|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 379 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Congratulations! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DC85 Member (Idle past 379 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
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!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 12998 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dan Carroll Inactive Member |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
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.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
berberry Inactive Member |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
TTBOMK, NO State in the US recognizes religious marriages.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DC85 Member (Idle past 379 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
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: |
Percy writes:
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'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.
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DC85 Member (Idle past 379 days) Posts: 876 From: Richmond, Virginia USA Joined: |
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!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 394 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Hopefully, slim to none.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22391 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5195 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
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 |
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024