Associated Press – October 9, 2007:
“I believe if two people want to commit to each other, God bless ’em,” the syndicated advice columnist told The Associated Press. “That is the highest form of commitment, for heaven’s sake.”
“I’m trying to tell kids if they are gay, it’s OK to be gay. I’ve tried to tell families if they have a gay family member to accept them and love them as they always have,” she said Friday.
“If gay Americans are not allowed to get married and have all the benefits that American citizens are entitled to by the Bill of Rights, they should get one hell of a tax break. That is my opinion,” said Phillips, who speaks with the no-nonsense tone of someone who is used to settling debates.
“If they are my readers, they know how I feel on the subject,” she said. “I don’t think I’m a flaming radical. I’m for civility in life. I’m for treating each other with respect, trying to do the best you can.
Well… she ain’t wrong…
This is a fantastic stand, and I am glad that someone with this high a profile gets it. People are People, treat them the way you want be treated yourself. If two people cannot commit to each others then you cannot either.
Finally a blonde woman with common sense.
This is how most ordinary Americans have come to feel. Maybe being a flaming radical in the eyes of the Establishment explains why I figured this out back in the 50’s. But, damned near every family has had their eyes opened by the brave folks who came out of the closet in early days – in their own families. And in recent years, it really hasn’t taken special courage or understanding to get past reactionary hangups.
Unless, of course, you’re one of those idiots who relies on reactionary hangups to guide your life.
So do you have to actually be gay to get married to get these benefits?
Or can you just get away with cohabitation? Maybe lie and say I’m a bi swinger?
I’ve had the same roommate for years, we share bills, food, colds usually, hell even a woman or two.
If thats not commitment I don’t know what is. Why do the gay guys next door get a tax break when my room mate and I don’t? Why can’t I get on my room mates health plan at his work?
Because I don’t express my love for him and bang him in th @ss?
Hell I’d even pay for that insurance
Why can’t I sign a contract to live with someone indefinitely (until we decide to divorce and move out) so I can get a tax break and health insurance?
As far as I can tell gay marriage is discriminatory toward straight unmarried people reguardless of circumstance.
Great to see and hear voices of reason from trusted personalities like Abby. In over a year from now, we’ll have another fine woman – Hillary.
Think of all the bible thumping republicans that will be jumping out the window. OMG, I just can’t wait !
#5….California has a Domestic Partner law, for gays, or str8’s. But I think the *banging* is obligitory, though choice of holes is up to the partners. 🙂
Abby sure looks good for being like 90.
>>As far as I can tell gay marriage is discriminatory toward
>>straight unmarried people reguardless of circumstance.
I guess you’ve never been married, pumpkin.
Must be a new age replacement “Dear Abby”
Fill ins for the original writer
Reminds me of a folk song “Dear Abby….Dear Abby…”
To which the refrain answer was always
” You Are what you are and You Ain’t what you Ain’t”
#5 – I believe the requirement is that you have to pitch and catch too.
Never, ever get married. If it flies, fucks or floats – rent it.
Could Abby be a carpet muncher herself? Inquiring minds…
I guess you’ve never been married, pumpkin.
Guess again thar tater…
As a matter of fact I have been married and I’m currently paying my state enforced morally certified dues in child support to my ex wife and soon when my daughter turns 18 and decides to go to college I’ll have to pay her directly until she’s 21 as long as her grades don’t slip. Pretty cool state law huh? Yet just another discriminatory law towards divorced singles. Why? Because if your married and your child moves out, they can’t go to the state and demand you support them. Regardless of the childs need. They may need the rent money to support themselves while in school… Why am I obligated by law to pay that when married parents are not? How is than non discriminatory towards single people when married people are not held accountable in the same way?
Yay Abby!! So do I, and many other types of marriage as well!
#12 – Raff,
Boy that’s off topic. What does that have to do with gay marriage again? Seems to me the rights and obligations would merely be identical for straight and married people.
As for your current situation, that just means you did not investigate the law prior to entry into a legally binding contract. I’m sorry if you don’t want to keep to the responsibilities for which you inadvertently signed up in the event of a dissolution of your partnership.
Given the love you show for your children, I suspect that the real mistake was not getting a vasectomy. This is not meant to be offensive. I don’t want those responsibilities either. Nor do I want the responsibility on my conscience for having brought kids into this world in its present and deteriorating state. So my wife and I made a different decision than you.
#5 – What’s stopping you from doing that with a girl? You really don’t have to f her in the a$$ either to get fake married.
#14… 12 was a reply to 8.. go read 5 and 8 first…
As for your current situation, that just means you did not investigate the law prior to entry into a legally binding contract. I’m sorry if you don’t want to keep to the responsibilities for which you inadvertently signed up in the event of a dissolution of your partnership.
This particular state law was enacted after I was married..
Given the love you show for your children
You have no idea what kind of love I show my children.. Do you think the amount of dollars the state mandates I pay to my ex-wife is some sort of indicator of the love I show for my children? Your twisted….
I suspect that the real mistake was not getting a vasectomy. This is not meant to be offensive. I don’t want those responsibilities either. Nor do I want the responsibility on my conscience for having brought kids into this world in its present and deteriorating state. So my wife and I made a different decision than you.
I don’t have a problem with paying child support.. What I have a problem with is the state government forcing me by law to pay for my childrens college education when they are legally adults. Yet not forcing married parents to do the same.
And yes its off topic but it relates in the fact that I cant enter into a legal contract with a cohabitant of the same sex without declaring myself a homo in order to get the same tax and benefits. And it was a reply to number 8 who implied I had never been married, rather than a direct comment toward the article.
Both are laws that are discriminatory towards single people..
Am I over explaing this? Was it that difficult to see a correlation there?
Sorry I go off on tangents sometimes..
Raff, sounds like you dislike happy people.
Remember, with gay marriage will inevitably come gay divorce. If you’re looking for a tax break, get married. If you’re just whining because the state doesn’t recognize your roommate as your spouse, well… grow up.
17 It may sound like that.. but in actuality I’m simply trying to point out many states uphold laws that are discriminatory to singles and that includes these new gay marriage laws.
#13 Misanthropic Scott >> Yay Abby!! So do I, and many other types of marriage as well!
I’m curious, Scott what other types of marriage?
This is one of the oft-cited concerns of the anti-gay marriage people.
While I’m OK with gay marriage, I don’t have a good answer for them. If we move the line of marriage to include gays, does this really solve the issue? I’m no so sure.
>>Am I over explaing this?
Well, you are explaining your distaste for something that has nothing at all to do with GAY MARRIAGE, which is what this is all about.
I agree that plenty of guys get fucked in the custody/ child support thing, but that’s neither here nor there.
And what is this TAX BREAK people keep alluding to for married people? More people end up paying MORE in taxes by filing as a married couple that they would have paid if they were single.
Yes you can. You can marry said cohabitant (assuming that your divorce is actually final.)
And why are you being forced to pay for college expenses- if your child is under 18, this is perfectly reasonable – it’s called “child support”, but if your child is over 18, it is not.
My twisted what?
#20- Mister M is correct. It’s called the marriage penalty. Easy to look up with your favorite search engine. It’s the result of getting bumped into a higher tax bracket after adding two incomes together when filing a married, joint return.
Using simple numbers (not real tax rates) for illustration…..
Two single people making 30k apiece may each be in the 10% bracket so pay 3k each in taxes; a total of 6k.
Now get married and file a joint return. those two separate 30k incomes are now one 60k income which bumps it into a higher bracket.. (say 15% for argument) so their total out of pocket is now 9k.
The marriage penalty was addressed a few years ago but not to fully eliminated.
What are we talking about anyway?
Marriage is a religious institution. The Constitution mandates the separation of church and state. What is government doing in the marriage business.
The government should not be granting anyone marriages, nor be granting anyone tax benefits for marriage nor tax penalties for marriage, nor should married couples have any special rights.
The fact is that gay people want to get married for the benefits and rights it conveys.
The opposition to gay marriage is about children.
Fix the system by eliminating marriage as a factor in tax benefits or even as collected information.
A large number of parents with children are not married, the consequences of marriage are ridiculous when a divorce occurs because some judge gets to make decisions about your life.
Scrap the entire government sponsored marriage system and any tax benefits meant for children can be rewritten in a marriage-neutral way.
I don’t think married people without children deserve any special tax priviledges nor penalties and since marriage gives the government some sort of invented right for them to have jurisdiction over your assets is a joke, really.
#24;
Well, close. Governments actually do have a vested interest in marriage as the means to produce children, so it’s not just a religious interest…
Welcome to San Franciso!
See the rainbow over Alcatraz and Pier 69.
erm.. San Francisco
Of course it’s time for gay marriage to be recognized legally, and to get these small minded religious ‘right’ folk to mind their own business. ‘Protection of marriage’ is what they say they are doing, but all they are doing is furthering an agenda of discrimination.
Protection of marriage? You mean those ‘precious’ marriages that end in divorce nearly half the time? Yeah, that’s working out well.
I’m with Hmeyers (#24). I don’t quite see why people can’t legally have open/polygamous marriages if they want it (not my thing but if someone wants to do it why shouldn’t they). I reckon cut all the tax breaks for marriage and give it to people who rear children instead. You could then create a body of law of division of assets and that type of thing that has nothing to do with what vows you make, but has everything to do with the degree in which people living in a household share their lives together.
29…
OK..
WAY not…
Even tho there are MORE boy babies born then Girl babies… and 1 man has 5 girls…Why cant I have one??
I wonder Why war was created…
think about the idea of Lions… 1 male Lots of females, and Male cubs are kicked out FAST. You are the ruler as long as you Dont die or get kicked out.
You send off a FEW maidens to SOME males to keep them on YOUR side, and help defend your area.
but considering that MORe males are born, you have to ship them out or start killing your own. so you send them into battle to win MORE girls…
NOW,
You aint the only one doing this…
So you farm out MORE girls to get More/better men to help defend you…
Even if you took, ALL the Female children from ALL the men you have helping.. HOW do you keep those you have and THOSE male children, that would LOVE a piece of the action…
So, someone decided it was better to have 1 each, and have a FEW extra FRUSTRATED MEN, then to have ALOT of frustrated men trying to get YOURS…