WATCH OUT! Here it comes.

[firstsgtmike]

Davis Plans to Sign Domestic Partners Bill

Sunday, August 17, 2003

SACRAMENTO, Calif. Embattled Gov. Gray Davis announced Saturday he would sign legislation giving domestic partners most of the same legal rights that married couples have.

The domestic partners bill would, among other things, allow domestic partners to file joint state income tax returns and give them the same tax exemptions enjoyed by married couples.

It would also give them the same rights as married couples regarding the acquisition, transfer and sharing of property, health insurance and pension coverage and collection of government benefits, including public assistance.
==============================================
I CAN SEE IT NOW!


The next logical step is the right to allottments, married quarters on military installations and "accompanied" overseas tours.

Remember, when a man asks for a spousal allottment, married quarters, or a separation allowance, you cannot ask if the spouse is male or female.

Be prepared for the President of an NCO Wive's Club to be called George or Steve.

I see problems with mixed doubles bowling, golf, and tennis teams.

Formal dances at the O Club will be a real hoot.

The term "drag strip" will take on a new meaning. (Drag Races will require high heels.)

I crack up when I think about transvestites in transition.

Military and VA hospitals required to provide sex changes.

Restrooms marked "His", "Hers", and "Its".

Eventually, that ugly brute of a mascot will be replaced by an adorable perfumed pink French Poodle.

Revellie will be announced by a recording of Tiny Tim singing TipToe Through the Tulips.

And that macho Marine Corps Hymn will be replaced by "Hail to the Queen".

[JChristin]

FirstSgt:

Perhaps I may suggest the following change:


Restrooms: "Male," "Female," "Everyone Else" - or - "Puzzled."


semper fi,
jchristin

[firstsgtmike]

Yes,

That would be more "Politically Correct".

[RONALD511]

HELL YES YOUR RIGHT. THE DRESS CODE AND UNIFORM CHANGES WILL WELL .MAKE COMMENT ON THE POSSIBLE UNIFORM CHANGES SIR???!

[firstsgtmike]

Judge rejects transsexuals' bias claim against pub
By Phil Hazlewood
15 August 2003


A discrimination claim by five male-to-female transsexuals who were ejected from a pub after one of them used the ladies' lavatory was rejected by a judge yesterday.

Judge Charles Harris QC, sitting at Oxford County Court, ruled that the claimants, only one of whom had undergone sex-change surgery at the time of the incident in March last year, were, in law, biologically men. He said they were perceived as men dressed as women.

[yellowwing]

Moral issues aside, it's not a bad idea when you think about money issues. Financial institutions give married individuals higher credit ratings. More money will be loaned out and circulating in the economy. If they default on those loans, then the institutions are able to go after the 'spouse'. More bad loans will be collected. Currently they cannot go after 'boyfriends'.

Personally I don’t think our services are ready for this. It may have worked for the armies of Sparta, but they are long dead and conquered.

[firstsgtmike]

Group Calls for De-Legalization of Marriage



Thursday, October 09, 2003
By Steve Brown


CHICAGO — Marriage has its advantages but some think the nation’s laws give married couples too much favorable treatment and the only way to even the playing field is to de-legalize the institution.


A group of legal scholars and gay advocacy groups are calling for marriage to be de-legalized in order to make the distribution of benefits more fair for people who aren’t married, including gay couples.

University of Houston Law School professor Victor Flatt cites social security, immigration, tax benefits and travel benefits as some of the perks married couples receive.

"The goal is equality between married and unmarried persons,” said David Blankenhorn at the Institute for American Values . “… Why should you be treated differently by the law just because you're married?"

But opponents say the idea of de-legalizing marriage is a ploy by gay rights advocates.

"There's no lengths to which they won't go,” said Sandy Rios of Concerned Women for America. “And of course it undermines traditional marriage and we cannot allow them to do that."

Yet Rios is adamant about keeping one form of marriage de-legalized -- gay marriage. Later this year conservative groups hope to introduce an amendment to the Constitution that would not only define marriage as a union between a man and a woman but would also nullify state laws that grant gay couples equal status to heterosexual married couples.

[greensideout]

God created Adam and Eve---NOT Adam and Steve.

Marriage is a Biblical tradition, that's why it's called, "HOLY MATRIMONY".

Now what is it that they are really trying to get rid of?

If you said, "Holy", I think you're right.