Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: truedog who wrote (54744)	6/29/1999 3:53:00 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 67261

You keep talking facts. hehehe Eventually you will learn. Guaranteed she calls you a homophobe. JLA

To: truedog who wrote (54744)	6/29/1999 3:55:00 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

Thats fine truedog, you are entitled to your beliefs. Notice how easy it is for me to say that. I don't care that you disagree with me, its no big deal. The problem for gays is that legislation involving benefits (including IRAs and 401Ks) in this country deal with spouses. Spouses have benefits and that requires a marriage. Thats what they want, the benefits, not the biblical spiritual thing or whatever you call it. So, the answer is to decouple benefits from marriage. But that means no repeal of the marriage penalty, no SS benefits for spouses etc. The right doesn't like that because they are all hung up on their social agenda. The other option is to create some sort of "domestic partner" law that allows gays to get the benefits of marriage but not be married. The right is even opposed to that. SO WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE FOR THESE PEOPLE THEN? Do you really expect them to pay into the social security system for their entire lives and not recieve the same payout as everybody else or not be allowed to deduct IRA contributions etc?