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.
Yes, [i]marriage[i], properly defined, is a civil right. Gay marriage fails this definition.
Whether it's a civil right or not doesn't matter that much. The fact is that same-sex marriage is legal today in a lot more places than it was a few years ago.
I just love how people who aren't gay have an opinion on this subject. It doesn't have any affect on anyone but the people getting married.
IF you feel that your marriage doesn't mean anything because 2 men or 2 women got married, then you got married for all the wrong reasons. :-|
It's really silly, and it baffles me that people get this hype over this type of thing. Don't believe in gay marriage? Then don't marry someone of the same sex.. LOL...
There's nothing in the marriage laws that says marriage is for the benefit of progeny.
Look up "Common law marriage" and the common law rights of curtesy and dower.
Remember, licensed marriage is for folks who have no private property rights - like socialists.
Quote:
Only about half of opposite-sex couples have children, so if we're to go strictly by what you said, then about half of the marriage licenses granted to opposite-sex couples should be revoked.
Your understanding of the law is flawed. The contract for marriage, whether common law or licensed, was for uniting two property rights into one. . . and the ultimate beneficiary was the child(ren) of the marriage.
Look up legitimate versus illegitimate. The only legal difference is that the legitimate child can inherit from his father. Both can inherit from their mothers.
------------
COMMON LAW MARRIAGE - One not solemnized in the ordinary way (i.e. ceremonial) but created by an agreement to marry, followed by cohabitation. A consummated agreement to marry between persons legally capable of making marriage contract, per verba de praesenti, followed by cohabitation...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P.277
DOWER- The provision which the law makes for a widow out of the lands or tenements of her husband, for her support and nurture of her children. 2 Bl. Comm. 130 ... A species of life estate which a woman is, by law, entitled to claim on the death of her husband ... Dower has been abolished in the majority of the states and materially altered in most others.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 492
DOWER BY COMMON LAW - The ordinary kind of dower in English and American law, consisting of a life interest in one-third of the lands of which the husband was seised in fee at any time during the coverture. 2 Bl. Comm. 1332. Abolished by the Administration of Estates Act, 1945, Sec. 45.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 493
CURTESY - The estate to which by common law a man is entitled, on the death of his wife, in the lands or tenements of which she was seised in possession in fee-simple or in tail during her coverture, provided they have had lawful issue born alive which might have been capable of inheriting the estate. It is a freehold estate for the term of his natural life. ... in most states it has been abolished or otherwise materially altered.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 383
Pre-Socialist Common law was simple: if you "married", and one spouse died, the survivor inherited the deceased's property - unless there was no lawful issue. Then the surviving blood kin had a valid claim upon the deceased's share of the marriage property.
However, due to voluntary socialism, all enumerated Americans lack legal standing to enter into common law marriages.
Now, let us look at the "modern" situation:
MARRIAGE - Legal union of one man and one woman as husband and wife. Singer v. Hara, 11 Wash. App. 247,522 P.2d 1187,1193. Marriage, as distinguished from the agreement to marry and from the act of becoming married, is the legal status, condition, or relation of one man and one woman united in law for life, or until divorced, for the discharge to each other and the community of duties legally incumbent on those whose associations is founded on the distinction of sex. A contract, according to the form prescribed by law, by which a man and a woman capable of entering into such contract, mutually engage with each other to live their whole lives (or until divorced) together in state of union which ought to exist between a husband and a wife.
- - -Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P.972
COVERTURE - The condition or state of a married woman... whereby the wife could not own property free from the husband's claim of control.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 366
PRIVATE PROPERTY - "As protected from being taken for public uses, is such property as belongs absolutely to an individual, and of which he has the exclusive right of disposition. Property of a specific, fixed and tangible nature, capable of being in possession and transmitted to another, such as houses, lands, and chattels."
- - - Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1217
Thanks to historical revisionism, folks no longer know WHY coverture was part of the marriage contract. The definition of private property is that which is absolutely owned by an INDIVIDUAL. So to preserve the married (joined) family's private property status (protected by LAW), only ONE person can hold title to ALL family property - the man. (If a wife wished to retain ownership of her property, she indicated that by keeping her "maiden name" - and absolved her spouse of his lifelong legal duty to support her. To illustrate, Queen Elizabeth II kept her family name, Windsor, and her sovereign status. )
In short, the "legal union" of each adult's property into one, for the benefit of the next generation, was and is the true purpose of marriage. However, thanks to national socialism, enumerated Americans lack the legal standing to absolutely own private property. Thus the socialist rules supersede the common law - by consent of the participants.
MARRIAGE LICENSE - A license or permission granted by public authority to persons who intend to INTERMARRY, usually addressed to the minister or magistrate who is to perform the ceremony, or, in general terms, to any one authorized to solemnize marriages. By statute in most jurisdictions, it is made an essential prerequisite to the lawful solemnization of the marriage.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P.973
INTERMARRY - see Miscegenation.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P.815
MISCEGENATION - Mixture of races. Term formerly applied to marriage between persons of different races. Statutes prohibiting marriage between persons of different races have been held to be invalid as contrary to equal protection clause of the Constitution. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 87 S.Ct. 1817, 18 L.Ed.2d 1010.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P.999
If you will please note, that the "legal reason" for a marriage license was for intermarrying (miscegenation). Free adults do not need a "license" (government permission) to marry. The definition skirts the legal reason why "mixing races" needed a license. A slave that is owned, cannot absolutely own a thing, let alone endow a child. In the event that the free spouse died, would the slave owner have a claim upon the marriage property held by the slave spouse? What about the child? That's the unpleasant situation that the license resolved.
Why get a license? The "voluntary slave" (via FICA) cannot endow his / her children without government permission.
Welcome to the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America!
If you will please note, that the "legal reason" for a marriage license was for intermarrying (miscegenation). Free adults do not need a "license" (government permission) to marry. The definition skirts the legal reason why "mixing races" needed a license. A slave that is owned, cannot absolutely own a thing, let alone endow a child. In the event that the free spouse died, would the slave owner have a claim upon the marriage property held by the slave spouse? What about the child? That's the unpleasant situation that the license resolved.
Why get a license? The "voluntary slave" (via FICA) cannot endow his / her children without government permission.
Welcome to the People's Democratic Socialist Republic of America!
Bizarre opinions. Not that being unusual is bad, but I doubt that the majority of mainstream Americans would agree with the opinions you've listed.
In fact, most laws aren't up for a popular vote. Some people act as if the public should have the final say on every law that's ever written. It doesn't work that way.
Not a popular vote certainly, but laws are created by the democratic process by our elected representatives.
But you are correct, many people hear "democracy" and think we are a pure Grecian style democracy, when we are a Constitutional Republic. Most people don't realize that legislation is supposed to be measured against that document before being signed into law.
Weird you would bring up the KKK, as 80% plus of the black population voted AGAINST gay marriage. I guess those 80% of black people in California don't believe in equallity for all.
A later recount of the votes showed that it was more like 54% of the blacks voted for prop 8, not 80%. And I would say that the blacks that voted for prop 8 do not understand or believe in equality for all, just for the chosen few. Most have forgot that up to the late 60's marriage between races was a state choice, not a federal law. Much like the way gay marriage is today, one state did not have to recognize the interracial marriage from another state. The federal government stepped in as they will eventually do with gay marriage.
I would show my face cuz homosexuality ruined my life!!! It destroyed my marraige. Now I have to share my wife with women just to keep her. I hate the idea of two men or women being together. the parts just dont fit. get a clue
So, because your wife hurt you, you want to inflict hurt on all gay people? Maybe you need to get a clue. Your wife was probable already gay when she married you and was either hiding it, or did not know.
"Sponsors of California's ban on same-sex marriage, which faces a federal court trial in San Francisco next month, have told the trial judge that his suggestion to televise the proceedings is both unwise and illegal.
Television coverage could expose witnesses and other trial participants to harassment and intimidation, backers of Proposition 8 said in a court filing Monday. They said some of their witnesses "have indicated that they would not be willing to testify" if the trial was televised."
If they're afraid to show their faces, maybe they could wear white sheets to testify - just like the Ku Klux Klan.
Did you forget that there are plenty of racists in the gay community as well.
Why do the gays constantly try to associate anyone who doesn't agree with same sex marriage as racist bigots?
The state of California already allows domestic partnerships, but as we all know that's not good enough for the gays who want to call it "marriage". So if you think that a public hearing on the issue needs to be had, then bring it on. I would take time off work to go to Sacramento to sit in on one of those hearings.
I don't get it, I mean, of course it might be weird to straight people, but if love is love then why restrict marriage? I've read articles on this and watched the news, but what argument is there? People love each other. They wanna get married. They're gay, or bi, and they can't. They're straight, they can. WHAT IS THAT?!
Yes, [i]marriage[i], properly defined, is a civil right. Gay marriage fails this definition.
Not really. You can't base anything on progeny, as has been pointed out by others, and "marriage" grants rights and privileges by the government that have nothing to do with said progeny. Rights and privileges that it CHOOSES to grant and which can absolutely be granted to homosexual couples without anything else or anyone else being effected. Those would be civil rights.
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.
I guess those 80% of black people in California don't believe in equallity for all.
