01.28
Last night I went to bed after watching a show about current issues in court and government.
Why can’t they just get it straight that allowing gay marriages doesn’t force the priests and clergy to acknowledge or perform these ceremonies. It does force insurance companies, and other important factors such as IRS and adoption and other offices to recognise the relationship as permenant intent with the goal of stability and possibly family.
One of the religious opposition complained that the next thing would be allowing 3 person marriages…why not? Marriage is a commitment for a life long goal, and I don’t see where sex was ever mentioned in that. They were complaining that same sex marriages change the meaning of marriage…I was raised a little different, I took marriage to mean 2 people comming together as one, I never thought about the sex of the people.
The real problem is that if gay marriages were publically recognized, then religious bigots would have to acknowledge that gay people aren’t all promiscuous. They would have to identify them as living a normal life, and not some crazy life of instability and sexual indiscretion. Straight people can be just as reckless.
*adores you, your thoughts, and your power of expression*
🙂
I’m an ordained minister, and I perform straight or gay weddings, makes no difference to me, 300 bucks and you’re hitched. I would like to see every gay couple that would like to be married do so. Not just for the aspect that it is a freedom that they should not be denied, but because that is the only way this country will ever see any sort of fairness applied to divorce settlements. When 2 guys that both work for a bank want to split shit up, it’ll have to be done, omg, FAIRLY.
Gen,I wish you would say this to Bush and the rest of his homophobes. I totally agree that obviously two people that want to be with each other,be they the same sex or whatever,are not promiscuous and are not tainting the meaning of family or love or marriage any way. If anything,they are only showing they are stronger than the rest of us if they want to go against the “norm” and I applaud them for that.
what good is it to even talk to that bigot…he thinks that all of the united states is christian. Let’s just ignore buddhist, athiest, muslims, jews, and all the other sects and faiths. We aren’t all protestant baptists.
I say we shoot him!
yeah, and in custodial splits, two women would be mothers, or two men would be fathers.
And what if there were 3 way or 4 way marriages…intermarried couples that raised and cared for each others children and shared insurance benefits…this doesn’t seem so bad to me. You should be able to make a legal commitment of marriage anyway the consenting parties choose. If the church doesn’t consider you married that is the church’s deal.
The catholic church doesn’t acknowledge divorce, so why should the church have to acknowledge same sex and multiple marriages. All they are asking is that the legal system acknowledge it. And Unitarians will acknowledge any marriage and still allow you to be married by a priest.
you are always full of flattery.
I say we put him in a pit of mad bull dykes with big clubs.
Or better yet,with Diamanda Galas and a crow bar!
^-^;;; I just think you’re great. I love how you write, and your thoughts. I hope you don’t feel it is inauthentic. I always strive for authenticity.
thanks
yeah, and sell pay per view tickets!!!
first she’d ram that thing up his ass,then beat his teeth out with it! yum!!
do you read my own posts sometimes ever? 🙂
I fairly ever get to many posts. i read a select few close friends.
no wonder I love Diamanda!
Strictly speaking, and I are not married; our union was officiated by a justice of the peace, not a minister. By church law, no lay person can marry anyone.
So am I not married? No, because the state of Louisiana considers a union by a lay person who has the legal authority to perform such an act a marriage. And the government of the United States recognises marriages legally performed in any state (or at least it is supposed to).
Because we are legally married, we have legal rights and protections that we would not have if we were just living together. And by being married, we can receive special tax, financial, and legal benefits as well. Even though by strict church interpretation, we are not married.
So in other words, marriage is a legal status, not simply a moral one. And because it is a legal status, it should be available to anyone who wants it. Even same-sex couples-because by denying them that right, you deny them the protections and rights married couples get.
Of course, as long as the neocons control the White House there’s no way any logical argument will survive….
yeah, there is clearly a blur growing daily between church and state.
then she’d write a song about it! gotta love her!