User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6

  1. #1
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ExTJ
    Posts
    1,377

    Default Gay marriage, adoption, related issues -- Take 2

    This thread is started after the old thread got a bit long, and had some drifts into a more nitpicky style.

  2. #2
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ExTJ
    Posts
    1,377

    Default

    Some posts from the end of the original thread (mainly about how the official marriage process works):

    Well, I disagree that people are better off being patient, because then they could be waiting forever for something that's just never going to come. I just don't think we should force religious groups to hold particular opinions and perform particular rites because it's flat-out unconstitutional. I don't want church in my government or government in my church. Churches will or won't change from the inside. There are LOTS of pro-gay marriage movements within the mainline churches. They will handle the church part. The government should handle the legal part. The way it should handle it is by extending the same rights to same-sex couples as it does to hetero couples.
    How about a dentist who refuses to provide services or employ gay people? A doctor who refuses to inseminate a black woman? A private hospital that denies treatment to a Mexican man? None of these are governmental entities, and the first two are individuals. Same result? Discriminate away?
    Freedom of association would say that yes, they have the right to do so. However, in our era, medical personnel almost always receive money from the government in some way. Also, their individual licensing organizations would be free to decertify them for breaking internal anti-discrimination rules.
    Actually it's the other way around. The license can be traded in for a certificate. The gov. has to OK the pending marriage and issue the license before the officiant can marry the couple and sign the certificate and send it back to the gov.
    As far as I know you don't have to go out and get a separate license to marry people. Simply being a priest or minister of a recognized religious body is enough. I know people who have done that mail-order Universal Life Church thing, and they can marry without procuring a separate license, just by virtue of being "ordained" by the "church." So while it's true that pretty much anybody can do it, if you're not a judge or a magistrate, you DO have to at least say you're part of a church because in most states only clergy or magistrates can certify marriages. That is the government extending the right to perform an act of governmental authority to the clergy. IMO, it violates the separation of church & state. I would rather they each stuck to their own side of the equation--let governmental officials certify the legal marriage, and let religious officials bless the marriage and perform any religious ceremony.
    They don't "dispense" licenses, they fill out the paperwork and send it in to the state, which then processes it and sends the couple the certificate. The person officiating need to be registered with the government to fill out said paperwork, and anyone can get it regardless of their religious affiliation.
    You really can't say that across the board. It varies by state. In California there is a thing called "deputy-for-a-day" where anyone can be temporarily granted the power to perform a marriage, so a couple can have a friend perform their wedding. But in most states it's only clergy members and court/government officials.

  3. #3
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    New thread eh? Well I'll get her started.

    I think as long as the right-wing continues to complicate this matter by mixing church into the issue and making frivolous arguments like "gays want more rights than everyone else" then nobody will be happy. As long as the government gives gays and bisexuals the same legal rights as anyone else, then most people will be happy to leave the religious institutions to catch up on their own time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  4. #4
    Senior Member reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    1,211

    Default

    Individuals ought to be able to form legally binding contracts with one another if they choose, including contracts which mimic the contractual character of traditional marraige. However, no organisation is under any obligation to approve of such a union, and can rightly object to such a union being called 'marraige'. The term 'marraige' is traditionally defined as a union between a man and a woman, joined by an oath to God and approved by a religious organisation. Therefore, if 'marraige' is to have this meaning, then 'gay marraige' is simply impossible, by definition, and no law can change that.

    (A rose would smell just as sweet... etc.)
    A criticism that can be brought against everything ought not to be brought against anything.

  5. #5
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nocturne View Post
    Individuals ought to be able to form legally binding contracts with one another if they choose, including contracts which mimic the contractual character of traditional marraige. However, no organisation is under any obligation to approve of such a union, and can rightly object to such a union being called 'marraige'. The term 'marraige' is traditionally defined as a union between a man and a woman, joined by an oath to God and approved by a religious organisation. Therefore, if 'marraige' is to have this meaning, then 'gay marraige' is simply impossible, by definition, and no law can change that.

    (A rose would smell just as sweet... etc.)
    I don't think the name of "marriage" comes anywhere near as important as the rights and benefits provided by the government to married couples. As long as those are provided to same sex couples, then who cares what they call it. And heck, there are plenty of gay friendly churches that would be happy to marry same sex couples. So I guess I don't really understand what the problem is. Give same sex couples the same rights and benefits as heterosexual couples and who cares if some religious institutions refuse to call it marriage.
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

  6. #6
    Junior Member TBiddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    I don't think the name of "marriage" comes anywhere near as important as the rights and benefits provided by the government to married couples. As long as those are provided to same sex couples, then who cares what they call it. And heck, there are plenty of gay friendly churches that would be happy to marry same sex couples. So I guess I don't really understand what the problem is. Give same sex couples the same rights and benefits as heterosexual couples and who cares if some religious institutions refuse to call it marriage.
    seconded. let them label it whatever they like. if they dont call it marriage then its no great loss, as long as the rights are the same
    shut up.

Similar Threads

  1. The issue of gay marriage
    By Torai in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 318
    Last Post: 04-19-2011, 10:45 PM
  2. Portia De Rossi: Gay Marriage
    By 01011010 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-02-2009, 12:19 AM
  3. Obama: Once Supported Gay Marriage
    By 01011010 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 01-15-2009, 07:26 AM
  4. So what's really the big deal about Gay marriage?
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 222
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 12:06 PM
  5. Mike Huckabee VS Jon Stewart: Gay Marriage
    By 01011010 in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 12-14-2008, 08:24 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO