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.

(Seattle Times)   Washington about to make same-sex marriage compulsory   (seattletimes.com) divider line 223
    More: Scary, domestic partners, secretary of states, lesbian couples  
•       •       •

20520 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Feb 2014 at 5:14 PM (23 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-17 08:53:02 PM

iron de havilland: Before gay marriage was allowed in parts of the UK, right wing rhetoric was that with the demolition of the biblical union of a man and a woman, it would suddenly be great for fathers to marry their sons for tax purposes.

One of the Tory grandees was the first person I saw proposing this notion. I want to say Lawson, but I may be wrong. But then, Jeremy Irons weighed in on the issue himself, making the exact same point.

Nobody needs to point out how lack-witted these idiots are; they do it for themselves.

/But, it's absolutely mind-boggling that an actor could be homophobic.
//Jeremy's Iron did attempt a backtrack on his idiotic comments: here.
///Third slashy is obligatory.


I am pro gay marriage, but I think any co-habitating people should be able to get the benefits of "marriage", even if they are related. What would it hurt?
 
2014-02-17 08:55:08 PM

umad: iron de havilland: Before gay marriage was allowed in parts of the UK, right wing rhetoric was that with the demolition of the biblical union of a man and a woman, it would suddenly be great for fathers to marry their sons for tax purposes.

One of the Tory grandees was the first person I saw proposing this notion. I want to say Lawson, but I may be wrong. But then, Jeremy Irons weighed in on the issue himself, making the exact same point.

Nobody needs to point out how lack-witted these idiots are; they do it for themselves.

/But, it's absolutely mind-boggling that an actor could be homophobic.
//Jeremy's Iron did attempt a backtrack on his idiotic comments: here.
///Third slashy is obligatory.

I am pro gay marriage, but I think any co-habitating people should be able to get the benefits of "marriage", even if they are related. What would it hurt?


Like father and daughter?
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-02-17 09:01:02 PM

rkiller1: umad: iron de havilland: Before gay marriage was allowed in parts of the UK, right wing rhetoric was that with the demolition of the biblical union of a man and a woman, it would suddenly be great for fathers to marry their sons for tax purposes.

One of the Tory grandees was the first person I saw proposing this notion. I want to say Lawson, but I may be wrong. But then, Jeremy Irons weighed in on the issue himself, making the exact same point.

Nobody needs to point out how lack-witted these idiots are; they do it for themselves.

/But, it's absolutely mind-boggling that an actor could be homophobic.
//Jeremy's Iron did attempt a backtrack on his idiotic comments: here.
///Third slashy is obligatory.

I am pro gay marriage, but I think any co-habitating people should be able to get the benefits of "marriage", even if they are related. What would it hurt?

Like father and daughter?


www.fuj.cz

I'll just leave this here.......
 
2014-02-17 09:03:42 PM

ciberido: Which reminds me: Pandora has apparently decided I'm lesbian awesome, based on the number of Tegan and Sarah tracks it keeps throwing at me.


FTFY, from a T&S fan.
 
2014-02-17 09:11:16 PM

rkiller1: umad: iron de havilland: Before gay marriage was allowed in parts of the UK, right wing rhetoric was that with the demolition of the biblical union of a man and a woman, it would suddenly be great for fathers to marry their sons for tax purposes.

One of the Tory grandees was the first person I saw proposing this notion. I want to say Lawson, but I may be wrong. But then, Jeremy Irons weighed in on the issue himself, making the exact same point.

Nobody needs to point out how lack-witted these idiots are; they do it for themselves.

/But, it's absolutely mind-boggling that an actor could be homophobic.
//Jeremy's Iron did attempt a backtrack on his idiotic comments: here.
///Third slashy is obligatory.

I am pro gay marriage, but I think any co-habitating people should be able to get the benefits of "marriage", even if they are related. What would it hurt?

Like father and daughter?


Why not? If they want the tax breaks and shiat I say let them have it. It isn't like they would be having sex. They would be married after all.
 
2014-02-17 09:11:19 PM
Slightly off-topic but I was wondering is there such a thing as common law divorce?
If two people are not living together or acting as a married couple for a period of time, are they divorced?
If not, why not?
 
2014-02-17 09:13:03 PM

ciderczar: ciberido: Mad_Radhu: iheartscotch: Why would you do that? Sentence happy, marriageless people to a life of sexless misery?

Not familiar with the phenomenon of lesbian bed death, eh?


WTF is this, and no, I am NOT going to have that in my internet search history.
 
2014-02-17 09:13:40 PM
Hey, the authorities need to make it really, really, super, duper official so they can know who to blame when things go awry. (and the state can make more money)

It's really simple, in WA state, gay or straight,(ha!) if the state knows about it,(the relationship) it's going to be made official if the same household is utilized by the couple because otherwise women are helpless against big bad men. Really.  That the past has wrought so many legitimately rotten men, now all men, good and bad are rolled into one in the eyes of the law because hey, what if good ol' Mitch down the road kicks Linda to the curb for no reason? Why should she suffer and go without shelter and money?

That's why.(Also, the courts make beaucoup bucks off each appearance-CASH COW) And guess what, now gays will have to deal with it, although I am not sure how the courts are going to decide which party to screw over because with men and women, it's the men that end up being painted as the bad "guys" in the theater that is the judicial system.

So as a guy I have a new rule and a simple one: Never have a woman move in with me and to make it clear that my home is my domain and not to be shared with anyone from any romantic relationship.

Sorry, babes, you can't ever take my damn house.

/almost never hear about bad gals
//it is a money issue not a gay issue
 
2014-02-17 09:15:45 PM

rkiller1: umad: iron de havilland: Before gay marriage was allowed in parts of the UK, right wing rhetoric was that with the demolition of the biblical union of a man and a woman, it would suddenly be great for fathers to marry their sons for tax purposes.

One of the Tory grandees was the first person I saw proposing this notion. I want to say Lawson, but I may be wrong. But then, Jeremy Irons weighed in on the issue himself, making the exact same point.

Nobody needs to point out how lack-witted these idiots are; they do it for themselves.

/But, it's absolutely mind-boggling that an actor could be homophobic.
//Jeremy's Iron did attempt a backtrack on his idiotic comments: here.
///Third slashy is obligatory.

I am pro gay marriage, but I think any co-habitating people should be able to get the benefits of "marriage", even if they are related. What would it hurt?

Like father and daughter?


Exactly. The loonies on the right suggested that allowing the gays to marry would lead to fathers marrying their sons, while conveniently ignoring the fact that fathers marrying their daughters and mothers marrying their sons are, quite rightly, taboo.

But yet, they'd still consider marrying their children for cheaper taxes.
 
2014-02-17 09:23:03 PM

DarkVader: theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.

Well, you're now on notice that it will probably happen.

Like Washington, you'll likely get a significant amount of notice before it does, so you'll have time to choose to either dissolve, get married, or wait until it becomes a marriage with no action needed on your part.


This, you should begin the conversations now.
 
2014-02-17 09:23:51 PM

danno_to_infinity: ciderczar: ciberido: Mad_Radhu: iheartscotch: Why would you do that? Sentence happy, marriageless people to a life of sexless misery?

Not familiar with the phenomenon of lesbian bed death, eh?

WTF is this, and no, I am NOT going to have that in my internet search history.


Only with more comfortable shoes and tank tops.
 
2014-02-17 09:25:59 PM

ciderczar: danno_to_infinity: ciderczar: ciberido: Mad_Radhu: iheartscotch: Why would you do that? Sentence happy, marriageless people to a life of sexless misery?

Not familiar with the phenomenon of lesbian bed death, eh?

WTF is this, and no, I am NOT going to have that in my internet search history.

Only with more comfortable shoes and tank tops.


This is what I meant.
 
2014-02-17 09:29:48 PM
Isn't the joke "after a few years married, all sex is the same"
 
2014-02-17 09:31:31 PM

insertdip: I know this might sound crazy but marriage in our culture carries far to many religious overtones and I want no involvement with it.


You're doing it wrong.  There's nothing inherently religious about the idea of marriage.  I can see how you might be made uncomfortable if you happen to be an atheist living in a very religious area of the US, and you're constantly bombarded by religious overtones, but trust me, there are plenty places you could move where you wouldn't feel that way.

Marriage is not a religious institution.  It's a civil one.  Always has been.

Corvus: It's called Common-law MARRIAGE and it has nothing to do with a church.


Actually, no.  He's in Canada, and Common Law partnerships are not usually considered marriages there.

He's also dead wrong about Common Law having all of the rights of marriage, especially if he's in Newfoundland, like his profile suggests.

umad: Washington doesn't have common-law marriage IIRC (thank FSM).


Very few states do, actually.

Kahabut: This isn't a common law marriage thing, although Washington has that too.


No, Washington does not contract common law marriages, and it never has.

mbillips: you can't dissolve the marriage without a formal divorce


No, in most places you can't get divorced if you have a common law marriage.  You have to petition the state directly to dissolve your contract, and it's much more difficult than getting a divorce.

Corvus: I don't get your point. Just because it can only happen in 9 states doesn't change it's definition.


Correct, and once your home state recognizes your common law marriage, all the other states and the fed do as well.

insertdip: Buddy, I'm in Canada and I enjoy all the benefits of marriage without being married.


Not if you contracted in Newfie-land, you don't.

Warlordtrooper: You cannot enter into a contract unless you voluntary sigh it.


waityou'reserious.jpg
 
2014-02-17 09:34:18 PM

wildcardjack: Isn't the joke "after a few years married, all sex is the same in the past unless you impress the shiat out of some harpie who will only cheat on you anyways."


FTFM
 
2014-02-17 09:38:27 PM

Farty McPooPants: Slightly off-topic but I was wondering is there such a thing as common law divorce?
If two people are not living together or acting as a married couple for a period of time, are they divorced?
If not, why not?


IANAL, but the short answer is, "it differs wildly from state to state".  The even shorter answer is "no, almost never".
On the other hand, the scenario you're describing would most likely carry with it a lot of grounds for divorce, even in states that don't have "no-fault".  If both parties are amenable to the divorce, and have lived apart for a year, it's pretty cheap and easy to dissolve your marriage.
 
2014-02-17 09:39:51 PM

umad: Stone Meadow: umad: Washington doesn't have common-law marriage IIRC (thank FSM).

Not by that name, true, but if "the court decides that you've had a stable, "marriage-like" relationship, it can make a "fair and equitable" division of certain types of property and debts acquired during your relationship."
Source: http://www.washingtonlawhelp.org/resource/washington-property-law-for - unmarried-couples

Short version? You're boned.

You just really bummed me out, but thanks for the info. Farking Christ I hate this state sometimes.


Sorry about that, man. The only reason I knew about it is my brother's neighbor is going through that with is now-ex live-in gf. Fifteen acres on the water in Washington...she helped him make payments for like 17 years before they split, and now it's up for court monitored sale.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-02-17 09:45:46 PM

Z-clipped: insertdip: I know this might sound crazy but marriage in our culture carries far to many religious overtones and I want no involvement with it.

You're doing it wrong.  There's nothing inherently religious about the idea of marriage.  I can see how you might be made uncomfortable if you happen to be an atheist living in a very religious area of the US, and you're constantly bombarded by religious overtones, but trust me, there are plenty places you could move where you wouldn't feel that way.

Marriage is not a religious institution.  It's a civil one.  Always has been.

Corvus: It's called Common-law MARRIAGE and it has nothing to do with a church.

Actually, no.  He's in Canada, and Common Law partnerships are not usually considered marriages there.

He's also dead wrong about Common Law having all of the rights of marriage, especially if he's in Newfoundland, like his profile suggests.

umad: Washington doesn't have common-law marriage IIRC (thank FSM).

Very few states do, actually.

Kahabut: This isn't a common law marriage thing, although Washington has that too.

No, Washington does not contract common law marriages, and it never has.

mbillips: you can't dissolve the marriage without a formal divorce

No, in most places you can't get divorced if you have a common law marriage.  You have to petition the state directly to dissolve your contract, and it's much more difficult than getting a divorce.

Corvus: I don't get your point. Just because it can only happen in 9 states doesn't change it's definition.

Correct, and once your home state recognizes your common law marriage, all the other states and the fed do as well.

insertdip: Buddy, I'm in Canada and I enjoy all the benefits of marriage without being married.

Not if you contracted in Newfie-land, you don't.

Warlordtrooper: You cannot enter into a contract unless you voluntary sigh it.

waityou'reserious.jpg


AHEM:::
Currently, 10 states (Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah) as well as the District of Columbia allow common law marriages, and a NY common law marriage may be established if you were common law married in any of these jurisdictions.
Because Pennsylvania borders New York and allows common law marriage, the most common state for New York common law marriage to come from is Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania also has no specific requirements for how long a couple must cohabit to be considered common-law married, but instead just requires proof of cohabitation and a reputation of marriage, as well as evidence that both people committed to the marriage verbally.

TMYK
 
2014-02-17 09:57:23 PM

Z-clipped: insertdip: I know this might sound crazy but marriage in our culture carries far to many religious overtones and I want no involvement with it.

You're doing it wrong.  There's nothing inherently religious about the idea of marriage.  I can see how you might be made uncomfortable if you happen to be an atheist living in a very religious area of the US, and you're constantly bombarded by religious overtones, but trust me, there are plenty places you could move where you wouldn't feel that way.

Marriage is not a religious institution.  It's a civil one.  Always has been.

Corvus: It's called Common-law MARRIAGE and it has nothing to do with a church.

Actually, no.  He's in Canada, and Common Law partnerships are not usually considered marriages there.

He's also dead wrong about Common Law having all of the rights of marriage, especially if he's in Newfoundland, like his profile suggests.

umad: Washington doesn't have common-law marriage IIRC (thank FSM).

Very few states do, actually.

Kahabut: This isn't a common law marriage thing, although Washington has that too.

No, Washington does not contract common law marriages, and it never has.

mbillips: you can't dissolve the marriage without a formal divorce

No, in most places you can't get divorced if you have a common law marriage.  You have to petition the state directly to dissolve your contract, and it's much more difficult than getting a divorce.

Corvus: I don't get your point. Just because it can only happen in 9 states doesn't change it's definition.

Correct, and once your home state recognizes your common law marriage, all the other states and the fed do as well.

insertdip: Buddy, I'm in Canada and I enjoy all the benefits of marriage without being married.

Not if you contracted in Newfie-land, you don't.

Warlordtrooper: You cannot enter into a contract unless you voluntary sigh it.

waityou'reserious.jpg


Yeah, not dead wrong. Profile out of date. I live in BC now. So yeah, I do have all the same benefits as a married person.
 
2014-02-17 09:59:42 PM

Z-clipped: No, in most places you can't get divorced if you have a common law marriage.  You have to petition the state directly to dissolve your contract, and it's much more difficult than getting a divorce.



lolwut?
 
2014-02-17 10:01:14 PM

iron de havilland: The loonies on the right suggested that allowing the gays to marry would lead to fathers marrying their sons, while conveniently ignoring the fact that fathers marrying their daughters and mothers marrying their sons are, quite rightly, taboo.

But yet, they'd still consider marrying their children for cheaper taxes.


You sound like you're on roll, just like when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor.
2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-02-17 10:02:08 PM

insertdip: I'd be pissed. I know this might sound crazy but marriage in our culture carries far to many religious overtones and I want no involvement with it. Obviously people who are non religious get married but for me it feels like if i get married I am somehow giving credit to religion which is something I refuse to do. I don't judge others for doing it and I love a good wedding but it's not something that I'd ever do.

/Common-law
//All the same benefits
///Just don't call me married


Way too many words. Next time just say "debate me".
 
2014-02-17 10:16:25 PM

jst3p: Z-clipped: No, in most places you can't get divorced if you have a common law marriage.  You have to petition the state directly to dissolve your contract, and it's much more difficult than getting a divorce.


lolwut?


My mistake.  I was reading up on this stuff last week because I'm going through a divorce in a state that I haven't lived in for very long, and just now realized I mis-read the analysis. Scratch that.  It looks like divorce from common law is pretty normal.
 
2014-02-17 10:17:54 PM

mbillips: a particular individual: insertdip: I'd be pissed. I know this might sound crazy but marriage in our culture carries far to many religious overtones and I want no involvement with it. Obviously people who are non religious get married but for me it feels like if i get married I am somehow giving credit to religion which is something I refuse to do. I don't judge others for doing it and I love a good wedding but it's not something that I'd ever do.

/Common-law
//All the same benefits
///Just don't call me married

Marriage in America is strictly between the couple and the state. Even if you get married in a church, it's not a legal marriage without a state-issued marriage license. You can get married with no ceremony apart from getting said marriage license and swearing before a justice of the peace that you want to get married. It's too bad that religion has co-opted marriage to the point that it's perceived as a covenant with God. Fortunately, Las Vegas has taken tremendous strides to remedy that misconception.

Read the common-law marriage link up the thread. Not every state requires a piece of paper, although once they recognize your common-law marriage, it's EXACTLY like getting the marriage registered with a license (you can't dissolve the marriage without a formal divorce).


My point was that insertdip shouldn't see marriage as a religious commitment, since even church weddings aren't legal without state sanction. Only the state can declare a couple to be married. Sorry if I wasn't clear about that.
 
2014-02-17 10:17:56 PM

insertdip: Profile out of date. I live in BC now.


In that case, disregard that part of my comment.
 
2014-02-17 10:24:28 PM

gja: AHEM:::
Currently, 10 states (Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah) as well as the District of Columbia allow common law marriages, and a NY common law marriage may be established if you were common law married in any of these jurisdictions.
Because Pennsylvania borders New York and allows common law marriage, the most common state for New York common law marriage to come from is Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania also has no specific requirements for how long a couple must cohabit to be considered common-law married, but instead just requires proof of cohabitation and a reputation of marriage, as well as evidence that both people committed to the marriage verbally.

TMYK


Some of this info is out of date.  For example, PA abolished common law marriage 9 years ago.
 
2014-02-17 10:28:26 PM

Z-clipped: jst3p: Z-clipped: No, in most places you can't get divorced if you have a common law marriage.  You have to petition the state directly to dissolve your contract, and it's much more difficult than getting a divorce.


lolwut?

My mistake.  I was reading up on this stuff last week because I'm going through a divorce in a state that I haven't lived in for very long, and just now realized I mis-read the analysis. Scratch that.  It looks like divorce from common law is pretty normal.


CSB: When breaking up with someone I had lived with in Colorado for some time she threatened to claim common law marriage in order to receive spousal support. My reply:

"The judge is going to laugh you out of court when I inform him that you are still married to Chris."

/she wasn't divorced yet
 
2014-02-17 10:31:35 PM

jst3p: Z-clipped: jst3p: Z-clipped: No, in most places you can't get divorced if you have a common law marriage.  You have to petition the state directly to dissolve your contract, and it's much more difficult than getting a divorce.


lolwut?

My mistake.  I was reading up on this stuff last week because I'm going through a divorce in a state that I haven't lived in for very long, and just now realized I mis-read the analysis. Scratch that.  It looks like divorce from common law is pretty normal.

CSB: When breaking up with someone I had lived with in Colorado for some time she threatened to claim common law marriage in order to receive spousal support. My reply:

"The judge is going to laugh you out of court when I inform him that you are still married to Chris."

/she wasn't divorced yet


Biatches be crazy.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-02-17 10:39:55 PM

Z-clipped: gja: AHEM:::
Currently, 10 states (Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah) as well as the District of Columbia allow common law marriages, and a NY common law marriage may be established if you were common law married in any of these jurisdictions.
Because Pennsylvania borders New York and allows common law marriage, the most common state for New York common law marriage to come from is Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania also has no specific requirements for how long a couple must cohabit to be considered common-law married, but instead just requires proof of cohabitation and a reputation of marriage, as well as evidence that both people committed to the marriage verbally.

TMYK

Some of this info is out of date.  For example, PA abolished common law marriage 9 years ago.


Did not know, Thanks. However NY will still recog a CLM from other states it is legal in. Weird.
 
2014-02-17 10:42:58 PM

danno_to_infinity: ciderczar: ciberido: Mad_Radhu: iheartscotch: Why would you do that? Sentence happy, marriageless people to a life of sexless misery?

Not familiar with the phenomenon of lesbian bed death, eh?

WTF is this, and no, I am NOT going to have that in my internet search history.


"Lesbian bed death" is the hypothesis that since women seem to want or need sex less than men, and copulation tends to decrease with time in long-term relationships anyway, when you put the two together, over time lesbians (more so than heterosexual or gay male couples) would stop having sex altogether.  The "bed death" is the hypothesized atrophy of the lesbian couple's sex life.

What few studies have actually been done on the topic don't really do much to support the idea, however.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-02-17 10:55:44 PM

ciberido: danno_to_infinity: ciderczar: ciberido: Mad_Radhu: iheartscotch: Why would you do that? Sentence happy, marriageless people to a life of sexless misery?

Not familiar with the phenomenon of lesbian bed death, eh?

WTF is this, and no, I am NOT going to have that in my internet search history.

"Lesbian bed death" is the hypothesis that since women seem to want or need sex less than men, and copulation tends to decrease with time in long-term relationships anyway, when you put the two together, over time lesbians (more so than heterosexual or gay male couples) would stop having sex altogether.  The "bed death" is the hypothesized atrophy of the lesbian couple's sex life.

What few studies have actually been done on the topic don't really do much to support the idea, however.


LBD? And here I was thinking it would be more along the lines of actual death resulting from an ever increasing size of sex toy leading to eventual use of one the size and shape of a fire hydrant with a motor run by a pneumatic source typically used for demolition jackhammers resulting in internal organ ruptures.

Eh, a guy can dream.......
 
2014-02-17 10:59:51 PM

Yakk: What the hell? Do people want this?


My first thought too. The government can't legally modify an existing contract. But hey, puppies and candy for all, comrades.
 
2014-02-17 11:01:45 PM
TheSwissNavy:

My first thought too. The government can't legally modify an existing contract. But hey, puppies and candy for all, comrades.

YES THEY CAN!

/and did
 
2014-02-17 11:02:45 PM
a particular individual:
My point was that insertdip shouldn't see marriage as a religious commitment, since even church weddings aren't legal without state sanction. Only the state can declare a couple to be married. Sorry if I wasn't clear about that.

How is this so hard to understand? I don't see marriage as a religious commitment. Many people do and that is the problem. A marriage can be completely devoid of religion and still lend credibility to religion. So many people still talk about things like living in sin and I find it ridiculous. I just choose not to participate. Same reason that i refuse to get my child christened. The ceremony is meaningless to me and i understand that doing it would change nothing except that all the grandparents would be happy. I just refuse to perpetuate stranglehold that religion has on so much of our society.

/Lives in Canada
//Not surrounded by religious wackos like in the states
///Still can't stand adults with imaginary friends
////Forget the fundies, attack the moderates
 
2014-02-17 11:03:15 PM

theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.


As the article points out, Connecticut and New Hampshire already did this as well.  It seems the most straightforward solution when they have two differently named legal statuses depending on orientation and are trying to merge them back into one after gay marriage is made legal.

You might want to think about that situation.
 
2014-02-17 11:13:26 PM

TheSwissNavy: Yakk: What the hell? Do people want this?

My first thought too. The government can't legally modify an existing contract. But hey, puppies and candy for all, comrades.


lolwut?

Isn't bankruptcy the government modifying existing contract?
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-02-17 11:16:42 PM

jst3p: TheSwissNavy: Yakk: What the hell? Do people want this?

My first thought too. The government can't legally modify an existing contract. But hey, puppies and candy for all, comrades.

lolwut?

Isn't bankruptcy the government modifying existing contract?


Shhhh, don't take away their illusion......

/pay the IRS late and find out just how much the gov can change contracts without asking
 
2014-02-17 11:19:55 PM

gja: jst3p: TheSwissNavy: Yakk: What the hell? Do people want this?

My first thought too. The government can't legally modify an existing contract. But hey, puppies and candy for all, comrades.

lolwut?

Isn't bankruptcy the government modifying existing contract?

Shhhh, don't take away their illusion......

/pay the IRS late and find out just how much the gov can change contracts without asking


Hell, Judge Judy has the power to modify contracts.
 
2014-02-17 11:22:24 PM
It's almost like if you contract with the state, the state has authority over you.

/freedumb
//the same reason you are in deep poodoo if you do not sign the papers win or lose in court
///do eet or go to jail because you agreed the court is God
 
2014-02-17 11:33:56 PM

Gordon Bennett: ciberido: /Which reminds me: Pandora has apparently decided I'm lesbian, based on the number of Tegan and Sarah tracks it keeps throwing at me.//That's what I get for giving indigo girls tracks thumbs up.

Maybe you should confuse it by adding some thumbs up for some Lynyrd Skynyrd and Molly Hatchet songs


Maybe.  I do actually quite like "Free Bird" and a few other Skynyrd songs.

Like a lot of Pandora users, I have several different channels because the kind of music I want to listen to depends on my mood or what I am doing.  So I have an "energetic" channel for the kind of music I want to listen to while I'm dancing or exercising, a "Latina" channel for some good Latina/Hispanic stuff (like Maná  and Orishas, not that accordion crap they force you to listen to in Mexican restaurants), a channel for the music I loved when I was in high school, and one, ironically, that more or less is my "lesbian channel" ---- I call it "Radio Laramie" and seeded it from the Amy Ray song.

If Tegan and Sarah were to show up anywhere, one would expect it to be there (if Pandora seriously knew or cared about whether a song was "gay" or not).  But no, they showed up in the channel that was seeded from Metric's Combat Baby.  Go figure.

If there's any logical connection between Metric and Tegan and Sarah, it's beyond me.
 
2014-02-17 11:41:26 PM

ciberido: theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.

You can always decide to hold a wedding when and if it suits you, regardless of whether the state considers you married.  While it's certainly traditional to hold a wedding at the same time the marriage begins, there have always been occasions when people decided to have one without the other, or to have both but at different times.


Okay you're smart enough to know the answer to this, I was thinking only clerks or judges could do the marriage license thing then I thought of ship captains. Well women weren't originally allowed on ships ( bad luck, or something) What kind of traditional married thing is that?
 
2014-02-17 11:45:44 PM

theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.


Sorry, you got married regardless of what they called it.  You just decided not to have a wedding in lieu of your flash mob thing.
 
2014-02-17 11:46:36 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: Okay you're smart enough to know the answer to this, I was thinking only clerks or judges could do the marriage license thing then I thought of ship captains. Well women weren't originally allowed on ships ( bad luck, or something) What kind of traditional married thing is that?


That's a myth.  Ship captains can't marry people legally.
 
2014-02-17 11:47:36 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: ciberido: theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.

You can always decide to hold a wedding when and if it suits you, regardless of whether the state considers you married.  While it's certainly traditional to hold a wedding at the same time the marriage begins, there have always been occasions when people decided to have one without the other, or to have both but at different times.

Okay you're smart enough to know the answer to this, I was thinking only clerks or judges could do the marriage license thing then I thought of ship captains. Well women weren't originally allowed on ships ( bad luck, or something) What kind of traditional married thing is that?


Except that being a ships captain alone does not give legal power to perform a wedding. If the captain happens to be a minister or a clerk or a judge then cool, but otherwise not so much.
 
2014-02-17 11:49:47 PM

meyerkev: iheartscotch: hardinparamedic: Yes. YES. The Gay agenda marches forward.

Soon, my bretheren and systers, soon we shall march upon their churches, and FORCE them at gunpoint to marry gay couples. We'll even force straight, GOD-Fearing heterosexuals to copulate with the same sex under the bayonettes and arclights of our Gay-concentration camps.

MWUHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I'm actually surprised that they worded the bill the way they did. Technically, if you've lived with your roommate long enough; congratulations! You're married!

Yeah, that's common-law marriage.  Fairly standard.  That's how that biatch is going to steal the family house.  In another 2 years, she'll be "married", and then she can get divorced and take the house.

/Everyone knows it.
//Except the uncle who owns the house.
///*sigh*


What state is this in? Most states do not have common law marriage.
 
2014-02-17 11:49:58 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: ciberido: theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.

You can always decide to hold a wedding when and if it suits you, regardless of whether the state considers you married.  While it's certainly traditional to hold a wedding at the same time the marriage begins, there have always been occasions when people decided to have one without the other, or to have both but at different times.

Okay you're smart enough to know the answer to this, I was thinking only clerks or judges could do the marriage license thing then I thought of ship captains. Well women weren't originally allowed on ships ( bad luck, or something) What kind of traditional married thing is that?


Cecil Adams says it's largely a myth.  Bermuda and Japan are somewhat exceptional in this regard.
 
2014-02-17 11:50:24 PM

LrdPhoenix: theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.

Sorry, you got married regardless of what they called it.  You just decided not to have a wedding in lieu of your flash mob thing.

This can be a new zinger: Oooh you've been wedded!  Wedpown'd?

 No, I got it: Matrimowned!
 
2014-02-17 11:52:48 PM

gja: Z-clipped: gja: AHEM:::
Currently, 10 states (Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, and Utah) as well as the District of Columbia allow common law marriages, and a NY common law marriage may be established if you were common law married in any of these jurisdictions.
Because Pennsylvania borders New York and allows common law marriage, the most common state for New York common law marriage to come from is Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania also has no specific requirements for how long a couple must cohabit to be considered common-law married, but instead just requires proof of cohabitation and a reputation of marriage, as well as evidence that both people committed to the marriage verbally.

TMYK

Some of this info is out of date.  For example, PA abolished common law marriage 9 years ago.

Did not know, Thanks. However NY will still recog a CLM from other states it is legal in. Weird.


All states do. Just because you can't marry under common law in most states doesn't mean you're not married in those states if your marriage comes from another state where you can.*

*Still unresolved for gay couples, but it's only a matter of time, IMO.


insertdip:

How is this so hard to understand? I don't see marriage as a religious commitment. Many people do and that is the problem.

The problem is that you're allowing people who believe something that is incorrect to dictate your life decisions.

A marriage can be completely devoid of religion and still lend credibility to religion.

Only in the minds of idiots.  Again, why are you letting idiots make your choices for you?  Civil marriage is a civil right.  By refusing to exercise your rights, you're helping the people who want to take those rights away from others.

Same reason that i refuse to get my child christened.

How in the hell is this even remotely the same thing?  A christening is a religious ceremony.  A marriage is not.  It seems like you're very confused.  Like, if religious idiots suddenly started saying "Catholics take communion, therefore eating crackers and drinking wine are inherently religious activities", you would refuse to eat crackers or drink wine ever again because doing so would legitimize their claims?

The ceremony is meaningless to me and i understand that doing it would change nothing except that all the grandparents would be happy. I just refuse to perpetuate stranglehold that religion has on so much of our society.

Except that the ceremony when you get married actually serves a social purpose.  You stand up in front of people you know and love (or at least, know) and you make promises to one another.  This creates a bond and a responsibility that goes beyond just the two people agreeing to marry.  Marriages succeed because they support and are supported by communities of people.  Denying yourself that just because you've been made to feel like an outsider by intolerant religious people is a victory for them, not you.
 
2014-02-17 11:56:22 PM

walktoanarcade: LrdPhoenix: theropod: My partner and I entered a civil union in Colorado shortly after they were legalized last year. We made it VERY casual (flashmob ceremony at Red Rocks, no gifts, pay-for-your-own lunch at Hamburger Mary's afterwards). We went into it with the explicit understanding that it was NOT a wedding, otherwise we would've made a bigger deal of it (pay a photographer, invite out-of-state family, etc.). We have grander plans that I only want to do after SSM officially goes nationwide.

If the State of Colorado were to tell us all of a sudden: "Uh, y'all are married now," I would have a problem with that.

Sorry, you got married regardless of what they called it.  You just decided not to have a wedding in lieu of your flash mob thing.
This can be a new zinger: Oooh you've been wedded!  Wedpown'd?

 No, I got it: Matrimowned!


Well played.
 
2014-02-17 11:56:45 PM

tinfoil-hat maggie: I was thinking only clerks or judges could do the marriage license thing then I thought of ship captains.


In Pennsylvania, literally any adult (or group of adults) can officiate a marriage, thanks to the Quakers and their wacky anti-hierarchical religious structure.

LrdPhoenix: That's a myth. Ship captains can't marry people legally.


They can in Pennsylvania!  : )
 
Displayed 50 of 223 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report