Marriage between two couples....

[dark_goddess84]

In the small town where I live two couple's marriages recently made the homosexual community in this area livid with rage.


A little back story is in order...

Couple #1 are lesbian (Female A & Female B). Couple #2 are Gay (Male A & Male B).

Couple #1 & #2 have lived in the same home (each having a floor of a two story house) for about six years... so its safe to call them great friends.

Six months ago Female A suffered a breast cancer scare (luckily it was nothing) and faced a major dilemma when she went to have a biopsy. The hospital would not allow Female B to stay with her. However, if Female A had been married her husband could have signed a release form so that Female B could stay.

After much consideration, talking, and planing the two couples decided they would get married. Female A married Male B. Female B married Male A.



This is what has the homosexual community in a uproar. They feel the couples should have waited until laws allowing gay marriage are pasted, then married their partners. The couple feels this is best for now because they don't want to have another dilemma come between them (if one should occur).

What are your feelings on this?

 

[off2bed]

This move cheapens the concept of marriage even more than letting gays marry.

 

[dark_goddess84]

This move cheapens the concept of marriage even more than letting gays marry.

Thank you for your oppinion.

I know both couples and have to say that I think it was not the best thing they could have done. But I can understand why they did this.

 

[Etoile]

This kind of thing has been going on for years. It doesn't cheapen anything, it's just an imperfect solution to a problem that's been plaguing gay couples for decades. It's called a "marriage of convenience" and it's nothing new. Personally I think it's between two couples...if four people come up with this solution and agree on it, that's their business. Nobody else's.

 

[driveshaft]

?

I don't understand why Female A can't just sign a release saying she wants Female B to stay. Can she just give Female B power of attorney on her behalf? These laws seem a little crazy if these are not options.

 

[Etoile]

I don't understand why Female A can't just sign a release saying she wants Female B to stay. Can she just give Female B power of attorney on her behalf? These laws seem a little crazy if these are not options.

It does depend on where they are located; states have different rules about this. However, it's possible that Female A was incapacitated and unable to sign anything.

 

[kbate]

This move cheapens the concept of marriage even more than letting gays marry.

Terrible that it somehow doesn't cheapen the concept of marriage when two heterosexuals marry who are not in love, but when a male homosexual and a female homosexual marry - it does. But heterosexual marriages of convenience, or for money, or family arrangement, or for power, or for insurance, or for citizenship, or for legal status - obviously don't cheapen the incredibly sacred ritual of marriage, do they?

 

[Etoile]

Terrible that it somehow doesn't cheapen the concept of marriage when two heterosexuals marry who are not in love, but when a male homosexual and a female homosexual marry - it does. But heterosexual marriages of convenience, or for money, or family arrangement, or for power, or for insurance, or for citizenship, or for legal status - obviously don't cheapen the incredibly sacred ritual of marriage, do they?

I agree 300% with everything kbate says.

 

[dark_goddess84]

This kind of thing has been going on for years. It doesn't cheapen anything, it's just an imperfect solution to a problem that's been plaguing gay couples for decades. It's called a "marriage of convenience" and it's nothing new. Personally I think it's between two couples...if four people come up with this solution and agree on it, that's their business. Nobody else's.

Yes. Marriage of Convenience is the perfect way to describe their situation. Although, the homosexual community here feels they have betrayed their sexuality.

I don't understand why Female A can't just sign a release saying she wants Female B to stay. Can she just give Female B power of attorney on her behalf? These laws seem a little crazy if these are not options.

It does depend on where they are located; states have different rules about this. However, it's possible that Female A was incapacitated and unable to sign anything.

Female A was already in surgery. However if she had been awake she would not have been able to give her power of attorney to Female B... I'm not clear on the exact law here, but it seems as long as Female A is of sound mind she can only give power of attorney to a family member.

Terrible that it somehow doesn't cheapen the concept of marriage when two heterosexuals marry who are not in love, but when a male homosexual and a female homosexual marry - it does. But heterosexual marriages of convenience, or for money, or family arrangement, or for power, or for insurance, or for citizenship, or for legal status - obviously don't cheapen the incredibly sacred ritual of marriage, do they?

I totally agree with kbate on this!

I have said that I think this was not the best thing they could have done but that I understand why. I don't feel that it cheapens the concept of marriage. I personally feel that homosexuals should be able to marry, and until then these kind of marriages will keep happening.

 

[SassySheDevil]

So if female A married male B, how does that improve the chances of female B being involved in similar incidences? If something like this arises again, then Male B could be in the room, but female B still couldn't.

I guess I'm just confused at how this has made things any better.

but to answer the question, if all are happy, then I think it's cool.

 

[dark_goddess84]

So if female A married male B, how does that improve the chances of female B being involved in similar incidences? If something like this arises again, then Male B could be in the room, but female B still couldn't.

I guess I'm just confused at how this has made things any better.

but to answer the question, if all are happy, then I think it's cool.

Apparently Male B can sign a form that allows Female B to be there and make small decisions in his stead...

 

[SassySheDevil]

ahh ok. That makes sense then. Sad they have to go through that just for that kind of permission though.

 

[dark_goddess84]

ahh ok. That makes sense then. Sad they have to go through that just for that kind of permission though.

Yes, very sad. I wish homosexual couples had the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples. Hopefully one day....

 

[SassySheDevil]

I agree with you. We've over come many hurdles that gave equal rights to other areas. So hopefully one day people will get over their weirdness about gay rights.

 

[dark_goddess84]

I sometimes think the human race will have to evolve to the point where bitter emotions (such as hate) are no longer in our make up before everyone is treated as equals no matter of race, ethnic origins, or sexual orientation.

 

[SassySheDevil]

yeah I just wish I was going to be around to see that day.

 

[dark_goddess84]

It is sad that some people are so afraid of differences that they resort to hate.

 

[kbate]

Today, on a Prop 8 discussion on the tube, the Family man being interviewed stated that, (not quoted as I do not remember exact wording) The Purpose of Marriage is to bring a Man and a Woman together for the purpose of procreation and continuation of the race.

He also stated that research proves that children reared in households of One Man and One Woman - achieve higher than children in other (single woman) (homosexual) households.

***

I take no exception with these statements, it is indeed a noble purpose to use law to provide for the best childrearing situation possible.

Now apply it to all marriage, as per equal rights.

All persons must be checked for fertility and be of proper breeding age prior to being granted a marriage certificate. No more marriages between infertile couples. No more marriages form women over 40 years of age. No more marriage for men with low sperm counts.

Single parents should be forced to either remarry (with a qualified partner) or be forced to give up their child to a proper household. That after all, is the purpose of protecting marriage - to ensure the best child rearing environment possible.

***

I fucking hate it when the family first hypocrites are on the morning talk and toss out bullshite arguments such as these. Either go all the way and protect marriage as per your own statements - or admit that queers marrying hurts nothing.

 

[playwithlezli]

Today, on a Prop 8 discussion on the tube, the Family man being interviewed stated that, (not quoted as I do not remember exact wording) The Purpose of Marriage is to bring a Man and a Woman together for the purpose of procreation and continuation of the race.

He also stated that research proves that children reared in households of One Man and One Woman - achieve higher than children in other (single woman) (homosexual) households.

***

I take no exception with these statements, it is indeed a noble purpose to use law to provide for the best childrearing situation possible.

Now apply it to all marriage, as per equal rights.

All persons must be checked for fertility and be of proper breeding age prior to being granted a marriage certificate. No more marriages between infertile couples. No more marriages form women over 40 years of age. No more marriage for men with low sperm counts.

Single parents should be forced to either remarry (with a qualified partner) or be forced to give up their child to a proper household. That after all, is the purpose of protecting marriage - to ensure the best child rearing environment possible.

***

I fucking hate it when the family first hypocrites are on the morning talk and toss out bullshite arguments such as these. Either go all the way and protect marriage as per your own statements - or admit that queers marrying hurts nothing.

Hey Kbate, tell us what you really think!

Actually, I love it that you always have something intelligent to say and you are not afraid to say it-thanks for that

 

[John Doe]

This move cheapens the concept of marriage even more than letting gays marry.

-Why?

 

[dark_goddess84]

Today, on a Prop 8 discussion on the tube, the Family man being interviewed stated that, (not quoted as I do not remember exact wording) The Purpose of Marriage is to bring a Man and a Woman together for the purpose of procreation and continuation of the race.

He also stated that research proves that children reared in households of One Man and One Woman - achieve higher than children in other (single woman) (homosexual) households.

***

I take no exception with these statements, it is indeed a noble purpose to use law to provide for the best childrearing situation possible.

Now apply it to all marriage, as per equal rights.

All persons must be checked for fertility and be of proper breeding age prior to being granted a marriage certificate. No more marriages between infertile couples. No more marriages form women over 40 years of age. No more marriage for men with low sperm counts.

Single parents should be forced to either remarry (with a qualified partner) or be forced to give up their child to a proper household. That after all, is the purpose of protecting marriage - to ensure the best child rearing environment possible.

***

I fucking hate it when the family first hypocrites are on the morning talk and toss out bullshite arguments such as these. Either go all the way and protect marriage as per your own statements - or admit that queers marrying hurts nothing.

*makes mental note not to say anything that makes kbate pissed*

I totally agree that the family first people need to get their ducks in a row... as well as their heads ex-rayed (to see if there is anything up there but mud).

~~~~~~~~~

I was recently talking to a family friend that thinks (and I quote) "If the government allows [gays]* to marry then they might as well burn the flag and tell the terrorist to come on in!"

I was pissed off big time.... How dare he compare homosexuals to terrorist! Needless to say we got into a huge fight... I ended up punching him in the face... I think I broke his nose... (I have not spoken to this man since and I don't make any plans on speaking to him ever again)

*I will not use the term he used

 

[playwithlezli]

*makes mental note not to say anything that makes kbate pissed*

I totally agree that the family first people need to get their ducks in a row... as well as their heads ex-rayed (to see if there is anything up there but mud).

~~~~~~~~~

I was recently talking to a family friend that thinks (and I quote) "If the government allows [gays]* to marry then they might as well burn the flag and tell the terrorist to come on in!"

I was pissed off big time.... How dare he compare homosexuals to terrorist! Needless to say we got into a huge fight... I ended up punching him in the face... I think I broke his nose... (I have not spoken to this man since and I don't make any plans on speaking to him ever again)

*I will not use the term he used

*makes mental note to not say anything to piss off kbate OR dark goddess*

 

[Wolfman1982]

This move cheapens the concept of marriage even more than letting gays marry.

-Why?

Because off2bed is a general board fucker or a postwhore in training on the general board, who posted to stir up some shit basically.

 

[gaymm]

In the small town where I live two couple's marriages recently made the homosexual community in this area livid with rage.


A little back story is in order...

Couple #1 are lesbian (Female A & Female B). Couple #2 are Gay (Male A & Male B).

Couple #1 & #2 have lived in the same home (each having a floor of a two story house) for about six years... so its safe to call them great friends.

Six months ago Female A suffered a breast cancer scare (luckily it was nothing) and faced a major dilemma when she went to have a biopsy. The hospital would not allow Female B to stay with her. However, if Female A had been married her husband could have signed a release form so that Female B could stay.

After much consideration, talking, and planing the two couples decided they would get married. Female A married Male B. Female B married Male A.



This is what has the homosexual community in a uproar. They feel the couples should have waited until laws allowing gay marriage are pasted, then married their partners. The couple feels this is best for now because they don't want to have another dilemma come between them (if one should occur).

What are your feelings on this?

Feelings: I truly feel for these 4 people. This story heightens the reason why gay and lesbian people should be allowed to marry. This is discrimination at a very fundamental level. Both loved ones, the hospitalized person and her SO are denied the comfort and healing and love while she is in the hospital and needs that extra care and nurture.

Does it cheapen marriage in any way? Absolutely not, again it just heightens that the concept of marriage as viewed from a government standpoint is basically meaningless as to personal feelings/commitment of the parties toward each other.

 

[playwithlezli]

Feelings: I truly feel for these 4 people. This story heightens the reason why gay and lesbian people should be allowed to marry. This is discrimination at a very fundamental level. Both loved ones, the hospitalized person and her SO are denied the comfort and healing and love while she is in the hospital and needs that extra care and nurture.

Does it cheapen marriage in any way? Absolutely not, again it just heightens that the concept of marriage as viewed from a government standpoint is basically meaningless as to personal feelings/commitment of the parties toward each other.

Well put.

From a biblical perspective, it is not about love there either, just procreation. And we already have more people than the planet can sustain. But it is easier to breed adherents to one's point of view than convert them so procreation then makes sense from political perspective as well.

Religion is the biggest political party there is.