Gay Marriage

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:42 pm

Has anyone been to a gay wedding?

I am very disappointed that none of my gay friends have bothered to tie the knot - even the ones living together see no need.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:46 pm

Pruitt wrote:Has anyone been to a gay wedding?

I am very disappointed that none of my gay friends have bothered to tie the knot - even the ones living together see no need.

Most weddings are ghey.

Post by **brian** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 2:47 pm

I've been to one. It's just like a straight wedding, but gayer.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:07 pm

I've been to two lesbian weddings. And that would be because in each instance a very good friend of mine was one of the marriage couple. In one case, a girl I knew since about when we were born, married her girlfriend. Not a big surprise, they'd been living together for years. The other wedding was a shock that nobody saw coming. That one was a girl I went to school with (as kids, back East) and who had a limited number of friends in this town (Vancouver). As a result we hung out together a lot. She was hot as hell too. Straight her whole life and then she met this chick that turned her on to a completely different lifestyle; groups, fetishes, name it.

Haven't been to a guyguy wedding.

But I can tell you this about lezzie weddings . . . not an optimal place to pick up chicks or to try arranging a three-way.

howard · Post by **howard** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:10 pm

Scottie wrote:But I can tell you this about lezzie weddings . . . not an optimal place to pick up chicks or to trying arranging a three-way.

Well, only if you have a penis. Otherwise, happy hunting.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:13 pm

Pruitt wrote:Has anyone been to a gay wedding?

I am very disappointed that none of my gay friends have bothered to tie the knot - even the ones living together see no need.

Same here. I have a gay friend that's actually against gay marriage.

howard · Post by **howard** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:18 pm

To the question posed by the South Park Movie--what would Brian Boitano Do? (Well, at least who.)

U.S. Olympic delegate Brian Boitano announces he is gay

This is the proxy all things gay thread, right?

BTW, I am against gay marriage. And straight marriage. State has no damn business saying who can and can't marry--government in the US has a dismal record on the topic. Govt out of our bedrooms--none of their damn business. Why the fuck do I need a license? A legacy function that once mattered (maybe), but no longer. The gay marriage issue is proof. Plenty of law governing children and their 'property rights' that supercede marriage.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:21 pm

thats news?

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:25 pm

howard wrote:To the question posed by the South Park Movie--what would Brian Boitano Do? (Well, at least who.)

U.S. Olympic delegate Brian Boitano announces he is gay

This is the proxy all things gay thread, right?

BTW, I am against gay marriage. And straight marriage. State has no damn business saying who can and can't marry--government in the US has a dismal record on the topic. Govt out of our bedrooms--none of their damn business. Why the fuck do I need a license? A legacy function that once mattered (maybe), but no longer. The gay marriage issue is proof. Plenty of law governing children and their 'property rights' that supercede marriage.

Well the gov't needs to be able to recognize marriage as there are certain benefits provided to married couples by the gov't.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:33 pm

Jerloma wrote:
Pruitt wrote:Has anyone been to a gay wedding?

I am very disappointed that none of my gay friends have bothered to tie the knot - even the ones living together see no need.
Same here. I have a gay friend that's actually against gay marriage.

The vast majority of gay people I know or with whom I was acquainted (bearing in mind that I lived in San Francisco for ages and now reside in leftyloonieland) don't concern themselves much with same-sex marriage. It's simply not important to them. And that's quite rational. If they are going to remain a couple indefinitely then they can well prepare financially for the future in much the same fashion anyone else on Earth can.

The reason so many homosexuals in France were protesting against same-sex marriage about a year ago is because they believe marriage is a state institution meant to protect children rather than to accommodate any two people presumably in love. "The rights of children trump the rights to children." In their protest they cited children being raised by same-sex couples as being remarkable less well-adjusted (or less likely to have a functional quality upbringing) than those raised by father/mother combinations.

Your friends that "see no need" are the majority within the gay community. The activists are a very small element within an already very small element; the fringe's fringe.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:38 pm

Scottie wrote:The reason so many homosexuals in France were protesting against same-sex marriage about a year ago is because they believe marriage is a state institution meant to protect children rather than to accommodate any two people presumably in love. "The rights of children trump the rights to children."

So by that rationale, they don't think you should be married either.

howard · Post by **howard** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:42 pm

Jerloma wrote:Well the gov't needs to be able to recognize marriage as there are certain benefits provided to married couples by the gov't.

Or, the gov't could eliminate that bullshit favoritism. Why are married couples favored with certain benefits provided by the gov't? Eliminate that shit too.

Post by **brian** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:44 pm

howard wrote:
Jerloma wrote:Well the gov't needs to be able to recognize marriage as there are certain benefits provided to married couples by the gov't.
Or, the gov't could eliminate that bullshit favoritism. Why are married couples favored with certain benefits provided by the gov't? Eliminate that shit too.

And while we're at it, also get rid of the government subsidizing having children too.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:48 pm

Jerloma wrote:So by that rationale, they don't think you should be married either.

No. The exact opposite is true. "By that rationale", couples who naturally bring their own children into the world are provided a legal marriage status with the life of those children being paramount as opposed to the same status being provided to a same-sex couple for whom raising has been proven, according to the various studies they cite, to be not "biologically natural".

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:52 pm

Scottie wrote:
Jerloma wrote:So by that rationale, they don't think you should be married either.
No. The exact opposite is true. "By that rationale", couples who naturally bring their own children into the world are provided a legal marriage status with the life of those children being paramount as opposed to the same status being provided to a same-sex couple for whom raising has been proven, according to the various studies they cite, to be not "biologically natural".

Yeah, but you got married with no intention of having children at all. According to their logic, you have no reason to get married at all.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 3:53 pm

howard wrote:
Jerloma wrote:Well the gov't needs to be able to recognize marriage as there are certain benefits provided to married couples by the gov't.
Or, the gov't could eliminate that bullshit favoritism. Why are married couples favored with certain benefits provided by the gov't? Eliminate that shit too.

Well, sometimes people die before they get a chance to write a will for instance.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 4:00 pm

Jerloma wrote:
Scottie wrote:
Jerloma wrote:So by that rationale, they don't think you should be married either.
No. The exact opposite is true. "By that rationale", couples who naturally bring their own children into the world are provided a legal marriage status with the life of those children being paramount as opposed to the same status being provided to a same-sex couple for whom raising has been proven, according to the various studies they cite, to be not "biologically natural".
Yeah, but you got married with no intention of having children at all. According to their logic, you have no reason to get married at all.

No. That's not true either. This simply comes down to the birds and the bees. Try looking at this in terms of the vast majority of people instead of individual exceptions. Laws are necessarily social, not individual.

And my wife and I did have a daughter, by the way.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 4:03 pm

Sorry...I didn't know that. I must have been thinking of someone else.

howard · Post by **howard** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 4:27 pm

Jerloma wrote:Well, sometimes people die before they get a chance to write a will for instance.

There is a huge body of law that determines what happens to property when someone dies intestate. Problem (as I see it), there is a different set of laws that applies to a married dead person than that which applies to a single dead person.

The gov't decides exactly what will happen to the property of someone who is unmarried, but is shacking up with someone, and has children, or doesn't. Lord knows the institution of marriage is not a necessary requirement for gov't intervention in this instance--they do that regardless. Will or no will.

Post by **Shirley** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 5:04 pm

howard wrote:U.S. Olympic delegate Brian Boitano announces he is gay

I assumed that was an Onion article until I clicked on it. Who knew he wasn't out already?

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Thu Dec 19, 2013 5:16 pm

A b-list celebretard announcing their sexuality should NEVER be considered news. Nobody should give a fuck. Wasn't it obvious to the world that Boi was gay back when, ohhhhhh, he was a figure skater? This just underscores what I was saying about the loudness of the gay community. Boi Boitano just happens to be going to Sochi, Russia, where the gay community has decided to "prove" that its politics are infinitely more important than the social values of the country they were invited to visit. He clearly has an agenda, otherwise there would have been no "announcement".

The city of Vancouver is sending an openly gay delegate to Sochi, too. Why? Not because he is remotely qualified to be an Olympic delegate in any conceivable way but simply because he pushed his way in so he could go over to Russia and make a stink about Russian culture while he's able to hide behind the Olympic symbol; he wouldn't have the balls to do so without a shield.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Fri Dec 20, 2013 1:25 pm

Post by **Shirley** » Fri Dec 20, 2013 2:04 pm

Did someone say my name?

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Fri Dec 20, 2013 4:37 pm

Utah federal judge strikes down same-sex marriage ban. More for the "good week for the Bill of Rights thread."

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Tue Jan 07, 2014 12:03 pm

This is kind of a fun story. Assistant Principal gets fired from Catholic School after getting married over the summer. The students have been revolting about this all year but the school has stuck to it's guns but in the ultimate show of Catholic hypocrisy, they offer this...

The former vice principal of Eastside Catholic school, who was terminated last month after school officials found out he had married his male partner, said in a newly released video [seen above, starting at the 12-minute mark] that he was told he could keep his job if he got a divorce.

Yes...the Catholic institution is endorsing divorce now.

Post by **brian** » Wed Feb 05, 2014 6:24 pm

Legalized in Scotland today.

Scottie · Post by **Scottie** » Wed Feb 05, 2014 6:41 pm

Ma-r-r-r-r-r-rvelous!

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Wed Feb 26, 2014 4:55 pm

Only 2 things come from Texas.

And one of those things is probably going to be allowed to get married there at some point soon.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:01 pm

Johnnie wrote:Only 2 things come from Texas.

And one of those things is probably going to be allowed to get married there at some point soon.

Not necessarily. There is a big difference between ruling a ban on gay marriage unconstitutional and making gay marriage legal. I probably shouldn't weigh in without reading the article, so if there is more to it than the headline indicated, feel free to correct me.

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:07 pm

How can you lift a ban on gay marriage and then have it still not be legal? If it's not legal then the state doesn't recognize it then it's not a marriage.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:44 pm

I just wanted to make the joke!

Anyway, the article states that it stays enforcement until pending appeal.

The ruling is, for the most part, symbolic as of this time.

Post by **brian** » Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:49 pm

(I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt. One of the 20 actual lawyer types should probably step on me here if I'm off base, but...)

It seems like the federal courts in all of these cases pretty much have to follow their cues from the recent Supreme Court ruling, no? Doesn't that pretty much make bans against same-sex marriages unconstitutional at the state level too? I realize those will need to be appealed and whatnot, but it seems like it's probably a fait accompli at this point that eventually it will be legal in all 50 states and probably on the soonish side?

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:50 pm

brian wrote:(I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt. One of the 20 actual lawyer types should probably step on me here if I'm off base, but...)

It seems like the federal courts in all of these cases pretty much have to follow their cues from the recent Supreme Court ruling, no? Doesn't that pretty much make bans against same-sex marriages unconstitutional at the state level too? I realize those will need to be appealed and whatnot, but it seems like it's probably a fait accompli at this point that eventually it will be legal in all 50 states and probably on the soonish side?

Yep. You just need a person with standing (a legal right to bring a case) to file a lawsuit when they are actually injured by a law. So if the Supreme Court rules a law Unconstitutional, a state can still pass an identical law and enforce it until someone files a lawsuit and a judge rules this new law Unconstitutional. Then the WBC can protest another soldier's funeral to protest the law, no matter what the law was about because GAY!

Jerloma · Post by **Jerloma** » Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:03 pm

Christian charity World Vision changes it's policy to allow married homosexuals to work there (Christian ones of course) and then promptly reverses it 2 days later after being pelted with sponsorship withdrawals from fundies...

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 2:52 am

Related to J-Lo's story above, but could be cross-posted in the "Death of Journalism" thread:

MSNBC: Christian charity does "full 360" on gay marriage

Um...that would be a 180.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 5:29 am

They were against it, then for it, then against it again. Seems like a 360 to me. Isn't the 180 changing tune for those 2 days? Or am I completely wrong?

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 8:10 am

After dipping a toe in the waters of marriage equality, World Vision — one of the nation’s largest and most prominent Christian charities — pulled a 360 on its employment policies regarding LGBT individuals.

Here it sounds like they were trying to apply the "360" to a single policy change.

Or maybe you're right. Way to kill the buzz from the opportunity to dig up a Last Action Hero reference.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Sat Mar 29, 2014 12:13 pm

Agree. Not very clear when using that sentence, but the Last Action Hero reference was completely appropriate.

They ended up where they stahted. Cretin.

/end accent

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Wed Jun 25, 2014 11:22 am

Steve of phpBB wrote:Utah federal judge strikes down same-sex marriage ban. More for the "good week for the Bill of Rights thread."

And the Tenth Circuit affirms today.

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Thu Sep 04, 2014 2:33 pm

The Seventh Circuit also ruled today that gay marriage bans are unconstitutional.

The case was only argued last Tuesday. That is amazingly fast for an appellate court.