Why does one, whether homo/heterosexual, even need the public to make their relationship 'valid'?
When my husband and I made it official, it was a spur of the moment decision on Halloween to take a trip to the JP. It was, of course, non-religious, and actually very odd. ha ha......Anyway we had a small ceremony several months later, almost a year. It a marriage or a civil union? Are there more benefits from 'marriage' than 'civil union' other than the 'public validation?'
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein
Why does one, whether homo/heterosexual, even need the public to make their relationship 'valid'?
well thats a whole other thread . But why should some people be able to validate it and others can't?
Some people get married cos it's the thing to do or cos it's tradition or cos they like the idea of it or cos everybody else wants it or for tax reasons... nothing wrong with any of those reasons... others do it cos they believe in god and they want their union to become official under the eyes of god. I guess if you have no belief whatsoever it's hard to understand... but anybody with any ounce of faith, even if marriage is not their thing, would understand or at least accept that it's what others believe and what they want.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Are there more benefits from 'marriage' than 'civil union' other than the 'public validation?'
I think there are very few people who get married for the PUBLIC validation. I believe in God and therefore I see marriage as much deeper and more special than civil union... but that's cos I believe... if I didn't believe I probably wouldn't see any kinda big deal at all... but I don't expect everyone to have the same opinion as me
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
I personally have no problem with gay marriage but my concern is this. Didn't the people of California vote against gay marriage a few years back? This sounds like the vote of the people being overridden by a few judges which bothers me.
Also, I heard that this topic will be on the agenda again come November in California so it will probably be voted down again by the people.
Seeing visions of falling up somehow.
Pensacola '94 New Orleans '95 Birmingham '98 New Orleans '00 New Orleans '03 Tampa '08 New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest Fenway Park '18 St. Louis '22
well thats a whole other thread . But why should some people be able to validate it and others can't?
I'm all for people getting married if that's what they want to do. I just don't understand the need, personally and was unclear about why one would seek 'public validity'.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I'm all for people getting married if that's what they want to do. I just don't understand the need, personally and was unclear about why one would seek 'public validity'.
but I've just explained that that's not what it's about... it may be A reason... but for most it's more than likely the smallest reason! There are several reasons that come ahead of it... and that's just a nice bonus.
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
but I've just explained that that's not what it's about... it may be A reason... but for most it's more than likely the smallest reason! There are several reasons that come ahead of it... and that's just a nice bonus.
I understand the reasons you gave and am aware those reasons exist. I'm only questioning the reason I left in my reply.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Why would anyone want to control someone else's life? Why would it ever matter if homosexuals got married? Enlighten me. If you are deeply religious, isn't it a sin to have sex out of wedlock? Now you don't want marriage? I'm confused. Maybe you should stop worrying about what other people do that doesn't harm you.
Why does one, whether homo/heterosexual, even need the public to make their relationship 'valid'?
Just because they're homosexual doesn't mean they don't have religious values and deserve the same rights as heteros. There's millions of homosexuals that attend church as well
I'm all for people getting married if that's what they want to do. I just don't understand the need, personally and was unclear about why one would seek 'public validity'.
It's purely in this sense about being able to do the same things as everyone else. File taxes jointly, be treated as a family member at the hospital. Very basic legal processes we take for granted. Yes in the most basic form it's absolutely insane that we have all these ridiculous rules and laws... kind of like 0 tolerance policies but this kind of thing is necessary for them to live like the rest of americans by the laws on the books.
That's the primary reason, to be treated as married people are in the legal sense, it really has nothing at all to do with religion or really validity. Yeah I'm with you though is there really a need for validation? Not particularly but there is something to be said about making a solid commitment if you take it seriously.
My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
I personally have no problem with gay marriage but my concern is this. Didn't the people of California vote against gay marriage a few years back? This sounds like the vote of the people being overridden by a few judges which bothers me.
Also, I heard that this topic will be on the agenda again come November in California so it will probably be voted down again by the people.
The court is not in place to weigh the will of the people. The court is in place to abide by the constitution. If the people of California voted to ban the right of African Americans to marry (as was once the law), the court would step in and override that. Sometimes the majority rules aren't the end all be all when it comes to constitutional issues. In fact, the courts' job, as upholder of the constitution, is to protect discriminated minorities, of course.
San Diego 10/25/00, Mountain View 6/1/03, Santa Barbara 10/28/03, Northwest School 3/18/05, San Diego 7/7/06, Los Angeles 7/9/06, 7/10/06, Honolulu (U2) 12/9/06, Santa Barbara (EV) 4/10/08, Los Angeles (EV) 4/12/08, Hartford 6/27/08, Mansfield 6/28/08, VH1 Rock Honors The Who 7/12/08, Seattle 9/21/09, Universal City 9/30/09, 10/1/09, 10/6/09, 10/7/09, San Diego 10/9/09, Los Angeles (EV) 7/8/11, Santa Barbara (EV) 7/9/11, Chicago 7/19/13, San Diego 11/21/13, Los Angeles 11/23/13, 11/24/13, Oakland 11/26/13, Chicago 8/22/16, Missoula 8/13/18, Boston 9/2/18, Los Angeles 2/25/22 (EV), San Diego 5/3/22, Los Angeles 5/6/22, 5/7/22, Imola 6/25/22, Los Angeles 5/21/24, [London 6/29/24], [Boston 9/15/24]
Why does one, whether homo/heterosexual, even need the public to make their relationship 'valid'?
They don't.
A piece of paper, the approval of the Federal Goverment (and some religious icon); means absolutely nothing. It's just a way of keeping track of people and their mating habits.
Now, there's some very valid and wise reasons to keep track of who's breeding with who. You know, like incest. Or accidental incest.
But none of that proves one's love and depth of commitment and loyalty.
And let's not forget that "Marriage" became BIG MONEY for a lot of different types of businesses. Churches, Reception halls, Caterers, Florists, Taliors/clothing, bands and liquor companies:D
I am all for more civil rights for all!! If it doesn't really affect myself or my family who the hell cares. If people want to have it on paper so be it....let it be. OH....and I just have to say "when is PJ coming to Ontario again"??????? Listened to a little "Barrie 98" in my car on the way to work...
Peace,
________________________
Too many shows but never enough!
These guys are the fruit of the earth...
The court is not in place to weigh the will of the people. The court is in place to abide by the constitution. If the people of California voted to ban the right of African Americans to marry (as was once the law), the court would step in and override that. Sometimes the majority rules aren't the end all be all when it comes to constitutional issues. In fact, the courts' job, as upholder of the constitution, is to protect discriminated minorities, of course.
Good point and that makes sense.
I'm curious as to what will happen come this November and the people vote to ban it if the court will again overturn that.
Seeing visions of falling up somehow.
Pensacola '94 New Orleans '95 Birmingham '98 New Orleans '00 New Orleans '03 Tampa '08 New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest Fenway Park '18 St. Louis '22
I'm curious as to what will happen come this November and the people vote to ban it if the court will again overturn that.
The vote will likely be to ammend the Constitution, and I don't think that could be overturned by the state Supreme Court. Hopefully the population of California comes to its senses before that vote.
The vote will likely be to ammend the Constitution, and I don't think that could be overturned by the state Supreme Court. Hopefully the population of California comes to its senses before that vote.
I believe that Arnold stated that he would not allow a measure to amend the state's constitution to be placed on the ballots in November.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I believe that Arnold stated that he would not allow a measure to amend the state's constitution to be placed on the ballots in November.
Intruiging. Can Arnold actually stop it from being on the ballot if they gather enough signatures? Or can he only veto it once passed? I need to do some research...
Intruiging. Can Arnold actually stop it from being on the ballot if they gather enough signatures? Or can he only veto it once passed? I need to do some research...
I was thinking the same thing.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
Why does one, whether homo/heterosexual, even need the public to make their relationship 'valid'?
they don't.
if you reread my post, i did NOT say they need/want 'validity'.....just that they might need/want 'public validity'...they are not one and the same thing, no? from a relationship/personal level i am sure EVERY couple, regardless of sexual, or any other, orientation...considers their relationship 'valid.' seeking 'public validity' refers to the benefits of a legal marriage...such as a heterosexual couple may have without issue. i thought the whole point of homosexuals WANTing the legal right to marry to be completely linked with that. i for one am happy to see, slowly, homosexuals being granted these rights just as heterosexuls, and just i think is right for all. from a LEGAL perspective, i have always fully believed hetero or homo-sexual, all are entitled to these rights. from a religious perspective, i leave that up to the religions....
It's purely in this sense about being able to do the same things as everyone else. File taxes jointly, be treated as a family member at the hospital. Very basic legal processes we take for granted. Yes in the most basic form it's absolutely insane that we have all these ridiculous rules and laws... kind of like 0 tolerance policies but this kind of thing is necessary for them to live like the rest of americans by the laws on the books.
That's the primary reason, to be treated as married people are in the legal sense, it really has nothing at all to do with religion or really validity. Yeah I'm with you though is there really a need for validation? Not particularly but there is something to be said about making a solid commitment if you take it seriously.
if you reread my post, i did NOT say they need/want 'validity'.....just that they might need/want 'public validity'...they are not one and the same thing, no? from a relationship/personal level i am sure EVERY couple, regardless of sexual, or any other, orientation...considers their relationship 'valid.' seeking 'public validity' refers to the benefits of a legal marriage...such as a heterosexual couple may have without issue. i thought the whole point of homosexuals WANTing the legal right to marry to be completely linked with that. i for one am happy to see, slowly, homosexuals being granted these rights just as heterosexuls, and just i think is right for all. from a LEGAL perspective, i have always fully believed hetero or homo-sexual, all are entitled to these rights. from a religious perspective, i leave that up to the religions....
aha, yes...thank you:
exactly what i meant by 'public validity.'
Equal legal rights should most definitely be given to all. I don't see that as having the same meaning as 'public validation'. But if that's how you meant it then I agree, most couples probably want the same legal rights and should have them.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Equal legal rights should most definitely be given to all. I don't see that as having the same meaning as 'public validation'. But if that's how you meant it then I agree, most couple probably want the same legal rights and should have them.
yep, that is what i meant by it.
to me, being able to have a legal marriage is giving 'public validation' to homosexual relationships, the same as heterosexual relationships, that was all. the good, the bad and the ugly...rights for all.
In many ways, it's very similar to the "separate but equal" doctrine that was overturned in Brown v. Board. Separate is inherently unequal. Even though the civil union laws gave some benefits, it's a separate thing.
The rule of law evolves with public sentiment. There was a time when an African American was not considered a whole person. That sentiment changed slowly, and the courts eventually made some landmark decisions. Similaryl, it seems that we are on the dawn of a new sentiment that the concept of marriage should include gays and lesbians. I have a cousin in Europe who is gay and is married to another man. Everything is recognized just as if he were a heterosexual. It's amazing how normal his life is, compared to all of this controversy in the US.
San Diego 10/25/00, Mountain View 6/1/03, Santa Barbara 10/28/03, Northwest School 3/18/05, San Diego 7/7/06, Los Angeles 7/9/06, 7/10/06, Honolulu (U2) 12/9/06, Santa Barbara (EV) 4/10/08, Los Angeles (EV) 4/12/08, Hartford 6/27/08, Mansfield 6/28/08, VH1 Rock Honors The Who 7/12/08, Seattle 9/21/09, Universal City 9/30/09, 10/1/09, 10/6/09, 10/7/09, San Diego 10/9/09, Los Angeles (EV) 7/8/11, Santa Barbara (EV) 7/9/11, Chicago 7/19/13, San Diego 11/21/13, Los Angeles 11/23/13, 11/24/13, Oakland 11/26/13, Chicago 8/22/16, Missoula 8/13/18, Boston 9/2/18, Los Angeles 2/25/22 (EV), San Diego 5/3/22, Los Angeles 5/6/22, 5/7/22, Imola 6/25/22, Los Angeles 5/21/24, [London 6/29/24], [Boston 9/15/24]
Comments
When my husband and I made it official, it was a spur of the moment decision on Halloween to take a trip to the JP. It was, of course, non-religious, and actually very odd. ha ha......Anyway we had a small ceremony several months later, almost a year. It a marriage or a civil union? Are there more benefits from 'marriage' than 'civil union' other than the 'public validation?'
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein
Some people get married cos it's the thing to do or cos it's tradition or cos they like the idea of it or cos everybody else wants it or for tax reasons... nothing wrong with any of those reasons... others do it cos they believe in god and they want their union to become official under the eyes of god. I guess if you have no belief whatsoever it's hard to understand... but anybody with any ounce of faith, even if marriage is not their thing, would understand or at least accept that it's what others believe and what they want.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Also, I heard that this topic will be on the agenda again come November in California so it will probably be voted down again by the people.
Pensacola '94
New Orleans '95
Birmingham '98
New Orleans '00
New Orleans '03
Tampa '08
New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest
New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest
Fenway Park '18
St. Louis '22
I'm all for people getting married if that's what they want to do. I just don't understand the need, personally and was unclear about why one would seek 'public validity'.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
I understand the reasons you gave and am aware those reasons exist. I'm only questioning the reason I left in my reply.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I love you a little bit right now, abook.........nice post
Just because they're homosexual doesn't mean they don't have religious values and deserve the same rights as heteros. There's millions of homosexuals that attend church as well
It's purely in this sense about being able to do the same things as everyone else. File taxes jointly, be treated as a family member at the hospital. Very basic legal processes we take for granted. Yes in the most basic form it's absolutely insane that we have all these ridiculous rules and laws... kind of like 0 tolerance policies but this kind of thing is necessary for them to live like the rest of americans by the laws on the books.
That's the primary reason, to be treated as married people are in the legal sense, it really has nothing at all to do with religion or really validity. Yeah I'm with you though is there really a need for validation? Not particularly but there is something to be said about making a solid commitment if you take it seriously.
The court is not in place to weigh the will of the people. The court is in place to abide by the constitution. If the people of California voted to ban the right of African Americans to marry (as was once the law), the court would step in and override that. Sometimes the majority rules aren't the end all be all when it comes to constitutional issues. In fact, the courts' job, as upholder of the constitution, is to protect discriminated minorities, of course.
They don't.
A piece of paper, the approval of the Federal Goverment (and some religious icon); means absolutely nothing. It's just a way of keeping track of people and their mating habits.
Now, there's some very valid and wise reasons to keep track of who's breeding with who. You know, like incest. Or accidental incest.
But none of that proves one's love and depth of commitment and loyalty.
And let's not forget that "Marriage" became BIG MONEY for a lot of different types of businesses. Churches, Reception halls, Caterers, Florists, Taliors/clothing, bands and liquor companies:D
________________________
Too many shows but never enough!
These guys are the fruit of the earth...
Good point and that makes sense.
I'm curious as to what will happen come this November and the people vote to ban it if the court will again overturn that.
Pensacola '94
New Orleans '95
Birmingham '98
New Orleans '00
New Orleans '03
Tampa '08
New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest
New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest
Fenway Park '18
St. Louis '22
The vote will likely be to ammend the Constitution, and I don't think that could be overturned by the state Supreme Court. Hopefully the population of California comes to its senses before that vote.
I believe that Arnold stated that he would not allow a measure to amend the state's constitution to be placed on the ballots in November.
Intruiging. Can Arnold actually stop it from being on the ballot if they gather enough signatures? Or can he only veto it once passed? I need to do some research...
I was thinking the same thing.
they don't.
if you reread my post, i did NOT say they need/want 'validity'.....just that they might need/want 'public validity'...they are not one and the same thing, no? from a relationship/personal level i am sure EVERY couple, regardless of sexual, or any other, orientation...considers their relationship 'valid.' seeking 'public validity' refers to the benefits of a legal marriage...such as a heterosexual couple may have without issue. i thought the whole point of homosexuals WANTing the legal right to marry to be completely linked with that. i for one am happy to see, slowly, homosexuals being granted these rights just as heterosexuls, and just i think is right for all. from a LEGAL perspective, i have always fully believed hetero or homo-sexual, all are entitled to these rights. from a religious perspective, i leave that up to the religions....
aha, yes...thank you:
exactly what i meant by 'public validity.'
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
Equal legal rights should most definitely be given to all. I don't see that as having the same meaning as 'public validation'. But if that's how you meant it then I agree, most couples probably want the same legal rights and should have them.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Aww:)
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
yep, that is what i meant by it.
to me, being able to have a legal marriage is giving 'public validation' to homosexual relationships, the same as heterosexual relationships, that was all. the good, the bad and the ugly...rights for all.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
The rule of law evolves with public sentiment. There was a time when an African American was not considered a whole person. That sentiment changed slowly, and the courts eventually made some landmark decisions. Similaryl, it seems that we are on the dawn of a new sentiment that the concept of marriage should include gays and lesbians. I have a cousin in Europe who is gay and is married to another man. Everything is recognized just as if he were a heterosexual. It's amazing how normal his life is, compared to all of this controversy in the US.