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.
Norman MacArthur, 74, and Bill Novak, 76, were married in Pennsylvania on Sunday. The couple, who has been together since their 20s, registered as domestic partners in New York City in 1994, but in 2000 they moved to Erwinna, Penn., where domestic partnerships are not legally recognized. “When we moved to Pennsylvania, we had both retired and we were of the age where one begins to do estate planning,” MacArthur tells Yahoo Parenting. “We went to a lawyer who told us Pennsylvania was never going to allow same-sex marriage, so the only legal avenue we had in order to be afforded any rights was adoption.”
MacArthur says he thought the suggestion was strange at first. “It struck me as fairly unusual, but we looked into it and discovered that other couples had done it. [Without the adoption] we would be legally strangers.” An adoption would grant the couple certain legal rights they felt compelled to secure. “Most importantly, it would allow us visitation rights in a hospital, and gaining of knowledge if one of us was in the hospital,” he says. “With new HIPAA privacy laws, hospitals are very constrained in what they can say to other people. If we were legally related, I would be allowed into the ER and entitled to know what Bill’s condition was if anything should happen.”
For all you conservatives out there who try to spin up polished arguments as to why civilized, decent humans in a first-world society shouldn't afford equal legal secular status to all consenting, long-term, monogamous adult relationships...this is a prime example of why they should.
Here's a couple who have been together 52 years - WAY longer than most heterosexuals these days make it on their church vows - and they are forced to resort to these kinds of legal loopholes to maintain access to basics of estate and legal family protections, such as being able to access their spouse in the event of a hospital emergency.
This is why gay marriage in a secular setting is and always will be right in a secular setting. Churches can do whatever antiquated nonsense they want, but these guys have shown a dedication to a relationship that most heterosexuals don't, and if anyone has earned the right to whatever legal protections exist for their relationship, it is them. They deserve it. They should have it. Fortunately, as society slowly evolves beyond the grasp of the knuckle-draggers who try to keep us all in the Dark Ages, now they finally do.
As I said in the other thread about this subject, degeneracy taken to new levels.
It's not degenerate. It's two people who are gay and who have been in a decent and committed relationship for most of their lives and deserve to have the related legal protections.
what is degenerate is when homophobes try to deny rights to others different from themselves on the basis of their own ignorance and hatred.
It's not degenerate. It's two people who are gay and who have been in a decent and committed relationship for most of their lives and deserve to have the related legal protections.
what is degenerate is when homophobes try to deny rights to others different from themselves on the basis of their own ignorance and hatred.
What is the point of this. Didn't the legal adoption afford them the rights they claim they are entitled to?
The fact that marriage and adoption are the most practical ways to ensure that basic things like inheritance are not obstructed by other people is a pretty sad critique of American society.
I'm pretty libertarian socially and support Paul, though he's not perfect. I see no good reason for people to have resort to bizarre legal maneuvers to get these rights. Go with civil unions nationwide and let's get this over with.
For all you conservatives out there who try to spin up polished arguments as to why civilized, decent humans in a first-world society shouldn't afford equal legal secular status to all consenting, long-term, monogamous adult relationships...this is a prime example of why they should.
Here's a couple who have been together 52 years - WAY longer than most heterosexuals these days make it on their church vows - and they are forced to resort to these kinds of legal loopholes to maintain access to basics of estate and legal family protections, such as being able to access their spouse in the event of a hospital emergency.
This is why gay marriage in a secular setting is and always will be right in a secular setting. Churches can do whatever antiquated nonsense they want, but these guys have shown a dedication to a relationship that most heterosexuals don't, and if anyone has earned the right to whatever legal protections exist for their relationship, it is them. They deserve it. They should have it. Fortunately, as society slowly evolves beyond the grasp of the knuckle-draggers who try to keep us all in the Dark Ages, now they finally do.
The problem is you liberals seem to forget or just can't grasp is that while many of us don't condone it, we are NOT going to persecute those who do. We consistently show more tolerance than the left and extend civility even when we disagree with the choice? You guys on the other hand get apoplectic about the whole issue.
Constantly swinging at your shadow and steaming up for no good reason. No one is stopping them. No one is kicking down their door. In short no one cares much or they would be doing something to stop it, wouldn't they? No, the majority of the right and dare I say, straight community may not CONDONE the choice but, if anyone is going to leave two old men alone it's a REPUBLICAN! We like the elderly and tend to protect them. We help people with flat tires, we open doors for everyone and tend to say thing like yes sir and yes maam.
You? You guys burn down cities and neighborhoods like spoiled brats when a couple of your shining examples of achievement get caught breaking the law. We build them back up with our taxes and loans despite our angst to do so. You clowns have ruined cities like Chicago, LA, San Fran, DC, Detroit, Atlanta, Miami, Jacksonville, Cincinnatti, aoakland, BALTIMORE, Newark, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Toledo, to name a few, because you think dealing drugs is a career choice and are allergic to hard work. Where social programs are endless and education is an inconvenience. You shelter guys like Bill Ayers and protect animated fools like Sharpton.
Please. 75% or more of the right just doesn't care about Steve and Kevin getting married. So long as they are civil, good enough. Afterall, I have YET to see, find, witness a republican playing the knockout game with old people. Homosexual or otherwise, have you? Democrats seem to have an appetite for it and not one of your leaders says squat about it. Figures.
We are, however, "concerned" about cities like Chicago particularly certain near in western townships....and we don't see too many Republicans there but, we see a shiiteload of democrats with nooooooooo tolerance for us for any reason? Chicago and Baltimore have nearly 100 murders combined per month. And not a Republican in the pile of bodies. Hmmmmmmmm....is that our fault.....too?
Tell you what, you guys marry anything and everything. In exchange, we ask you guys just quit killing each other and blaming us. Go to work and quit blaming us. Make English at least your second language right behind Ebonics, and try to quit burning down the neighborhoods everytime your crinal element/e-thugs get caught doing all sorts of Ill Shiite. Also drop the parades. That or be prepared for the biggest one ever. 100 million straight man march on DC. It will be boring and yet, no one will get arrested and no National Guard called. Good thing too because if their mayor is as dumb as Baltimores, it could get ugly. This time, the cops will be with us and bored to tears due to no action necessary on their part.
Fair?
You guys really, really need to get your priorities in line. It's becomming laughable. Also, I wish these two live the remainder of their lives in peace and harmony. I do mean that. Any decisions that approach the moral are things they have to account for and like most of the right, I am not allowed to judge them for their actions.
What is the point of this. Didn't the legal adoption afford them the rights they claim they are entitled to?
If you were in a committed relationship with someone for over 50 years, don't you think it is idiotic to be forced for one of you to "adopt" the other in order to get basic estate planning and hospital visitation rights that married couples enjoy? That's what the point of this is.
The problem is you liberals seem to forget or just can't grasp is that while many of us don't condone it, we are NOT going to persecute those who do. We consistently show more tolerance than the left and extend civility even when we disagree with the choice? You guys on the other hand get apoplectic about the whole issue.
Bull****.
If you're not persecuting it, then stop opposing gay couples from having the same SECULAR (not religious) legal relationship rights as heterosexuals.
Of course it's not a priority for you. That's because to a conservative, the only thing that is a priority is yourself and people just like you.
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.
