use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
詳しくは検索FAQを参照
高度な検索: 投稿者や、subredditで……
3,072 人のユーザーが現在閲覧しています
/r/inthenews /r/worldnews /r/politics new comments
Want to talk?
Chat with us on IRC Follow @rslashnews on Twitter
See a post that violates the rules below? Had your post stuck in the spam filter? Have a question about policy? Just want to give feedback? Send the mod team a message.
Submit all self- & meta-posts to /r/inthenews
Your post will likely be removed if it:
Your comment will likely be removed if it:
Extreme or repeat offenders will be banned.
>>>Expanded Rules<<<
If your post doesn't fit, consider finding an appropriate news article on that story to submit instead, or submitting yours to lower moderation subreddits:
/r/inthenews - all news-related content /r/AnythingGoesNews - unrestricted news /r/truereddit - insightful articles /r/self - any self-post /r/misc, /r/redditdotcom - anything
or other news subreddits:
/r/worldnews - from outside the USA only /r/SyrianCivilWar - about the conflict in Syria /r/MidEastRegionalWar - on MidEast conflict /r/UpliftingNews - uplifting /r/SavedYouAClick - making media more straightforward New!
or subreddits for other topics:
/r/FoodForThought - discussion-worthy long form articles about interesting subjects /r/politics - for shouting about politics /r/moderatepolitics - less shouting /r/politicaldiscussion - even less shouting /r/geopolitics - intl. politics and geography /r/entertainment - Justin Bieber updates, etc. /r/europe - news from Europe
or check out the 200 most active subreddits, categorized by content and the full list of subreddits by subscribers.
Recommendations:
/r/redactedcharts /r/patriots /r/personalfinance /r/restorethefourth
reddit is fun for Android and its subreddit /r/redditisfun
submit analysis/opinion article
submit news article
submit something else
Federal Judge Rules Mississippi Clerks Cannot Cite Religious Beliefs to Refuse Issuing Marriage Licenses to Gay Couples (abcnews.go.com)
Another-Chance が 8時間前 投稿
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]Zantom [スコア非表示] 59分前* (4子コメント)
Both sides of this issue are missing a bigger picture and point.
Except for one point (explain below), Government has no business in licensing marriage at all. Government should have no say in the matter on any social or religious union. It is only big government regulation minded bureaucrats that want to tax that want marriage licensing.
As it stands before all this gay marriage nonsense anyone could join in a mutual contact over property or what have you. That isn't a reason to have government specifically involved in marriage. If you wanted, you could sign an agreement that grants mutal power of attorney and mutual property ownership, etc. You could do that before gay marriage was "legal".
So what reason would govenment have to be involved specifically in marriage? There is only one reason there would need to be specific law about marriage that couldn't be satisfied with common contract law. There is no other contact law that exists in which a new person is formed into existence. The contractual protection of a new citizen minor is the only place for government in marriage law.
Therefore there is no need for gay marriage law as there is no precedent for gay couples for creating new citizens. If they adopt, then legal agreements can be entered into at that time, or if insemination is performed then legal agreements can then be made, otherwise there is no point to government involvement in marriage at all beyond common contract law.
The whole issue is off mark on both sides.
The flammatory nature of this issue is in trying to regulate and legislate the social acceptance of gay relationships. While there is definitely improvement that can be made in regards to tolerance of other's practices, historically it has proven to be a dangerous slippery slope to attempt to legislate and institutionalized social acceptance. And if you are so gung-ho about having the government force others to accept your position at the expense of their own counter beliefs beware the power and precedent you grant that government for one day you or your children will find themselves on the wrong side of that force. Very dangerous power to grant.
[–]Another-Chance[S] [スコア非表示] 53分前 (1子コメント)
There are benefits in our society, legals ones, that come with marriage between two people.
Folks didn't like whites marrying blacks and complained about that back in the day and said it wasn't "Natural". Didn't matter.
it isn't about social acceptance, you don't have to accept anything others do. But not accepting something doesn't mean you can block others from doing it.
Marriage isn't about creating other humans, it is about 2 who choose to join legally in marriage for taxes and certain rights that extend to family (hospital visits, not testifying in court, etc and so on).
[–]Covertghost [スコア非表示] 25分前 (1子コメント)
So what reason would govenment have to be involved specifically in marriage?
There are tangible tax/property/civil amenities that are applied to marriages that aren't also extended to civil unions.
I.E. if my partner was dying, his immediate family could legally bar me from seeing him in the hospital.
That's why I got married.
[–]Zantom [スコア非表示] たった今 (0子コメント)
Power of attorney and/or other legal contact can do the same.
π Rendered by PID 14970 on app-327 at 2016-06-28 06:06:23.495675+00:00 running 8eb35e6 country code: JP.
残りのコメントをみる →
[–]Zantom [スコア非表示] (4子コメント)
[–]Another-Chance[S] [スコア非表示] (1子コメント)
[–]Covertghost [スコア非表示] (1子コメント)
[–]Zantom [スコア非表示] (0子コメント)