Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off YOU know nothing about me or my marriage. Trying to say I was raped in any way shape or form is ridiculous.
WHY would I still be good friends with my ex if he had ever harmed me.
That is fair enough. I sincerely apologize if it came across in implying such. However, the bringing up of "marital rape" DOES open the door for pointed questions and all. I hope you would agree...
Quote:
When a woman says no even if you are married to her and you forcefully have sex with her it is RAPE. Marriage does not allow you to have her, nor her you, whenever you want. PERIOD. A marriage license does not grant consent to sex at any time.
Marriage between a man and woman implies natural consent. If a man forces his wife to have sex by way of violence? (or vice-versa? LOL), then yes, it should be punishable by law. BUT...by assault and battery laws, not "rape". Unless there is a pre-nuptial agreement, of course!
Quote:
The definition of marital rape legally is:
Here is the CA penal code on spousal rape:
There was obviously a problem for a law against it to be passed. You can say it isn't but in the eyes of the law of every state it is rape.
Sorry, I am a Texas/Southern boy. I don't really care what the "law" says in California; which is the fruit and nut capital of the United States, anyway...
Quote:
Loving V Virginia Zablocki v. Redhail Turner v. Safley[font=Enigmatic]
Loving v. Virginia had to do with interacial marriage, not same sex marriage. And for your edification? Read this one:
There are 3 to start you off.
The 14th amendment sets up equal protections under the law.
By denying me the right to marry the person of my choice, I am being denied equal protections, and privileges that are granted by the government to married couples.
Uhhhh, I know what the 14th ammendment says. Think I don't? And looks like it is a SCOTUS issue. BUT..."you" are not "denied equal rights" for the simple reason laws of marriage and allowances/restrictions on the same are NOT a "constitutional right". But hey? I will say this: If California or Massachussets wants to permit same sex marriage? Then hey, groovy. Go for it. But Texas and Alabama should not be required to recognize it within THEIR own borders.
Quote:
I am posting verifiable facts, how is that immature?
No, what you are posting are editorials/articles, that back your opinion. Nothing wrong with that, per say, but it IS immature if you don't grasp that there are plenty more on the other side. See what I mean?
Quote:
YOU are the one trying to twist my words, and calling my ex a rapist. THAT is childish, and immature. [
You are right. I regret and apologize for that. I misread what you wrote and replied hastily. I retract that summation.
Quote:
Have you ever heard of IVF. Many people use modern medicine to have children. Even hetero couples.
It STILL involves male and female parts, correct? No way around that one.
Quote:
Interracial marriage was made legal through the Supreme court. It has only recently been approved by the majority.
Sorry, but that is how the law regarding the denial of civil rights works.
Uhhhh, when the SCOTUS starts to change laws, then they can be just as easily reversed when another make-up comes into play. "Civil Rights" is a very broad term, and can just as easily be retracted as expanded. Keep that in mind. Word to the wise.
Quote:
As for it evolving to include same sex couples. There are already 6 states where it is legal. Those couples are just as married as a hetero couple.
True, in 6 states it is "legal". BUT? In ALL cases it was a judicial/legislative decision. NOT ONCE, when put to a vote, did the populace approve it. On the contrary, either a vote wasn't allowed, or the result indicated rejection.
Now, WHEN a majority approve it by popular vote? Then, as I said earlier, I will agree that it is accepted (at least in those states).
Why should our taxes go to pay for the changing of EVERY law, document, anything that contains the word married, marriage, or refers to marital status? That is what would have to be done to assure that civil unions receive ALL the same rights as marriage. Not only the government paperwork would have to be changed. All companies that have any documentation that refers to marital status would have to be changed. How many forms have a box to check off for marital status?
Why not have one name for something that is the same.
Didn't pretty much the same thing happen when Homosexuals ( Gays) were allowed into the Military????
Didn't pretty much the same thing happen when Homosexuals ( Gays) were allowed into the Military????
The only laws that changed were military laws regarding dismissal for homosexuality. There were no laws added, just removed. There was no paper work that had to be changed, just some forms discarded.
How many government forms alone will have to change to include civil union in the marital status category?
How many state and federal laws are there regarding marriage that will have to be rewritten to include civil unions? (every one that has to do with family law, inheritance law, court testimony, etc)
How many businesses have documents with marital status on them? All of those will have to be trashed, and reprinted.
Including same sex marriage with current marriage, none of those will have to change.
Simple, saves money, efficient.
For those who don't think that marital rape laws apply in Texas. YOU'RE WRONG
Quote:
Current Texas Law
Chapter 22 or Texas' Penal Code covers assaultive crimes that include various sexual misconduct. Under this chapter, an adult wife can bring charges of sexual assault against her husband.
A person commits sexual assault under 22.011 if the person knowingly causes the sexual or oral penetration of another without consent. The act is without consent if the actor compels the victim through physical force as well as the threat of physical force against the victim or a third party; if the victim is unable to consent because she is unconscious or physically unable to resist; or if the actor drugs or intoxicates the victim to render her incapable of resisting.
If the actor causes or attempts to cause bodily harm to the victim or a third-party; if the actor puts the victim in imminent fear of bodily harm to the victim or another; or if the actor brandishes a deadly weapon, the crime rises to the category of aggravated assault.
The only laws that changed were military laws regarding dismissal for homosexuality. There were no laws added, just removed. There was no paper work that had to be changed, just some forms discarded.
How many government forms alone will have to change to include civil union in the marital status category?
How many state and federal laws are there regarding marriage that will have to be rewritten to include civil unions? (every one that has to do with family law, inheritance law, court testimony, etc)
How many businesses have documents with marital status on them? All of those will have to be trashed, and reprinted.
Including same sex marriage with current marriage, none of those will have to change.
Simple, saves money, efficient.
I would think not too many , because the "State of California " didn't get buried under tons of paperwork
when it " Leaped Frogged " back and forth between Domestic Partnership and Homosexual Marriage......
The Texas law is light weight compared to the California Spousal Marital Rape Laws....Assualt and Battery could only be a couple of months in Jail.....Compared to 20 years in state prison.....
I wonder how many Texas wives know that some of their husbands think they are merely sperm receptacles that can be used anytime the husband gets the urge?
As a black lesbian, I neither chose my race or my sexual orientation. Why is it most sane Americans acknowledge the pathology of racisms' destructiveness but are then unwilling to acknowledge homophobia is no different?
There is no such thing as "homophobia." It is a made-up term by homosexuals.
I do not "fear" homos. I just don't want them pushing their agenda down my throat.
The Texas law is light weight compared to the California Spousal Marital Rape Laws....Assualt and Battery could only be a couple of months in Jail.....Compared to 20 years in state prison.....
Wrong. In Texas spousal rape is considered sexual assault it is a second degree felony. The charge of simple battery (3rd degree felony) can also be added if other physical violence occurs.
Quote:
Normally, simple assault that results in minor injury is a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by not more than 1 year in a county jail and/or a fine of not more than $4,000. However, prosecutors can bump it up to a third-degree felony – 2 to 10 years in a Texas prison and/or a fine of not more than $10,000 – in some cases. If you are charged with simple assault, it can become a third-degree felony if the state proves that you:
Committed the assault against a family member or someone with whom you are in a romantic relationship, and you have a previous domestic violence conviction.
Sexual Assault
This is the crime we commonly think of when we think of a “rape”. It can occur between two people in a relationship or two strangers. The offense doesn’t always include intercourse and can be charged even when “sexual contact” has been made. Some child molestation occurrences are charged under the Sexual Assault law. In most cases, sexual assault is a 2nd degree felony punishable by 2 to 20 years in prison.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And looks like it is a SCOTUS issue. BUT..."you" are not "denied equal rights" for the simple reason laws of marriage and allowances/restrictions on the same are NOT a "constitutional right". But hey? I will say this: If California or Massachussets wants to permit same sex marriage? Then hey, groovy. Go for it. But Texas and Alabama should not be required to recognize it within THEIR own borders. 
