California bans same-sex marriage - ban overturned

[Harleyman]

You certainly seem to have changed your tune since this thread first started!

 

Might one enquire about the reason for this volte-face? I'd be interested to know what arguments could convert somebody from rampant homophobia to tolerance.

 

 

 

Maybe I'm just getting old and no longer have the inclination to feel strongly about many issues one way or the other

 

Maybe it's the advent of Sarah Palin and her ridiculous out of date ideas that just irritate me

[BritPat]

You don't seem to have much faith in human adaptation. Despite what you think of the environment, surely it's the outcome that matters.

 

Adaptation by definition is time dependent the results of the adaptation are realised when the adopted child emerges into adulthood.

 

You seem to have a touching faith in placing children with one shot at childhood into a completely unnatural environment in order for your sociological experiment conclude.

[Plain Talker]

Why do gay people wish to get married? dont they know that a marriage is a religious ceremony and religion generaly frowns upon homosexuality? of course they know this, they're getting "married" to stir up trouble, egged on by "progressive" types to rub the rights nose in it and to perhaps bring down the church.

 

marriage isn't a religious ceremony:- what do you think couples do, who get married in civil ceremonies (eg in the register office or a hotel/ castle/ Stately home?) or in a humanist ceremony? When I married the now ex- Mr PT, we married in a "free-church" ceremony (baptist) so we had to have the church ceremony, and then go into the back to the vestry, to have the civil ceremony, with a registrar, to make the marriage a legal one.

 

If two consenting adults choose each other to be life partners, what the heck interference does it need from anyone else? And more to the point, what the heck difference does it make if they are the same gender or opposite (just like if it were two people marrying of different races or nationalities)

 

I don't have a problem with describing the "commitment ceremony" / civil partnership of a couple of the same sex as being a Marriage, any less than I'd describe the ceremony of a straight couple as being such.

[Plain Talker]

Adaptation by definition is time dependent the results of the adaptation are realised when the adopted child emerges into adulthood.

 

You seem to have a touching faith in placing children with one shot at childhood into a completely unnatural environment in order for your sociological experiment conclude.

 

Is it an unnatural environment for a gay child to have to "endure" having straight parents?

 

If a parent is capable of loving and nurturing their child, it matters not a jot what gender that parent is, and whether they are with a partner, or not, and whether they are in a straight or a gay relationship.

[Plain Talker]

Maybe I'm just getting old and no longer have the inclination to feel strongly about many issues one way or the other

 

Maybe it's the advent of Sarah Palin and her ridiculous out of date ideas that just irritate me

 

So, she's actually done one useful thing in her dreadful, oxygen-stealing life, then? (she says with a very broad grin)

[Plain Talker]

Gay or straight, what are the actual benefits of getting married? Surely if the state kept out of the issue of marriage altogether there wouldn't be this problem.

 

Without a civil partnership registration, one partner has no rights over determining things like switching off life support machines, or for inheritance/ insurance/ pension rights.

 

so if you were a gay person, in a thirty year partnership, without the benefit of a civil partnership, your other-half's relatives, who disowned them forty-five years previously (and had no contact since) would have the right to come in and demand the switching off of life-support, or have the right to inherit your shared home and the estate of your partner, and overrule you and your rights to determine what happens.

 

If you aren't civil partner-shipped, you can/ will lose rights to access your partner's pension should your partner predecease you...

 

There are a lot of legal loopholes that could tie you up in knots, and take rights away without having the security of a CP.

[epiphany]

You seem to have a touching faith in placing children with one shot at childhood into a completely unnatural environment in order for your sociological experiment conclude.

 

An unnatural environment? Doesn't that pretty much describe the environment most children are brought up in? And yet somehow they manage. They adapt and it becomes natural for them.

[epiphany]

Without a civil partnership registration, one partner has no rights over determining things like switching off life support machines, or for inheritance/ insurance/ pension rights.

 

so if you were a gay person, in a thirty year partnership, without the benefit of a civil partnership, your other-half's relatives, who disowned them forty-five years previously (and had no contact since) would have the right to come in and demand the switching off of life-support, or have the right to inherit your shared home and the estate of your partner, and overrule you and your rights to determine what happens.

 

If you aren't civil partner-shipped, you can/ will lose rights to access your partner's pension should your partner predecease you...

 

There are a lot of legal loopholes that could tie you up in knots, and take rights away without having the security of a CP.

 

Can't people work these issues out through private contracts? What I don't understand is why the state needs to effectively be an signatory?

[Wildcat]

Adaptation by definition is time dependent the results of the adaptation are realised when the adopted child emerges into adulthood.

 

You seem to have a touching faith in placing children with one shot at childhood into a completely unnatural environment in order for your sociological experiment conclude.

 

A natural existence would be sleeping rough in a hedgerow somewhere and scavenging for food, most people have moved on to live unnatural lives in brick built dwellings in conurbations called cities.

[redrobbo]

Why do gay people wish to get married? dont they know that a marriage is a religious ceremony and religion generaly frowns upon homosexuality? of course they know this, they're getting "married" to stir up trouble, egged on by "progressive" types to rub the rights nose in it and to perhaps bring down the church.

 

Don't show yourself up to be daft. You've completely overlooked the fact (as PT has pointed out) that a lot of marriages take place in register offices and places legally sanctioned for marriages, e.g., hotels, castles, etc.

 

 

As for your other observations - you also completely overlook the fact that same sex couples cannot by law get married in the UK. It is also the churches that ensured that same sex couples cannot have any religious aspect to their civil partnership ceremony. I mentioned this in an earlier post of mine....

My partner nobikejohn and I are having our own civil partnership in the Spring. We are busily devising the actual ceremony, choosing music, poems, etc.

 

Interestingly, it all has to be vetted and approved by the Registrar - solely to ensure that it does not contain any religious references or hymns, is devoid of any mention of a god, and any religious quotations - including any passages from the bible - will all be struck out.

 

As a sop to the churches, many of whom opposed gay civil partnerships, no religious content is allowed in the actual ceremony. As it happens, neither of us are religious, so it doesn't matter to us. But it does matter to other gay couples, some of whom are religious, who wanted to affirm their love within the context of their religious beliefs - but the churches weren't having any of that.

 

Wasn't Jesus supposed to be the embodiment of love? Maybe so, but not, it would seem, where the churches are concerned when it is about the love a man has for another man, or a woman has for another woman.