1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Stewart, Maher, O'Reilly, British Guy Thread

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Songbird, Jan 15, 2015.

  1. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    Always forget the Brit's name but he's funny. Wait, it's Jamie something or other.

    But anyway.

    Jon Stewart took a hammer to Florida in wake of the territory's decision not to wed ANYone because gay marriage passed. Hit play for the commentary, stay for the assault by lizard ...



    Post any and all media from these nightly shows.
     
    Donnie in his element and HC like this.
  2. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    Haven't seen the clip but there should be no state involvement in marriage, heterosexual or homosexual.
    It's medieval.

    I've been saying this forever, and have said it here before, but it's absurd to me that there is any state involvement in marriage whatsoever.
     
    SpeedTchr likes this.
  3. SpeedTchr

    SpeedTchr Well-Known Member

    Buck, I couldn't agree more. Get the state out of the marriage business.
     
  4. albert77

    albert77 Well-Known Member

    I would tend to agree, except that the marriage contract brings with it certain personal and financial obligations that the state has an interest in, taxes, for example, and custody, in situations where the contract is ended due to divorce or death. That's the main reason why I've come around to supporting gay marriage. The state should not be discriminating against certain parties in a binding contract, of any kind for any reason, including marriage.
     
  5. Buck

    Buck Well-Known Member

    Get rid of the tax advantages for marriage.

    Finances, possessions and child custody csan be determined contractaully by the parties who marry.

    It should be a matter of contract law, not a distinct area of law. Two adults decide to form a contractual partnership.
     
  6. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    Michael Kinsley wrote this in the early 90's - he was the first I saw say it. I thought the social right should have embraced this position as soon as it became clear that the battle over same-sex marriage was lost for them - which was quite a while ago if they were being realistic.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page