Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 64

Thread: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

  1. #1
    Professor
    Sykes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Mmm. Bacon.
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,257

    Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Ohio Plans Unspeakably Cruel Appeal Of Dying Man's Last Wish | ThinkProgress

    In his final days, Arthur wants to honor his commitment to his husband. He wants his own death certificate to list Obergefell as his “surviving spouse.” And he wants to die knowing that his partner of 20 years can someday be buried next to him in a family plot bound by a directive that only permits his lawfully wedded spouse to be interred alongside him. And, on Monday, a federal judge ruled that Arthur should indeed have the dignity of dying alongside a man that Ohio will recognize as his husband.

    And now, Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine (R) wants to take that dignity away from Mr. Arthur. The day after a judge issued a temporary restraining order requiring Ohio to list Arthur’s husband as his “surviving spouse” on his death certificate, DeWine announced that he would appeal this decision and try to strip a dying man of his final wish.

    There are marriage equality cases with sweeping national implications. This is not one of them. The judge’s order is limited exclusively to Arthur and Obergefell. Indeed, as the judge explains, “there is absolutely no evidence that the State of Ohio or its citizens will be harmed by the issuance” of an order requiring Ohio to acknowledge the two men’s marriage. “No one beyond Plaintiffs themselves will be affected by such a limited order at all.”


    My guess is this is one that will be fought after the man's passing.

    My guess is also DeWine is a dick.


  2. #2
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    I disagree that no one beyond the plaintiffs would be affected. Even beyond that, I hope that the cometary still keeps him out if its restrictions would be reasonably construed to not put the dead boyfriend there. Bury them elsewhere.

  3. #3
    Professor
    Sykes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Mmm. Bacon.
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,257

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    I disagree that no one beyond the plaintiffs would be affected. Even beyond that, I hope that the cometary still keeps him out if its restrictions would be reasonably construed to not put the dead boyfriend there. Bury them elsewhere.
    The cemetery does not get to declare who can be buried in a plot which is bought and paid for.

  4. #4
    Sage
    Fisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Last Seen
    12-06-13 @ 02:44 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    17,002

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by Sykes View Post
    The cemetery does not get to declare who can be buried in a plot which is bought and paid for.
    ".....can someday be buried next to him in a family plot bound by a directive that only permits his lawfully wedded spouse to be interred alongside him"
    1. Your own OP says otherwise. Someone set up that directive and the cemetery has the fiduciary duty to whomever did; and

    2. The SCOTUS has ruled that states that have bans can keep their bans ergo he is ineligible to be deemed married under the Ohio law; and

    3. Making an exception to the law creates a door through which 1,000 cases would follow so it is the AG's job to keep it shut and maintain the integrity of Ohio law which has been upheld by the SCOTUS's ruling. Don't like it, change the law through the legislative process.

  5. #5
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,343

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by Sykes View Post
    The cemetery does not get to declare who can be buried in a plot which is bought and paid for.
    Yes they do. People buy property subject to the rules and restrictions in place. Cemetaries, like other restricted areas, have restrictions to protect the owners, and all purchasers are made aware of those restrictions. Don't like the rules, don't purchase the property.

  6. #6
    Guru

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    4,484

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    1. Your own OP says otherwise. Someone set up that directive and the cemetery has the fiduciary duty to whomever did
    Then they also have a fiduciary duty to bury him in that plot if he dies at any time prior to an appellate court ruling in favor of the State or a stay on the district court ruling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    2. The SCOTUS has ruled that states that have bans can keep their bans ergo he is ineligible to be deemed married under the Ohio law;
    The Supreme Court made no such ruling. The constitutionality of State bans wasn't even addressed.

  7. #7
    Professor
    Sykes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Mmm. Bacon.
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,257

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
    Yes they do. People buy property subject to the rules and restrictions in place. Cemetaries, like other restricted areas, have restrictions to protect the owners, and all purchasers are made aware of those restrictions. Don't like the rules, don't purchase the property.
    Funny, I get the impression there's some baiting going on here.

    Pass.

  8. #8
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,343

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by Sykes View Post
    Funny, I get the impression there's some baiting going on here.

    Pass.
    Not from me. You stated that the cemetary does not have the right to make the rules That's incorrect. The purchaser needs to understand the rules prior to purchase. If you don't agree, don't purchase there.

    Think of the cemetary committee as a homeowners association. Same rules apply.

  9. #9
    Professor
    Sykes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Mmm. Bacon.
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 10:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,257

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
    Not from me. You stated that the cemetary does not have the right to make the rules That's incorrect. The purchaser needs to understand the rules prior to purchase. If you don't agree, don't purchase there.

    Think of the cemetary committee as a homeowners association. Same rules apply.
    And it is doubtful a gay couple would pick such a cemetery, and unnecessarily cruel to say that he would make sure they weren't buried together.

    That's baiting.

  10. #10
    Global Moderator
    Rage More!
    Your Star's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    26,362

    Re: Ohio plans unspeakably cruel appeal of dying man's last wish

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher View Post
    I disagree that no one beyond the plaintiffs would be affected. Even beyond that, I hope that the cometary still keeps him out if its restrictions would be reasonably construed to not put the dead boyfriend there. Bury them elsewhere.
    Really? How in the **** would this hurt anyone? How would letting these two people having the dignity of being buried next to each other hurt anyone else?

    This is the stupidity, and the evil of laws against SSM.
    Eat me, drink me, love me;
    Laura make much of me

Page 1 of 7 123 ... 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
  •