<p>I think being contradictory can be good. I am glad there are people that fight for low taxes, and I am glad there are people that fight for tons of social services. I hope we end up with some kind of balance.</p>
<p>dstark, we may actually agree in some respects. As I’ve posted before, I think the lack of opposition to either side (any side) is the cause of all sorts of trouble. Both sides have extremist impulses on so many issues that need to be pulled back. It’s not always easy to do that and sometimes one has to be unpleasant and gets to be overly sensitive. In a particular area (transportation) I have long been an advocate against the mainstream in my area, holding press conferences, meetings with top elected and appointed officials. Someone needs to yell stop!</p>
<p>We do agree. I don’t like the lack of opposition either. In California, the democrats have control. I am not happy about that. The republicans in the state need to reinvent themselves. The state has elected republican governors in the past.</p>
<p>Well, some feel that people under 18 should not get married and the same people feel that people of the same sex should get married, lots of confusion as to why some are should be listened to and other should not, especiallly considering the biblical (very old human history in reality, the practices that lasted for centuries) supported the celebrated instances of marriage at 13, including some theoretical assumptions that virgin Mary was a very young teenager herself and some believe that she might be close to this age. I have NO stand and NO opinion, I DO NOT support one way or another simply because I do not have enough of personal background in any of it and I never ever take sides unless I have a personal experience. I am just thowing some very known and documented facts. BTW Juliet (remember Romeo and Juliet) was 14, they both would be punished currently in the USA one way or another, if not formally, then in some other way. The age was not a concern in the story at all, the families feud was. So, should we be concern with family feuds at this point? Some of us parents here would not want their kids to be married to others from other families.They have no legal law that would work to protect thier desire/goal/standing/set of values or whatever else you want to call it. Should they raise this to the level of the gay marriage issue? I am more and more confused and have more questions than answers that lead me to believe that somehow gay’s right have been elevated above other group’s rights and it seems not to be correct, but again, I have no standing/opinion/goals/desires in this, just curious how others can keep all of this logical. At the end, it seems that the only logic is alive: “All of us are created equal, but some of us are created MORE equal than others”. Not my comment either, some very smart person who was a genius came up with this one.</p>
<p>The people of Calif. deserve to reap the whirlwind of their choices @ election time. A state that chooses to elect Jerry Brown to a second term & reelect Boxer( her own hometown paper wouldn’t even endorse her)?? Nuff Said.</p>
<p>
Well I did tell you I was a hypocrite!</p>
<p>I just think at the core that consenting adults should have the sole right to decide with whom they make their families and share their lives. I don’t think people under age 18 are fully cooked and should make such determinations. Yes there are exceptions, in fiction and in life, but a general standard can be a good thing.</p>
<p>@zoosermon,</p>
<p>I think you missed my point: I think straight couples should be registered as civil unions, as well as any other mutual economic partnerships between consenting adults who are willing to tie together their finances and take accountability for each other.</p>
<p>Gov’ should get out of the business of deciding what constitutes a “marriage” and leave that to the holy men (women).</p>
<p>
No, I do get it and I agree with you. I was just not going that far in the context of the conversation. I think reasonable people can and should debate that issue to come up with a more workable, fair and sensible solution going forward. Just as a matter of big picture philosophy, I think gay couples should get whatever society decides straight couples should get. Smarter people than I should decide the logistics.</p>
<p>About 15 years ago my DH was offered a job for considerably more more money at the time ($30Kish) in a low tax state. On the surface it seemed like a great deal. But when we ran the numbers and had to figure in private school from K-12 (this state’s schools are, imo, awful, and since county wide school districts it doesn’t matter where you live the schools are crap,) and what it would cost us to get the comparable medical insurance to what we had (which came in close to $500 a month more,) plus the loss in other benefits my DH gets (accrued sick days are paid out in cash when he retires and he’s never taken a sick day in 23 years, his pension, etc., ) it was clear we were much better off staying in our high tax state. </p>
<p>My neighbors across the street up and left to move to this low cost state about a year ago, giddy with the idea of being able to get a house twice the size for half the cost and no nasty taxes to pay. The wife left first with the kids, while the DH stayed behind to sell the house while looking for a job in new state. </p>
<p>The wife is a nurse. In new state she had to work two jobs with no benefits to earn what she was making working 1 part time job here.</p>
<p>He was never able to find anything paying close to what he earns here or with the benefits he gets. </p>
<p>She moved back after May after the school year ended in new state. Unfortunately, the house sold about a month before (had been on the market since the summer) so they had to buy a new house around the corner.</p>