foxnews Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 In a move thats strikingly vindictive the state of North Carolina has banned same sex couples from having any form of legal union. Not just marriage but civil partnership or anything similar. I know a lot of you will be pleased. But it seems to me theres a section of the south (of America) that won't be happy until they are sat on the veranda in white suits sipping mint juleps watching the slaves pick cotton. Land of the free? Apparently not if you want to rub your funbags against similar ones. Next they'll be teaching creationism in schools... Oh dear... :roll:pathetic:roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackLakeland Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Isn't there enough strife in the world to concern us without worrying if two blokes love each other and want to make a commitment in front of family and friends? Gay men, or women, who get married do not effect anyone else in the world. If you dont like the look of two people getting married don't go to the wedding...easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubydazzler Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Some states will allow to people to marry, some will recognise marriages made in other states, and some will not recognise the marriage. NC have voted to only allow male-female marriage as the only relationship that they will recognise. Here is a nifty map. Cliquez Yes I do understand that but thanks anyway. What I'm trying to clarify if, for instance, you were in a civil partnership/married elsewhere where there were no rules against it, and you moved there, and let's say, were seriously injured, would you still be their next of kin, and then died, let's say, would your estate go to your partner, or would the intestacy rules apply if you left no will? etc etc. You know, the legal stuff. A country where the basic laws don't apply across the board, it must make things quite confusing and difficult. I'm expecting that some of our American members will know the answers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 First of all you cannot remove a right that did not exist in the first place and the right to same sex marriage was as I've repeatedly said already not part of the Constitution... yet. Didn't California remove the right for same sex couples to marry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Remeber it is optional to take a same sex partner-I dont think most Americans have grasped this point. Depends where you live as far as "grasping the point" In Frisco by the Bay same sex partner is commonplace whereas in Kansas having a same sex partner is tantamount to damning yer soul. That's why it needs to be left for individual states to decide and not having the federal govt running roughshod over those who oppose same sex partnerships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Thank you, I've had a lot going on these last few days, but this one point has bugged me. The US is so big, and so geographically different that a law that's useful in crowded Massachussets would be useless in sparsely populated areas of Texas or New Mexico. The states were united into a single federal union. The United States! Get it?! A good series to watch (if you're interested) is on the History Channel, and How the States got their Shapes , also on the History Channel, but meant more for children. Still interesting though, I used to watch it with my children. Also, to everyone, please stop with the inbred redneck stuff. It's ignorant, and reminds me of My Cousin Vinny when his friend calls his mother from the police station and says, "you know how corrupt things are down here, they all sleep with their sisters!" I've watched that documentary a few times now, it's really fascinating how the stave trade shaped a lot of the southern states, and the gold rush the western states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sierra Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 I've watched that documentary a few times now, it's really fascinating how the stave trade shaped a lot of the southern states, and the gold rush the western states. It is very interesting, a lot of info I didn't know. Did you know that some native americans owned slaves, and because indian reservations are self governing sovereign nations, didn't free their slaves in 1865 with the Emancipation Proclamation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 [/b] Depends where you live as far as "grasping the point" In Frisco by the Bay same sex partner is commonplace whereas in Kansas having a same sex partner is tantamount to damning yer soul. That's why it needs to be left for individual states to decide and not having the federal govt running roughshod over those who oppose same sex partnerships. I bet the Klan used a similar argument when opposing LBJ's Civil Rights Act of 1964. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 I bet the Klan used a similar argument when opposing LBJ's Civil Rights Act of 1964. The enlightened eastern states used it to justify rejecting female suffrage aswell. (Map) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callippo Posted May 11, 2012 Share Posted May 11, 2012 Obama has said that he's for gay marriage but that the states should vote for or against it. Sounds right to me. If anyone has a problem with that contact the appropriate authorities. it could be good call that. I just don't know yet. It could cost him vital votes in swing states was my first thought. He should have just fudged it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.