This may hurt the Democrats in November. However, the dam has sprung leaks, and in time, more and more states will follow. It is also just a matter of time before the Supreme Court will have to make a decision whether to enforce the US Constitution's Full Faith and Credit claus* or to say that it really doesn't mean what it says it means.
*Article IV, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, commonly known as the Full Faith and Credit Clause, addresses the duties that states within the United States have to respect the "public acts, records, and judicial rulings" of other states.
[i]Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Posts: 17477 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Hippolips , how would that 'court battle' differ from any other divorce or civil suit relating to a marriage?
The mistake is only in calling it a ' marriage'.
That's bound to be offensive to those who think that marriage is the word for a union between a man and a woman, approved by a church or religious body.Does California use the word marriage in its law creating a legal single sex union?
The fundamental principle ought to be the establishment of the same legal rights for single sex couples as are enjoyed by heterosexual ones who marry. That means, inter alia,establishing a right to end the formal, legal, union.Having a sexual relationship outside the union or infecting one partner with a sexually transmitted disease would normally be regarded as grounds for ending the union.
"Loving spouses" of all sexual orientations experience conflict and heartbreak in their relationships. Marriage is a contract between consenting adults who wish to spend their lives together, and ensure that their wishes are honored and partners and children are cared for after death. Marriages may end in divorce for many reasons, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. Assuming that only homosexual relationships are at risk of disease should one partner stray is silly.
In my experience, homosexual couples are far more patient and caring and honest with each other than the heterosexual couples I know, and the New York Times has posted an article, Gay Unions Shed Light on Gender in Marriage, with respect to this.
quote:
Originally posted by FredPuli:The mistake is only in calling it a ' marriage'.
And indeed, that may have been the only point, since Californians have long had domestic partnership rights equal to those awarded in marriage, in my understanding.
I found this the other day and saved it because I thought it was worded very well:
quote:
No majority, regardless of how large, can legally impose religious beliefs through force of law on society. The very purpose of the religion and speech clauses of the Bill of Rights is to stop popular majorities from legislating religious views or censorship into law merely by the power of even overwhelming numbers. - CSH Lauds California Supreme Court Victory for Same-Sex Marriage Rights By Eddie Tabash, Secular Humanism Online News Vol.4 No.6
Posts: 4605 | Location: Rochester, NY, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
Actor George Takei and his partner were among the first Californian couples to get a wedding licence after the state lifted its ban on same-sex marriage.
Takei, 71, best known for playing Mr Sulu in Star Trek, received his licence in West Hollywood on Tuesday. BBC
Good for him. So did John McCain agree to walk Ellen DeGeneres down the aisle at the wedding at the Bush ranch yet? CNN
I'm just curious to see how gays handle the same problems straights face .
This is really a legitimate point, and reminds of one of Mr. Spock's lines from the old Star Trek series which went something like "Wanting may be better than having. I know it is not logical." I think that, human nature being what it is, whether hetero- or homosexual, the same marital problem will ultimately occur.
Posts: 7675 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
How do straight married couples handles it in California, Hippo? That might be a clue as to how gay married couple handle it. After all, a cheating spouse bringing a disease home has been happening for a very long time, and for a long time, some of those diseases were 100% fatal. It has never really mattered what gender either of the married couple were.
I will never understand the interest that some straights have about gays and their lifestyles. (But maybe I do.) Has anyone ever noticed any gays showing the same curiosity about straights' habits?
I agree with JR. The patterns of long term committed people will be about the same, regardless of which side of the street they walk on.
Posts: 17477 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
I posted somewhere here a list of things I am in favor of and opposed to. I'm just too damn lazy to look for it. I think that the brouhaha about same-sex marriage, along with blue laws in certain states, is the last bastion of religious influence in secular society. If I hear the old "Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" cliché one more time, I think I'll vomit. Heterosexual marriage was a societal necessity for millenia, it produced population at a time of enormous infant mortality rates. Religion simply legitimized that. As it did for many other societal imperatives (cf. the Ten Commandments). About all critics can do now is cite religious sources, ignoring the Establishment clause. If gays wish to roll the dice on marriage, the way straights do, more power to them. As I said above, I have a hunch that they too will live to enjoy or regret their decision.
Posts: 7675 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02
I'm just curious to see how gays handle the same problems straights face .
hippolips
Thanks, hippo, for the explanation. Apparently you are concerned that gays may suffer the same problems as heteros: infidelity, expensive diseases, etc. If you can manage to overturn the legitimization of gay marriage, you'll save them a lot of grief. Very commendable!
Well, they will almost certainly suffer the same difficulties as heterosexual couples, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have the right to decide if marriage is right for them or not.
When gay marriage was legalised in Ontario in 2003, we had lots of publicity here, with many couples rushing to the altar. What some of them found, as do many straight couples, is that marriage isn't all it's cracked up to be. We had our first gay divorce here, in 2004.
It's very easy to get caught up in the moment, in an exciting historical time, and this newfound freedom and opportunity of the revolutionary moment often overrides the personal issues that marriage usually involves
I'm just curious to see how gays handle the same problems straights face .
hippolips
Thanks, hippo, for the explanation. Apparently you are concerned that gays may suffer the same problems as heteros: infidelity, expensive diseases, etc. If you can manage to overturn the legitimization of gay marriage, you'll save them a lot of grief. Very commendable!
______________________________________________
Hi Frank:
Where did you get the idea that I was opposed to gay marriage???
I really don't care who marries whom.
I don't even care if some guy wants to marry his horse
...just as long as he keeps his horse off my front lawn.
Eureka! Now I understand your problem, hippo. These California gays are getting married on your front lawn, or threaten to do so. Your off-hand mention of "bathouses" and "Aids" must have given me an incorrect idea about the reason for your interest in the issue of gay marriage versus the red-blooded American variety. Sorry!
'...Nader Abdul Kadoos, a 50-year-old returning student, was set upon by one such street committee last month in the southern port city of Aden, in a confrontation that received broad attention in Yemen's news media.
Kadoos's apparent offense was to stroll out of the gates of Aden University after class in a group of male and female students.
About five bearded men pounced on the students, grabbing one woman by the hand to hold her while two other female students escaped in taxis, Kadoos recounted. The men slapped some of the male students. "Is this a lover's lane?" the leader of the gang shouted, according to Kadoos.
More bearded men appeared from nowhere to upbraid the group, while some outraged passersby stopped to defend the mostly young men and women.
"Do you want us to wait until they start having sex in the street?" Kadoos recalled one of the bearded men shouting back at the crowd...'Self-Appointed Morals Police
I guess there's a certain kind of mind, and apparently it's an international phenomenon, that leaps to "sex in the street" when it sees young men and women talking, or unprotected sex in bathhouses when it hears of gay marriage.
Originally posted by hippolips: I'm just curious to see how gays handle the same problems straights face.
Much the way they have been doing it all along, I suspect. I haven't heard about a great rash of infections among now-married couples in Massachusetts. Again, this is no different from the dalliances of a married heterosexual couple. AIDS is not only a gay disease -and it is actually much more manageable and more affordable to treat than you would have us believe.
quote:
I don't even care if some guy wants to marry his horse
The habit of equating homosexuality with bestiality is ignorant and insulting to all parties involved. You may feel it is quite liberal to approve of a NIMBY man-beast marriage, but we are talking about consenting adults here. A horse cannot consent to marriage, nor can a minor or someone who is developmentally disabled. They are really quite different topics.
Posts: 4605 | Location: Rochester, NY, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Elexina: AIDS is not only a gay disease -and it is actually much more manageable and more affordable to treat than you would have us believe.
________________________________________________
Hi Elexina:
I agree ,Aids is not only a gay disese,but I believe the statistics would show the disease is much more predominant within the gay community.
The disease might be more affordable and manageable if your name is Magic Johnson... but it still kills.
Everyone who is infected with Aids is capable of killing any partner they have sex with...gay or straight...and that's murder.
I do not have at my fingertips the statistics for infection across sexual orientation, but I suspect you are correct. However, if that is your main opposition to gay marriage, then it’s kind of far-fetched. One spouse cheating and infecting the other with any disease, from mono to the chicken pox to AIDS is crappy and dangerous and cruel, but it is not really any of your business.
One would hope that anyone entering into a marriage contract, gay or straight, in the state of California or anywhere else, does so with full knowledge of the laws of their state, especially those regarding divorce and sharing of assets. Someone else’s divorce, whatever the cause, should not concern you. We might be saddened that their marriage was unable to endure, we might be disgusted by one partner’s carelessness and the other’s naivety, but their relationship, lasting or not, does not affect our own relationships or anyone else’s. Marriage is not just about love and fidelity, it is a partnership built on respect and cooperation. If a couple is lacking those things, their marriage will fail regardless of their orientation and, regardless of their orientation, they probably had no business getting married in the first place.
Posts: 4605 | Location: Rochester, NY, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Elexina: I do not have at my fingertips the statistics for infection across sexual orientation, but I suspect you are correct. However, if that is your main opposition to gay marriage, then it’s kind of far-fetched. One spouse cheating and infecting the other with any disease, from mono to the chicken pox to AIDS is crappy and dangerous and cruel, but it is not really any of your business.
_______________________________________________
Hi Elixana:
First of all I have no objection to gay marriage,that's your assumption.
Second,comparing Aids to mono or chicken pox makes no sense.
Aids is a stone cold killer,and anyone who has Aids,and knowingly continues to give it to sexual partners ,is stone cold killer.
Those with Aids ,who do not practice safe sex,are no different than street gang bangers, who drive by and kill innocent people just because they can.
So did John McCain agree to walk Ellen DeGeneres down the aisle at the wedding at the Bush ranch yet? 
