Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 112

Thread: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

  1. #91
    Sage
    Mach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    11,513

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    What would be the benefit of this?
    Everyone, including gay/lesbians, can be equally treated legally as a union (or whatever word they use).
    Anyone can still claim the mantle of Marriage, or "being married", through non-government institutions.

    If marriage is a religious thing, embrace that. Get married in your church, before god, whatever. More power to you. This law would do NOTHING to prevent that.
    Or, if you are an atheist, get married under the authority of your local non-secular community group, before the community.
    Or, use the pagan rights of your pagan group, the traditional pagan marriage ceremony.

    The benefit is it solves the political question, while retaining 99% of what people want.

  2. #92
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,055

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    Everyone, including gay/lesbians, can be equally treated legally as a union (or whatever word they use).
    Anyone can still claim the mantle of Marriage, or "being married", through non-government institutions.

    If marriage is a religious thing, embrace that. Get married in your church, before god, whatever. More power to you. This law would do NOTHING to prevent that.
    Or, if you are an atheist, get married under the authority of your local non-secular community group, before the community.
    Or, use the pagan rights of your pagan group, the traditional pagan marriage ceremony.

    The benefit is it solves the political question, while retaining 99% of what people want.
    Well, before I get into the logistics of that, I'm confused about something: I thought the whole reason for any of this coming up in the first place was so that religious organizations didn't have to see the word "marriage" used for anyone but the religious. If, as you say, atheists, pagans and homosexuals can be "married" how does this change achieve that?

  3. #93
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    Well, before I get into the logistics of that, I'm confused about something: I thought the whole reason for any of this coming up in the first place was so that religious organizations didn't have to see the word "marriage" used for anyone but the religious. If, as you say, atheists, pagans and homosexuals can be "married" how does this change achieve that?
    My take on it is that couples go to some group that performs some ceremony and pronounces them "married". At that point, it becomes a meaningless word that anyone can use and all the retarded fights go away (over a word, seriously people!, its ... a ... word) because nobody has a monopoly on its usage.

  4. #94
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,055

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    My take on it is that couples go to some group that performs some ceremony and pronounces them "married". At that point, it becomes a meaningless word that anyone can use and all the retarded fights go away (over a word, seriously people!, its ... a ... word) because nobody has a monopoly on its usage.
    So essentially the idea is that while religious institutions feel they are forced to recognize the legitimacy of marriages that are conducted by the government, they would not feel that same obligation if the marriages were performed by any other institution?

  5. #95
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    So essentially the idea is that while religious institutions feel they are forced to recognize the legitimacy of marriages that are conducted by the government, they would not feel that same obligation if the marriages were performed by any other institution?
    There would be no force of law behind it, so they could do what they wanted.

  6. #96
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,055

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    There would be no force of law behind it, so they could do what they wanted.
    (bold mine)

    What's the "what"? Not recognize other forms of marriage? They can do that now.

  7. #97
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    (bold mine)

    What's the "what"? Not recognize other forms of marriage? They can do that now.
    Exactly. Everyone is on an equal playing field at that point and we can drop the issue for something that is actually important.

  8. #98
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,055

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    Exactly. Everyone is on an equal playing field at that point and we can drop the issue for something that is actually important.
    #1. Everybody must go to the courthouse to get a marriage license. How is that not an "equal playing field?"
    #2. Religious organizations already have the freedom to not perform marriage ceremonies for people they don't feel are deserving of them, and they are free to not recognize the legitimacy of other marriages they don't agree with. So what you are arguing for (or at least clarifying the position of) is a freedom they already have.

  9. #99
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    #1. Everybody must go to the courthouse to get a marriage license. How is that not an "equal playing field?"
    It would be a civil union license and government would not use the word marriage. Civil unions would be open to everyone, regardless of orientation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal View Post
    #2. Religious organizations already have the freedom to not perform marriage ceremonies for people they don't feel are deserving of them, and they are free to not recognize the legitimacy of other marriages they don't agree with. So what you are arguing for (or at least clarifying the position of) is a freedom they already have.
    religious marriage would be separated out completely from the civil institution with different names and all. Then one could be married without the civil union and government would see it as two individuals. One could get a civil union without being married and receive the government benefits. One could do both. One could do neither.

    The basic premise behind this idea is that some people attach all sorts of meaning to that particular word, marriage, so let them have the word and do what they want with it, and give everyone else the exact same freedom.

  10. #100
    Almost respectable

    Cardinal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    35,055

    Re: In looming federalism fight, three states say feds can't 'unmarry' gay couples

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    It would be a civil union license and government would not use the word marriage. Civil unions would be open to everyone, regardless of orientation.



    religious marriage would be separated out completely from the civil institution with different names and all. Then one could be married without the civil union and government would see it as two individuals. One could get a civil union without being married and receive the government benefits. One could do both. One could do neither.

    The basic premise behind this idea is that some people attach all sorts of meaning to that particular word, marriage, so let them have the word and do what they want with it, and give everyone else the exact same freedom.
    What you're talking about are what the proposed change would (and could) entail. I'm talking about what is, right now. As in, the concerns you outlined (equal playing field and the freedom to reject the legitimacy of other marriages) already exist.

Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •