women???
And of course, if black men marry white women, they shouldn’t be able to get immigration rights, file jointly on their tax returns, or any of the other 1,000+ federal rights reserved to properly married same race couples.
I left my wife today because of a sudden urge to get gay married.