California ROCKS! Same Sex Marriage Legal!

FanaticusIncendi · Post by **FanaticusIncendi** » Sun May 18, 2008 8:17 pm

Congratulations Mikayla, on both fronts!

That moment standing on those steps must have been a very proud and fulfilling one. Life is good.

FanaticusIncendi · Post by **FanaticusIncendi** » Sun May 18, 2008 8:23 pm

Of course, Massachusetts has recognized same-sex marriage since 2004 so technically my home state rocks more than yours does

Mulu · Post by **Mulu** » Sun May 18, 2008 8:24 pm

And I forgot last time but...

Congrats Mik!

Twin Axes · Post by **Twin Axes** » Sun May 18, 2008 9:21 pm

Maybe it's because I'm european but...to me the whole concept of marriage seems antiquated. It feels like divorces are more common than marriages these days, however that works out :p. Not to mention infidelity. Not that that's a new thing. Why, in certain european contries, the Mistress is almost a social institution. There just doesn't seem to exist the socio-economic foundation that kept married people together historically. Most of the married people around me when I grew up, for example in my family and those of my friends, wound up getting divorced sooner or later.

I respect any committed relationship, on its own terms, married or not. However, I understand the idea behind formalising a relationship in order to get support from the state to form a household, with our without children. And in terms of making gay relationships equal to heterosexual ones, that has been long overdue. So Huzzah!

By the way, a funny anecdote: Last week I was asked, in an art context, to write down a wish. I wrote "I wish that all people, without exception, are allowed to become happy". And then a few days later, I found my wish was starting to come true!

Congratulations Mikayla.

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Sun May 18, 2008 9:48 pm

Thank you to all the folks who've given me their congratulations - I very much appreciate it! We are still discussing how we want the wedding to go - a private ceremony a year from now, or up on the Pride stage at this year's pride. Who knows? The one thing I have determined is that I think my wedding dress will be .. scarlet!

mxlm · Post by **mxlm** » Sun May 18, 2008 10:10 pm

Wow. Congrats, Mik.

Nekulor · Post by **Nekulor** » Mon May 19, 2008 3:00 am

Gratz Mikayla. I'm glad to see that this issue has been resolved in California. Constitutionally, you can't agree with the other position and be in the right by the law.

ElCadaver · Post by **ElCadaver** » Mon May 19, 2008 3:19 am

How about, to separate itself from the christian ideal of marriage, call it something else? like....Gayiage? You still get the legal rights, and no one gets upset. Unless you are trying to upset people of course. Just like the word Gay used to stand for something nice...

Mayhem · Post by **Mayhem** » Mon May 19, 2008 5:28 am

ElCadaver wrote: Just like the word Gay used to stand for something nice...

A lot of people would say that it still does.

Kest · Post by **Kest** » Mon May 19, 2008 6:00 am

ElCadaver wrote:Just like the word Gay used to stand for something nice...

He doesn't look very happy.

Vaelahr · Post by **Vaelahr** » Mon May 19, 2008 9:19 am

Mayhem wrote:If marriage is ONLY recognised by churches, then by all means the churches can decide who can/cannot get married.

When marriage is recognised by the government, and gives the married priviledges not available in any other way, then the government should ensure that no citizen is discriminated against, and thus denied those priviledges.

Nekulor wrote:Constitutionally, you can't agree with the other position and be in the right by the law.

The basic logic is that gays have a right to be treated like everyone else. But just like everyone else, gays do have the right to marry. They have the right to marry adult members of the opposite sex! What gay activists want is something else: the right to marry members of the same sex. This isn't a right currently enjoyed by anyone. What these gay activists seek then isn't equal treatment but rather to change the very definition of marriage.

But states have a legitimate right to define marriage. State legislatures, drawing on tradition and appealing to the values of their constituents, have defined marriage in a very particular way. Marriage requires a) two people who are b) of legal age and c) not closely related to each other who are d) one male and one female. Note that this definition excludes people who want to marry children, or guys who want to marry their sisters, or Muslims who want to take four wives, or this superstitious bloke who wants to marry his dog.

Now gay activists, with the acquiescence of the California high court, want to remove one of the criteria of marriage while keeping all the rest. Yet if it’s discriminatory to gays to require that marriage be between a man and a woman, why isn’t it discriminatory to Mormons and Muslims to require that it remain between two people? Isn’t incestuous marriage also between “consenting adults” who have a right to equal protection of the laws? And why doesn’t the Fourteenth Amendment protect the fellow who wants to walk down the aisle with his poodle on the grounds that “I love my dog and my dog loves me”?

The point isn't that gay marriage is indistinguishable from child marriage or polygamy. The point is that any definition, and marriage is no exception, includes some people and excludes others. Consequently it’s unreasonable to say that gays have a constitutional right to over-ride the definition but other groups do not. The court’s real justification seems to have little to do with constitutional reasoning and everything to do with an assertion of political power. Sure, political power has its place, but that place is in the legislative and executive domain.

PensivesWetness · Post by **PensivesWetness** » Mon May 19, 2008 12:22 pm

Mayhem wrote:
Mikayla wrote: Anyway, in further happy news - I am engaged!
Congratulations!

...about &^%$ing time, love...

1st off, .....

Meh. never mind..

maybe it's a good time to be a budhist (i've never heard of nut jobs, Pedobears and Homocide Bombs in that side of religion)...?

Anyway, Congrats Mikky love. Odds are i'll be deployed when you tie the knot, but would love to be there...

PensivesWetness · Post by **PensivesWetness** » Mon May 19, 2008 12:25 pm

Mikayla wrote:The one thing I have determined is that I think my wedding dress will be .. scarlet!

ROWWWWWLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!! *howls in giggles in underpants!*

Mikayla · Post by **Mikayla** » Mon May 19, 2008 4:48 pm

Thanks PW! I will send you an invite if/when we have a big wedding of our own.

And Val, I see you have trotted out the polygamy/marry-your-dog arguments, which are all very nice, but have nothing to do with the issue at hand - and perhaps nothing shows the weakness of the anti-same-sex marriage group than their need to fall back on "but someone will want to marry their dog!" Thats sad. Oh, and I am glad you brought up the State legislature - California's state legislature has PASSED a bill legalizing same-sex marriage TWICE. Only the Governor's veto stopped it from being law both times. And now, our Governor has come out in support of the Supreme Court's decision - so - like it or not Val, all three branches of California's government support same-sex marriage now (and two of those branches are dominated by Republicans - you all are aware that the Chief Justice, who authored the opinion in this case, is a Republican, and that the Cal. Supreme Court is made of 5 Republican justices and 2 Democrats, yes?)

HATEFACE · Post by **HATEFACE** » Mon May 19, 2008 4:51 pm

mishmash wrote:You're pathetic mate. I really don't have any idea how you haven't been banned yet, and if your hysterics actually affected me in any way I'd make a case with admin against you, but to be honest you're just boring. And pathetic.

I'm glad to know that my "hysterics" do not make you refrain from posting. Indeed, if you really are moderate, they do not affect you in any way what-so-evur. I think your slick comments diguise who you really are; you're an islamo-fascist apologist. Have a nice day.