Behner nie lubi tylko prostytucji kobiet!

Podaje ten wyciag z historii 'domowych partnerow' w USA z powodu
klamstw, ktore moga wedrzec sie do Polski.
DZISIEJSZY NYT IMES ON LINE MA PRZEKLAMANIA W TEMACIE.

Go Behner go - YOU CAN GET MORE SPECIALS IN OHIO! ( Corzine will blend
his German mind to pay for his securiies as old - I SEE THE SCENARIO
HOW BEHNER WILL NOT SURVIVE THE POLITICAL PREASURE IN ..20 YEARS)



JUST PUBLISHED BY NYT ON LINE:

"Civil unions, an intermediate step that supporters say has made same-
sex marriage seem
less threatening, are legal in New Jersey,
THEY ARE NOT" ( see below)
 Connecticut and Vermont. The latter two states are phasing them out
after adopting same-sex marriage laws.
Not here

NEW ENGLAND

New England remains the nucleus of the same-sex marriage movement,
with a campaign under way to extend marriage rights to gay men and
lesbians in all six of the region's states by 2012.
I SEE!


Gay rights supporters suffered a crushing loss when voters decided in
November 2009 to repeal Maine's new law allowing gay men and lesbians
to wed, setting back a movement that had made remarkable progress
nationally over the course of the year.

ANYWHERE THERE IS REFERENDUM, PEOPLE REPEL IT!

Maine, with its libertarian leanings, had seemed to offer an excellent
chance of reversing the national trend of voters rejecting marriage
equality at the ballot box.
HALLO JOKER - CONTRADICTION IN TERM - LIBERTARIAN CAN NOT DOTAHT IF HE
IS LIBERTARIAN; YPU MIXING TERMS - LEBERTARIAN DOES NOT MAKE SUCH
LAWS. PERIOD.
 Instead, it became the 31st state to block same-sex marriage through
a public referendum.

WHOM ARE YOU JOKER COMPLAIN ABOUT? PEOPLE'S REFERENDUM BOTHERS YOU AS
LIBERTARIAN?
( I have a feeling that sex offenders , really regresssed too, hope
that 'libertyns' will hide their crimes)


CALIFORNIA

Another major front in the debate is California. On May 15, 2008, the
Supreme Court of California voted 4-to-3 that a state law banning same-
sex marriage constituted illegal discrimination (..)Opponents quickly
organized, and launched the Proposition 8 initiative campaign, asking
voters to ban same-sex marriages. After an expensive and hard-fought
campaign, the measure passed on Nov. 4, 2008, with 52 percent of the
vote. (Florida and Arizona also passed bans at the same time.)

Groups who had fought Proposition 8 immediately filed suit to block
it. On May 26, 2009, the state Supreme Court upheld the voter-approved
ban but also decided that the estimated 18,000 gay couples who tied
the knot before the law took effect will stay wed.
SEE THEM DERANGED - IF YOU COMMITTED WHAT IS THERE THE ISSUE NOW?
(..)
The judge initially stayed his order, leaving the Proposition 8 ban in
effect, then said it would be lifted as of August 18th, allowing same-
sex marriages to resume.
MUST BE REALY HOT THERE - IN SEPTEMBER 2008 THEY OFFENDENDE DTHE
PEOPLES DICENCY AND DEMOSNTRATED HOMO SEX ON THE STREETS ( this one is
an offence no matter how you cut it - they mixed the change and
'defended' marriage while the offence was exposure and exposure to
minors - in NJ that yild jail time.

PRESIDENT OBAMA AND GAY MARRIAGE

The flurry of activity in early 2009 has put pressure on President
Obama to engage in a variety of gay issues.
HOW POPULAR AGAIN!

 Mr. Obama has said he opposes same-sex marriage as a Christian but
describes himself as a "fierce advocate of equality" for gay men and
lesbians. (..) On legislation, Mr. Obama is charting a careful course.
REALLY? IS HE LEGISLATOR?
 In addition to calling for the repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell"
policy in the military, Mr. Obama supports a legislative repeal of the
Defense of Marriage Act, the 1996 law that said states need not
recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. Opponents of
same-sex marriage say that is an inconsistency. But Mr. Obama's
Justice Department
REALLY? WHO PAIS FOR JUSTICE DEPARMENT?
defended the law against separate lawsuits brought by the
Massachusetts Attorney General and an advocacy group.
JUSTICE DEPARFMENT IS NOT A POLITICIAN, MORON! IT COULD HAVE DONE TAHT
ON TECHNICALITY OR ON THE CONSISTENCY OF LAWS OR ELSE; BUT MOST LIKE
BY THE LAW.

On July 8, 2010, Judge Joseph L. Tauro of United States District Court
in Boston ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in both cases. In the
Coakley case, the judge held that federal restrictions on funding for
states that recognize same-sex marriage violates the 10th Amendment,
which declares that rights not explicitly granted to the federal
government, or denied to the states, belong to the states.


AND?

PARDON ME, WHICH STATE APROVES THAT INSANITY? NONE!

DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP WAS TO BE SOMEWHAT THE MATTER OF CONVENIENCE.
BUT IS IT? WHAT SI THIUS RAMBLING THAT PARTNERS DO NOT GET FEDERAL
BENEFITS - PROBABLT BRITISH INVASION FOUND OUT THAT HEAD OF HOUSELHOLD
DOES NOT APPL;Y IF THEY LIVE TOGETHER BY THE STATE LAW SOMEWHERE DOES
LOSE 2000$ IN TAX; BUT SHOULD NOT AS 2 HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD CAN LIVE
TOGETHER.

MEDICAID IS AVAILED TO ALL BY THE LAW AND THE SENSE WHAT IT IS.

WHICH BENEFITS? THE ONE THAT AHS THE PROPERTY IS TO PAY FOR THE ONE
THAT DOS NOT,LOOKS LIKE THAT TO ME. AND ISNSTED THAT GET OUT TO CLAIM
THAT FEDERAL BENEFIT DENIED. TEHY ARE NOT.
IT SEEMS TO ME THAT BRITISH INVASION WANTS TO HIDE CRIMINALS AS THEY
WILL NOIT USE THE SS IF THE MANIPULATE SOME MORE; GET OTEHR PERSONS
PROPERTY CLAIMIMNG TAHT THGIS IS COMPULSORY! ( SO MUCH FOR LIBERTYN)
BUT WOIRSE - CAN MAKE THE VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSOULT REAL SEXUAL SLAVE
WITHOUT A MATRRIAGE IN CASE OF HEREROSEXUAL DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP
( MEANS TAHT THEY WILL NOT BE MARRYING AND SHARING THE PROPERTY )

DOBLE MANIPULATION POSSIBLE, UNDER THE IMPRESSION TAHT ALL AMERICANS
ARE NOT THAT STUPIFIED TAHT WILL BE BUYING THE COMPLAINT ABOUT LOSS OF
BENEFITS BECAUSE THE OFFENDER 1. DOES NOT WANT TO MARRY TO SHARE
PROPERTY 2. WANTS TO ENSLAVE UNDERAGED OR OTHERWISE ILLEGALLY COERSED
VICTIM AS A SLAVE. AND HERE IS WHAT THEY CONCOCTED EVENTUALLY UNDER
THE DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP THAT FOR A CHANGE IN NJ, NOBODY YET
 HEARD IN 2004.
"The domestic partnership statute remains in place even though New
Jersey has since enacted a civil union statute. Couples in an existing
domestic partnership are not required to enter a civil union. However,
new domestic partnerships are available only to couples in which both
partners are 62 and over, whether same-sex or different-sex.[4][5]"

BUT THAT IS NOT ALL WHAT CORZINE CAN DO! HE IS MARRIED TO KATZ AS YOU
ALL REMEMBER!

and here is more dispute on the lose: "On July 20, 2007, Governor Jon
Corzine sent a letter to UPS officials on behalf of a UPS driver and
her partner, asking the company to comply with New Jersey law and
extend spousal benefits such as health insurance to civil union
partners. On July 30, Allen Hill, UPS's senior vice president for
human resources, announced, "We have received clear guidance that, at
least in New Jersey, the state truly views civil union partners as
married. We've heard that loud and clear from state officials and
we're happy to make this change."[11]

REALLY

The company also noted that it already offers equality of benefits to
married same-sex couples in Massachusetts, and would review its
policies in Connecticut and Vermont, which also offer civil unions
(and have since enacted legislation legalizing same-sex marriage).

BUT NJ DEFEATED THE SAME SEX MARRIAGE! ( REFLECTED IN THE INTERNET -
BILL IS NOT PASSED!)

 ( this is about these jokers that do not givorced while fulling
around with the rest of the world trying to force finacial
transactions unders that new form of sex favour)

PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW CORZINE PARK IN YOUR DRIVEWAY AS YOU MIGHT PAY,
PAY AND PAY
( please note that they mean no less), UNLESS YOU ALREADY SUICIDAL