| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 9:24AM #21 | |
Yes, and for a long time, your neighbor expected that you wouldn't marry someone outside your race. I can only assume that this is the definition of marriage that NC will move towards next year.
Gary Johnson 2012
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 9:36AM #22 | |
|
Here is something I don't understand. Some states allow marriage at different ages. Some states require blood tests. Some states allow closer relatives than others to marry. Some states allow quicky marriages, while others require time in residence. It used to be that some states forbid the marriage between blacks and whites. As far as I know, all states recognize the marriages of other states. People run off to Las Vegas or Maui and get married all the time, returning to their home states to live in wedded bliss, regardless of the marriage laws of their home state. So what happens if if a same sex couple is married in a state which allows ssm, and they subsequently move to South Carolina or other state that does not allow ssm? Are they married? Do they enjoy all the rights and protections that straight couples married in that other state, or will SC reserve the right to dissolve those marriages and break up those families? What about property rights and inheritance laws or powers of attorney that come with marriage? In other words, can SC recognize some marriages from another state and not others, or will they have to accept all if they accept one? Inquiring minds want to know.
I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. Albert Einstein You can get anything you want out of life if you will just help enough other people get what they want. Zig Ziglar Here's the difference between a capitalist society and a communist society: Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's the other way around. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 9:37AM #23 | |
If that's what your case is, I would think you would want to include as many couples as possible--especially those with children--for the good order of society.
This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 9:43AM #24 | |
|
This is life in the land of the "free." So North Carolina yesterday became the 29th state to ban gay marriage, as well as all forms of domestic legal partnership. So be it. The rest of the country can be the "Christian" nation it wants to be, where marriage is only contracted between men and women who pack heat and punch hippies, and works to eliminate all economic activity except the "free" market and war. Meanwhile, we'll watch from our forest hideout as that purified, homogenized country goes down like a sack of coal.
Adepto vestri stercore simul.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 9:44AM #25 | |
It's all about the buggery. Whining about the degradation of the institution of marriage is just an attempt to bring on board those who might not otherwise care very much about other people's sex lives.
This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 9:56AM #26 | |
|
North Carolina has a long history of stupidity and backwardness, and this is not their first attempt to strictly control who can marry whom. They passed a law against whites marrying blacks or Indians in 1715 and again in 1875. Just for giggles and shits, blacks were banned from marrying Indians in 1887. Those laws were eventually invalidated by the Supreme Court's strict interpretation of Amendment XIV in the appropriately-named Loving decision. What is legal in NC is for 14-year-old girls to marry, as long as they're pregnant.
Adepto vestri stercore simul.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 10:28AM #27 | |
Maybe you mean NC? But to use your analogy, those rights would not be recognized by that state, nothing would really dissolve. SC indicates it recogizes a marriage as between a man and a woman. It is no more complicated than that. Were I want to be a homosexual in marriage, I would choose NOT to live in SC, or determine what I needed to do (such as poa) to ensure my partner could do the legal things needing to be done. I dont know that poa's automatically come with marriage. Survivorship does maybe its the same thing? Property rights you can leave in your will to whomever you wish.
Any man can count the seeds in an apple....
.......but only God can count the apples in the seeds. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 10:41AM #28 | |
Marriage is working out pretty well for me. I have friends on their second and third, for them it might be a different story. Hollywood is exactly the culprit. No fault divorces came from there in the 70's. If you want to totally destroy the USA, it wont happen economically, you have to destroy the family. And this is taking its toll, slowly but surely.
Any man can count the seeds in an apple....
.......but only God can count the apples in the seeds. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 11:16AM #29 | |
In the event of one's mental incapacitation (ie coma, etc.) the next of kin of the age of majority is by default given powers of attorney. This is almost always the spouse (Remember the Terry Schiavo case?) It is marriage that makes the spouse next of kin. Gay couples are automatically denied this protection, regardless of how long they have been together. The next of kin then defaults to the parents or living siblings. Gay couples have no right to Social Security survivor or VA retirement benefits as do straight married couples. Parents of gay people have been known to even deny visitation rights to the 'spouse' when their adult child is hospitalized and unable to speak for themselves. There are laws that protect against spouses who abandon their families in the form of alimony and child support. Gay partners are denied these protections. Marriage is more than just two people making a public commitment to one another. There are important spousal rights acknowledged in every jurisdiction and protected by the courts. Why we would want to withhold those rights from one particular class of citizen is beyond me.
I never consider a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. Albert Einstein You can get anything you want out of life if you will just help enough other people get what they want. Zig Ziglar Here's the difference between a capitalist society and a communist society: Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's the other way around. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 1 year ago :: May 09, 2012 - 11:29AM #30 | |
Tenac ... it's working out well for me as well .. going on 21 years, with no sign of weakening. ... don't get me wrong .. I"m not trying to hijack Ed's thread, but it seems the central argument surrounding Gay Marriage is really a concern about the attitude change in society regarding Traditional Marriage, and the increasing failure rate.The divorce rate is currently 50% in the US [marriage rate 6.8/1000, divorce rate 3.4/1000] According to the Census [2004], only 60% of children lived with both their biological mother and father.This is alarming. But with all that said, I don't see Gay Marriage being the primary culprit. The "war on the family" is not being perpetrated by the Homo community, as much as it is the "liberal commmunity" in general. You and I both know that this is connected to their disdain for Protestant Religion and it's views ... specifically on topics such as Abortion. AND ... since Liberals control the flow of information, and specifically, own Hollywood, they have succeeded in changing the way a significant number of people view Sex, Marriage, etc. Thus ... out of wedlock sex, and children are more "accepted" as ok these days. In fact, for the more rabid among us, it is preferred, because they hate men, especially White Men. I guess my position is that we should not be punishing the homosexuals for something that liberals in general do. That is lowering ourselves to the same level as they are, ie., no different from their war against marriage just because Protestant Religions value marriage, but oppose Abortion. Instead, we should be focusing on getting out the message that Traditional Marriage is GOOD for Women and for Children ... not to mention Men, who are increasing becomming a disenfranchised group in their own right thanks to the rabid left's concerted "war on men". Just as the Liberals have succesfully incorporated Abortion into Sex Education as a legal and viable means to end a pregnancy, taught in schools as "a woman's choice" ... we need to push for Schools presenting the evidence ... that Traditional Marriage has a lot of benefits to Women, Men, and Children, and the characteristics and behaviors that lead to and sustain a succesful marriage. I just don't see how spending so much energy on Gay Marriage is helping in the goal of bolstering the benefits of Traditional Marriage. |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|