Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Congratulations!
DC85
Member (Idle past 379 days)
Posts: 876
From: Richmond, Virginia USA
Joined: 05-06-2003


Message 1 of 25 (108819)
05-17-2004 2:41 PM


Congratulations to all the Homosexual couples in Mass. Who got legally married today! Hopefully this is Just the beginning for you!
This message has been edited by DC85, 05-17-2004 04:41 PM

My site The Atheist Bible
My New Debate Fourms!

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dan Carroll, posted 05-17-2004 2:55 PM DC85 has not replied
 Message 4 by NosyNed, posted 05-17-2004 2:57 PM DC85 has not replied
 Message 5 by Percy, posted 05-17-2004 3:03 PM DC85 has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 2 of 25 (108822)
05-17-2004 2:48 PM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

Dan Carroll
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 25 (108826)
05-17-2004 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by DC85
05-17-2004 2:41 PM


Isn't it great? One out of fifty states is willing to recognize homosexuals as human beings.
Sigh. 49 to go, I suppose.

"As the days go by, we face the increasing inevitability that we are alone in a godless, uninhabited, hostile and meaningless universe. Still, you've got to laugh, haven't you?"
-Holly

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by DC85, posted 05-17-2004 2:41 PM DC85 has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 4 of 25 (108827)
05-17-2004 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by DC85
05-17-2004 2:41 PM


?
What spelling mistake?
I won't gloat to much that my part of Canada is well ahead of Mass. (I'm not sure what's going to unfold after our upcoming election.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by DC85, posted 05-17-2004 2:41 PM DC85 has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 5 of 25 (108833)
05-17-2004 3:03 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by DC85
05-17-2004 2:41 PM


Here in NH, Governor Benson just yesterday signed into law a bill prohibiting the state from recognizing such marriages.
I'm all for gay couples having all the same rights as married people (including paying more taxes if both are wage earners), I just wish they'd find another name for gay unions. We could use this name for all civil unions. From a legal standpoint, the word "marriage" would apply to religious ceremonies uniting a couple, while a different word would apply to civil ceremonies.
Of course, this gets more complicated if there are some religions that will marry gay couples, and I'll bet there are. But in this case it would probably satisfy states like New Hampshire if the married gay couple also attended a civil ceremony. In other words, states like NH would accept marriage licenses of heterosexual couples signed by ministers, pastors and so forth, and of gay couples signed by justices of the peace. But they wouldn't accept a religious leader's signature on the marriage license of a gay couple.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by DC85, posted 05-17-2004 2:41 PM DC85 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by berberry, posted 05-17-2004 3:30 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 7 by jar, posted 05-17-2004 3:48 PM Percy has replied
 Message 11 by coffee_addict, posted 05-17-2004 5:57 PM Percy has replied

berberry
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 25 (108840)
05-17-2004 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Percy
05-17-2004 3:03 PM


Southern Baptists and the Theology of Intolerance
If the word 'marriage' applies to heterosexual civil unions then it should apply to all gay civil unions as well. If the government wants to get out of the marriage business altogether and issue only civil unions that'd be fine with me.
Here in Southern Baptist country people want the government to continue to perform heterosexual marriages and they don't want anything, not even civil unions, for gays. They believe that marriage is a blessing from God but they have no problem at all allowing the government to be the conduit for this blessing. They have totally abandoned their own heritage as the religion that first fought for separation of church and state. They do, however, continue their heritage as the most intolerant of mainstream faiths (speaking here of Southern Baptists, of course, not all Baptists). The Southern Baptist church was founded for the express purpose of defending the institution of slavery. They abandoned that stance many, many years ago, back in 1996!
The new "improved" Southern Baptist Church is just as intolerant as it ever was. The only thing that has changed is the target of that intolerance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Percy, posted 05-17-2004 3:03 PM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by DC85, posted 05-17-2004 9:45 PM berberry has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 7 of 25 (108845)
05-17-2004 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Percy
05-17-2004 3:03 PM


TTBOMK, NO State in the US recognizes religious marriages.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Percy, posted 05-17-2004 3:03 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Percy, posted 05-17-2004 4:52 PM jar has replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 8 of 25 (108858)
05-17-2004 4:52 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by jar
05-17-2004 3:48 PM


jar writes:
TTBOMK, NO State in the US recognizes religious marriages.
I'm trying to remember the details surrounding the marriage license from my own wedding, but it was long enough ago that I've forgotten too much. I don't know if this is accurate, but when we applied for the marriage license, someone told us that once you have the license you're married, that the religious ceremony is a formality. True or not, I think the minister who performed the ceremony signed the certificate. But I wonder if he signed it not as a religious leader, but as a representative of the state? Do ministers, pastors, priests, etc., have to obtain state licenses before they can perform legally recognized marriages?
If so, this changes my argument a little because it means that marriage is a construction of the state and not of religion, and the state therefore gets to define what is marriage and what is not. But the state's definition of marriage and religion's definition probably do not agree. Nor should they! And since the definitions are different, it would be nice if there were different words, but I guess we're stuck with marriage for both.
So, in order to be considered married by the state, you must have a civil marriage. I think everyone, gay or not, should be entitled to such a marriage. Whether or not you're also married in the eyes of God should be up to each religion.
Up here in New Hampshire we apparently believe the civil and religious definitions of marriage should be one and the same.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 05-17-2004 3:48 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by jar, posted 05-17-2004 5:07 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 17 by crashfrog, posted 05-18-2004 1:48 AM Percy has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 9 of 25 (108863)
05-17-2004 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Percy
05-17-2004 4:52 PM


Yes, the phrase used is often, "By the power vested in me by XYZ".
Marriage, particularly in the US has been a civil contract for as long as I can find records. You can get a civil only wedding, but not one that is just religious.
The license is from the state.
It sets out privilages and responsibilities involved in the contract.
That is why I find it so hard to understand why anyone opposes same-sex marriages.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Percy, posted 05-17-2004 4:52 PM Percy has not replied

DC85
Member (Idle past 379 days)
Posts: 876
From: Richmond, Virginia USA
Joined: 05-06-2003


Message 10 of 25 (108868)
05-17-2004 5:38 PM


According to the Church I am not married...
So why the heck do they care if homosexuals get married outside the church? I don't understand this... I mean to the church a nonreligious ceremony isn't real anyway...
This message has been edited by DC85, 05-17-2004 07:37 PM

My site The Atheist Bible
My New Debate Fourms!

coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 477 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 11 of 25 (108872)
05-17-2004 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Percy
05-17-2004 3:03 PM


Percy writes:
I'm all for gay couples having all the same rights as married people (including paying more taxes if both are wage earners), I just wish they'd find another name for gay unions. We could use this name for all civil unions. From a legal standpoint, the word "marriage" would apply to religious ceremonies uniting a couple, while a different word would apply to civil ceremonies.
Percy, this reminds me of the slogan "seperate but equal" the racist bastards used to use. Sorry, but it is not going to work. There will always be bastards that will find loopholes to make the "seperate but equal" not equal for everyone.
I just don't understand why people won't see that we are facing the same damn problem with the civil rights movement. Yes, I agree that gays aren't drinking from different drinking fountain and all of that, but a gay man can't legally claim that his "spouse" is in the emergency room or whatever occasion that is convenient to have a spouse. This is making me mad. People should open their eyes and see that the governator and his conservative blood sucking republicans aren't gods in this matter.
Either give us the same rights or open up concentration camps. I don't want anything in between.
This message has been edited by Lama dama ding dong, 05-17-2004 04:57 PM

The Laminator

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Percy, posted 05-17-2004 3:03 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Percy, posted 05-17-2004 9:05 PM coffee_addict has not replied

DC85
Member (Idle past 379 days)
Posts: 876
From: Richmond, Virginia USA
Joined: 05-06-2003


Message 12 of 25 (108915)
05-17-2004 8:42 PM


hehe some short subject.. this may have to move...
anyway... anyone know the chances of the Marriage amendment passing?
This message has been edited by DC85, 05-17-2004 07:42 PM

My site The Atheist Bible
My New Debate Fourms!

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by jar, posted 05-17-2004 9:01 PM DC85 has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 13 of 25 (108918)
05-17-2004 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by DC85
05-17-2004 8:42 PM


Hopefully, slim to none.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by DC85, posted 05-17-2004 8:42 PM DC85 has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 14 of 25 (108919)
05-17-2004 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by coffee_addict
05-17-2004 5:57 PM


To me this seems less a "separate but equal" issue and more one of equal rights. If a woman can have a husband, why can't a man? Denying a man a husband amounts to sex discrimination, doesn't it?
Either give us the same rights or open up concentration camps. I don't want anything in between.
That's the spirit! They'll sure be sorry once you're locked away in a concentration camp!
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by coffee_addict, posted 05-17-2004 5:57 PM coffee_addict has not replied

mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 15 of 25 (108922)
05-17-2004 9:14 PM


I always took a slightly different take on this. Not that I'd deny homosexuals the right to marry, but give ALL non-married couples the same rights as married ones.
I am reminded of Nigel Hawthorne's (the madness of King George, among others) partner (whose name escapes me), who had to give up the "marital home" because of inheritance tax that he wouldn't have had to have paid if married.
Its simply a cash issue for the IRS/Treasury, nothing more.
Bloodsucking leeches. Bastards.
Mark

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024