If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   County: So is gay marriage legal or not? State: Hell I dunno. County: So we can do whatever? State: Hey why not?   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 100
    More: Strange, same-sex marriages, gender neutral, county  
•       •       •

10151 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Aug 2013 at 6:01 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-21 05:04:47 PM
New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.
 
2013-08-21 05:09:47 PM
OK, so what I got from that is some counties are in court try to get it approved, the AG said it is not expressly forbidden or approved let's have the court decide, and one county said, Y'all are taking too long, we'll just start issuing them.
 
2013-08-21 05:15:36 PM

Theaetetus: Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.


If it does say "no person", then I find that acceptable. English doesn't have a neuter singular pronoun, so we have to make do with what we have.
 
2013-08-21 05:18:17 PM

exick: English doesn't have a neuter singular pronoun, so we have to make do with what we have.


I had a college English professor who suggested hiser as it was easier to say than heris.
 
2013-08-21 05:31:57 PM

Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.


Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.
 
2013-08-21 05:49:56 PM
maureenholland.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-08-21 05:51:50 PM

unyon: Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.


Or, you did. It's not clear which the statute refers to, so why do you presume one interpretation over the other is correct? Was this really just you attempting to look smart and failing?
 
2013-08-21 06:04:49 PM

cretinbob: [maureenholland.files.wordpress.com image 320x240]


Maybe you can't. Some people still know how to drive a hard bargain.
 
2013-08-21 06:05:03 PM
I really don't get the whole opposition to gay marriage thing. Marriage has always been about property. Its never been about love or procreation or any of that horseshiat. So why are religious people, who follow the Bible, that has the most cynical view on marriage ever written claim that marriage is about anything regarding heterosexual love?
 
2013-08-21 06:08:05 PM

Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.


That would seem to settle the issue.
 
2013-08-21 06:09:19 PM

Mugato: I really don't get the whole opposition to gay marriage thing. Marriage has always been about property. Its never been about love or procreation or any of that horseshiat. So why are religious people, who follow the Bible, that has the most cynical view on marriage ever written claim that marriage is about anything regarding heterosexual love?


Because the derp necessarily to believe in a violent pervert sky wizard allows you to accept pretty much anything you're told to believe?
 
2013-08-21 06:11:00 PM
And seriously, who farking cares? I am a straight male, and though i don't understand gay men, i have nothing against them. They are humans, and have the same right to happiness, marriage, the exact same things that hetro couples do. It affects my life not one iota if a man marries a man in my state, or a woman to a woman. I don't know them, and it has 0-affect on my life at all. Why should i give i shiat? I don't. And even if i DID know them, i still wouldn't care. They don't give a fark about my life, or how i choose to lead it..why should it be my business what they do with theirs? Its not. Mind you own business people, and we will all get along great.

/My 2 cents.
 
2013-08-21 06:11:56 PM
Great. I bet tomorrow someone tries to marry a cactus.
 
2013-08-21 06:13:27 PM

unyon: Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.


Are you one of those people who also gets upset when a reporter doesn't get the exact model number of a gun right when reporting on a mass shooting? Yes, gender and sex can be different but for most of society and the law, there's no difference.

As for a sex/gender neutral singular pronoun, extending the use of 'their' in include singular situations seems to be where we are headed rather than creating a new word.
 
2013-08-21 06:19:07 PM
How is New Mexico for ultra vires at the county level?
 
2013-08-21 06:20:09 PM
God bless you, New Mexico. You're pretty cool and laid back and sensible. If you weren't so goddamned far from anything meaningful and so filled with a whole lot of nothing, I'd move to you.

/also, I have a mild Kokopelli allergy
 
2013-08-21 06:22:25 PM

Theaetetus: unyon: Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.

Or, you did. It's not clear which the statute refers to, so why do you presume one interpretation over the other is correct? Was this really just you attempting to look smart and failing?


I haven't read the statute, but these things generally refer to the union of biological males and females, which is sex.  It occurs to me that we might be discussing two different things- I was talking about gender as it relates to the marriage participants (vs sex, which makes it a legal quagmire without strictly defined terms).

It sounds like you're referring to the gender of the language used to describe sex, not the actual sex of the participants.

/BTW- I am both look smart and failure, so there
 
2013-08-21 06:22:59 PM
The next time I'm in New Mexico I'm having gay sex, just to see what happens.
 
2013-08-21 06:23:44 PM

Cletus C.: The next time I'm in New Mexico I'm having gay sex, just to see what happens this time.


I jest.
 
2013-08-21 06:25:18 PM

EngineerAU: unyon: Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.

Are you one of those people who also gets upset when a reporter doesn't get the exact model number of a gun right when reporting on a mass shooting? Yes, gender and sex can be different but for most of society and the law, there's no difference.

As for a sex/gender neutral singular pronoun, extending the use of 'their' in include singular situations seems to be where we are headed rather than creating a new word.


If by "the way we are headed", you mean in near-universal use since before Shakespeare, then yes, we may be headed that way.
 
2013-08-21 06:26:08 PM

Uranus Is Huge!: Cletus C.: The next time I'm in New Mexico I'm having gay sex, just to see what happens this time.

I jest.


I joust.
 
2013-08-21 06:28:38 PM

cretinbob: [maureenholland.files.wordpress.com image 320x240]


No kidding.  These days, you're lucky if you can get two chickens and a bundle of wool.
 
2013-08-21 06:29:27 PM

unyon: It occurs to me that we might be discussing two different things- I was talking about gender as it relates to the marriage participants (vs sex, which makes it a legal quagmire without strictly defined terms).

It sounds like you're referring to the gender of the language used to describe sex, not the actual sex of the participants.


Yes, exactly. Criticism withdrawn.
 
2013-08-21 06:30:08 PM

exick: Theaetetus: Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

If it does say "no person", then I find that acceptable. English doesn't have a neuter singular pronoun, so we have to make do with what we have.


well, technically, we do.  would be pretty hilarious if wordings got changed to "its".  but i think that probably has too much history of negative usage with regards to trans* folk.
 
2013-08-21 06:31:50 PM

Cletus C.: Uranus Is Huge!: Cletus C.: The next time I'm in New Mexico I'm having gay sex, just to see what happens this time.

I jest.

I joust.


With meat swords!
 
2013-08-21 06:32:40 PM
Walt and Jesse can finally get married.
 
2013-08-21 06:33:50 PM

Cletus C.: Uranus Is Huge!: Cletus C.: The next time I'm in New Mexico I'm having gay sex, just to see what happens this time.

I jest.

I joust.


Don't GIS 'docking'.  Don't.  NSFW.
 
2013-08-21 06:38:01 PM

unyon: Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.


Jesus, you farking people are the worst.
 
2013-08-21 06:38:11 PM

cynicalminion: well, technically, we do. would be pretty hilarious if wordings got changed to "its". but i think that probably has too much history of negative usage with regards to trans* folk.


"it" (and its possessive sibling "its") have long, long been used to refer to things that are not people. It's not like you have to be a member of the trans community to be horrified by its usage either. "no person under age can marry unless it obtains the consent of its parent or guardian." Just as someone who uses English, that sentence makes me want to claw my eyes out.
 
2013-08-21 06:41:58 PM

PerilousApricot: unyon: Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.

Jesus, you farking people are the worst.


themurkyfringe.com
 
2013-08-21 06:43:02 PM

Lawnchair: If by "the way we are headed", you mean in near-universal use since before Shakespeare, then yes, we may be headed that way.


Pretty much. Too bad English teachers aren't on board. They're pretty much the last holdouts. Well, and of course the Grammar Nazis are on their side.

I did encounter a lawyer on here a few months back who insisted "it" was the proper word and seemed willing to argue until the end of time to ensure that everybody else used "it" in place of him, her, and their. It was a bit weird.
 
2013-08-21 06:43:55 PM

cynicalminion: exick: Theaetetus: Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

If it does say "no person", then I find that acceptable. English doesn't have a neuter singular pronoun, so we have to make do with what we have.

well, technically, we do.  would be pretty hilarious if wordings got changed to "its".  but i think that probably has too much history of negative usage with regards to trans* folk.

The word 'they' is also perfectly serviceable in that regard without resorting to 'its' or creating new pronouns.
 
2013-08-21 06:43:55 PM

Uzzah: God bless you, New Mexico. You're pretty cool and laid back and sensible. If you weren't so goddamned far from anything meaningful and so filled with a whole lot of nothing, I'd move to you.

/also, I have a mild Kokopelli allergy


It's more Zia symbol than kokopelli here. But there is some good and meaningful stuff here. Just not in great abundance.
 
2013-08-21 06:44:45 PM

unyon: Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.


oh don't start that shiat
 
2013-08-21 06:45:23 PM
Re the comment, above, that English doesn't have a neuter pronoun, that may be true now, but the original Saxon did: "man" and "men." The sex was specified by a prefix: "wo" for female and "were" for male.

So, if we wanted to, we could revert to that usage, and all male types would become, ta da: weremen.

Of course, all the werewolves would just be "male wolves," but that may not be too much of a problem.

That reversion would also correct any sex bias in any law not specifically restricted to apply to women. And, of course, women - as a downtrodden majority - deserve special treatment, eh?
 
2013-08-21 06:45:30 PM

Theaetetus: PerilousApricot: unyon: Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.

Jesus, you farking people are the worst.


Unyon, not you. I'm glad he/she had the opportunity of the lifetime to drop that zinger in
 
2013-08-21 06:46:16 PM

exick: cynicalminion: well, technically, we do. would be pretty hilarious if wordings got changed to "its". but i think that probably has too much history of negative usage with regards to trans* folk.

"it" (and its possessive sibling "its") have long, long been used to refer to things that are not people. It's not like you have to be a member of the trans community to be horrified by its usage either. "no person under age can marry unless it obtains the consent of its parent or guardian." Just as someone who uses English, that sentence makes me want to claw my eyes out.


i.imgur.com

Doesn't see the problem.
 
2013-08-21 06:46:26 PM
Strange?  More like COOL!

/Spiffy, at least
 
2013-08-21 06:46:41 PM

Bit'O'Gristle: And seriously, who farking cares? I am a straight male, and though i don't understand gay men, i have nothing against them. They are humans, and have the same right to happiness, marriage, the exact same things that hetro couples do. It affects my life not one iota if a man marries a man in my state, or a woman to a woman. I don't know them, and it has 0-affect on my life at all. Why should i give i shiat? I don't. And even if i DID know them, i still wouldn't care. They don't give a fark about my life, or how i choose to lead it..why should it be my business what they do with theirs? Its not. Mind you own business people, and we will all get along great.

/My 2 cents.


it's the same impulse that leads to old men patrolling their neighborhoods and turning neighbors into the HOA as soon as a blade of grass is out of place

BE LIKE ME! IT'S A THREAT IF YOU'RE NOT
 
2013-08-21 06:47:47 PM
AG is a dingleberry.  He may think the one man, one woman law is unconstitutional (I do, too) but he needs to defend it.  The best way to get it overturned is to fight it up to the NMSC and let them take a crack at it.  If he won't defend it, the issue won't get decided for years, and then there is the risk that all of the couples that took advantage of this "gap" get their lives shredded apart.
 
2013-08-21 06:49:18 PM
Come on down marriage-minded folk, we'll leave the light on for you.
 
2013-08-21 06:51:16 PM

PerilousApricot: Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.

Jesus, you farking people are the worst.


I'm not just being pedantic, TFA says this:   Ellins said he had carefully read state laws and concluded the "state's marriage statutes are gender neutral and do not expressly prohibit Dona Ana County from issuing marriage licenses to same-gender couples."

Gender-neutral refers to the language of the statute.  Fine.  But what's a same-gender couple?  We already fairly well understand what a same-sex couple is.  But based on the definition of gender, an effeminate man and woman would qualify, but a lesbian couple of different outward non-biological characteristics would not.

I'm sure this person misspoke, but it simply lacks the precision that both legal statutes and the language used to describe them should have.

BTW...

forums.watchuseek.com
 
2013-08-21 06:51:17 PM

tuna fingers: Come on down marriage-minded folk, we'll leave the light on for you.


I heard that in Tom Bodet's (sp?) voice
 
2013-08-21 06:52:20 PM

Bit'O'Gristle: I am a straight male, and though i don't understand gay men


You don't understand wanting food, a blowjob, and a nap?
 
2013-08-21 06:52:22 PM
Proud to be moving to New Mexico!!!
 
2013-08-21 06:53:45 PM

LeroyBourne: Cletus C.: Uranus Is Huge!: Cletus C.: The next time I'm in New Mexico I'm having gay sex, just to see what happens this time.

I jest.

I joust.

Don't GIS 'docking'.  Don't.  NSFW.


Don't look? Sounds like a cover-up.
 
2013-08-21 06:54:15 PM

tulax: AG is a dingleberry.  He may think the one man, one woman law is unconstitutional (I do, too) but he needs to defend it.  The best way to get it overturned is to fight it up to the NMSC and let them take a crack at it.  If he won't defend it, the issue won't get decided for years, and then there is the risk that all of the couples that took advantage of this "gap" get their lives shredded apart.


Embellish much?

You'd have your anecdotal wife #1 on her deathbed, while wife #2 can't visit her.  You'd have many couples with insurance issues.  But you would not have  all of the couples getting their lives shredded apart in the event some judiciary cried foul.
 
2013-08-21 06:55:12 PM

Theaetetus: PerilousApricot: unyon: Theaetetus: New Mexico statute 40-1: Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting, is essential.

... and, that's it. Lolz.

Interestingly, the only place where gender shows up in the statutes is regarding minors, specifying that no person under age can marry unless "he" obtains the consent of "his" parent or guardian.

Like the one line in the article, you've made the error that gender=sex.

Jesus, you farking people are the worst.

[themurkyfringe.com image 450x373]


i50.tinypic.com
 
2013-08-21 06:55:25 PM

BigJake: tuna fingers: Come on down marriage-minded folk, we'll leave the light on for you.

I heard that in Tom Bodet's (sp?) voice


Who didn't?
 
2013-08-21 06:58:06 PM

CrscntBufS: Proud to be moving to New Mexico!!!


Where are moving to?

I moved from CO to NM five years ago.  Love it.
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report