Prop 8 Announcement

[Guest]

Sure, because 'separate but equal' has always worked out so very well.
It has been suggested that the legal entity known as marriage be abolished and changed to civil union for everyone. Churches would perform marriages, but the legal binding would be civil union no matter.
I'm fine with that.

This is a fine idea.

And I imagine will become the norm in the next decade or so. Or longer, perhaps.

The church's blessing on a marriage is just that - merely a blessing.

The legalities must still be observed.

All marriages are civil unions, yes?

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Legally, yes.

 

[Guest]

Legally, yes.

I's amazing to me, that after the ceremony comes the signing - witnesses, too.

And yet, the religious right conveniently forget that part.

Fools.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

I's amazing to me, that after the ceremony comes the signing - witnesses, too.

And yet, the religious right conveniently forget that part.

Fools.

So do the Catholics. They keep going on about the Sacrament of Marriage. It ain't no sacrament!

 

[Guest]

So do the Catholics. They keep going on about the Sacrament of Marriage. It ain't no sacrament!

Isn't that funny?

I was fine with God and the Bible and such.

Until we lost my brother.

Then it seemed superfluous.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Isn't that funny?

I was fine with God and the Bible and such.

Until we lost my brother.

Then it seemed superfluous.

Your glass went from half full to half empty?

 

[Guest]

Your glass went from half full to half empty?

In all truth, I could not understand how some prayers were answered.

But not all.

 

[Boxlicker101]

So do the Catholics. They keep going on about the Sacrament of Marriage. It ain't no sacrament!

Actually, it is. I'm not saying I agree with their ideas, because I don't, but I don't like to see inaccuracies posted.

http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_13295a.htm

 

[Weird Harold]

Legally, yes.

Actually, "Legally NO."

All (legal) marriages are Civil Marriages which are legally distinct from Civil Unions -- and that's the whole problem; legally they're "seperate but equal" civil contracts.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Actually, "Legally NO."

All (legal) marriages are Civil Marriages which are legally distinct from Civil Unions -- and that's the whole problem; legally they're "seperate but equal" civil contracts.

WRONG! "Separate" ain't "Equal"!!!!

(Above and beyond the fact that the rights bestowed by a "Civil Union" or "Domestic Partnership"are no where close to those from a legal marriage)

 

[Weird Harold]

WRONG! "Separate" ain't "Equal"!!!!

(Above and beyond the fact that the rights bestowed by a "Civil Union" or "Domestic Partnership"are no where close to those from a legal marriage)

Yes, I know that separate ain't never "equal" but according to the law, they are equally binding legal contracts.

The fact that one enables all of the rights and responsibilities inherent in the word "Spouse" and the other doesn't is only a minor technicality as far as the law is concerned regarding the equivalency of the legal procedures involved are concerned.

Of course, it is NOT a minor technicality when it comes to results.

 

[Belegon]

Best sign I've seen in crowd shots during my anticipatory surfing?

"Jesus had two dads. Why can't I?"

 

[Belegon]

My blog post in anticipation of the release...


http://willbelegon.blogspot.com/

 

[Liar]

Yes, I know that separate ain't never "equal" but according to the law, they are equally binding legal contracts.

That's because they're legal contracts. So is the lease on my car. So what?

The fact of the matter is, marriages and civil unions grants the parts different amounts of rights, priviliges and responsibilities. They are similar. But neither the same nor equal.

 

[ishtat]

Yesterday, the Church of Scotland agreed that a gay minister, living in a gay relationship, can be a minister of one of their churches.

The minister had the backing of the majority of his congregation. Now he has the official backing of the Church of Scotland's authorities.

This has been a difficult decision for the Church of Scotland and not everyone will be happy with it. Until recently I would have thought it impossible.

Og

Og, as the Church of Scotland is Presbyterian I understand that they would still not allow a woman to be a priest whatever her sexuality. I'm open to correction on this point but think the ban on all women being priests remains.

 

[Vermilion]

It has been suggested that the legal entity known as marriage be abolished and changed to civil union for everyone. Churches would perform marriages, but the legal binding would be civil union no matter.
I'm fine with that.

This is pretty much how it works in the UK. Churches perform marriages, registry offices perform civil unions that, due to tradition, most people refer to as marriages between men and women, but are exactly the same as the civil partnerships homosexual couples are entitled to. Using the word 'marriage' or 'civil union/partnership' is a semantic choice over here, not a legal distinction. The churches are left to their own devices as to whether they perform the ceremony of blessing or not, afaia.

Most people of my generation tend to use the words marry and marriage to refer to any binding unions, gay or straight.

I can't remember what tipped the balance to get this to happen, but I am, for once, extremely proud of my country and government for making it happen. Shame about some of the other shit they've been pulling...

x
V

 

[Vermilion]

PS- when are we likely to hear about the ruling?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The news prediction is for failure of the appeal with a concession to allow existing same-sex unions to remain legal.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Mid-morning, I suspect. Stay tuned . . .

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Actually, it is. I'm not saying I agree with their ideas, because I don't, but I don't like to see inaccuracies posted.

http://www.newadvent.org/library/almanac_13295a.htm

The inclusion of marriage in the Sacraments dates directly to that particularly scurrilous period in the Middle Ages when the Vatican discovered that they were short of funds for their grandiose building projects. However, they extracted a fee for every sacrament a priest presided over so they increased the number of sacraments as a means of increasing revenue. There is no scriptural reference to any sacrament other than baptism and communion. The rest is just taxes.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Mid-morning, I suspect. Stay tuned . . .

10AM, PDT. Almost two hours from now.

 

[Samuel667]

Hope springs eternal but not confidence. I fully expect the Court to validate all the legal marriages that took place but not to invalidate Prop 8. But I hope that they do.

Yes, this appears to be the proper legal response in this case.

 

[freshface]

Og, as the Church of Scotland is Presbyterian I understand that they would still not allow a woman to be a priest whatever her sexuality. I'm open to correction on this point but think the ban on all women being priests remains.

So here I am correcting you. Since 1968, the Church of Scotland has permitted men and women to hold all offices and ministries on an equal basis. They had their first female moderator in 2004 and their first female minister as a moderator in 2007. Also, the Church of Scotland (and the Presbyterians), don't have priests or Bishops. You may be confusing them with the Church of England?

 

[Weird Harold]

That's because they're legal contracts. So is the lease on my car. So what?

The Lease on your car is a rental contract -- a different class of contract than marriages and civil unions. Legally, all leases/rental contracts are "equal" even though the particular clauses within them are often significantly different.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Prop 8 Is The Law, Losers!