why has the gay community ever just ignored the law get married anyways and ask people that support us to acknowledge.... wouldnt that deminish the law and delute, its power that str8 right wing f*cks hold on it....
and with the supporters we have supporting us ask they aknowledge it i mean of course resitence would happen at first but since it such a big deal -- its just an idea. i figured i throw out here.
2006-07-16 22:56:00 · 15 answers · asked by american_stallionn 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
because you wouldn't have the rights in law that are the only point in getting married. Otherwise a declaration of commitment in the company of those we cared about would suffice.
2006-07-16 23:14:10 · answer #1 · answered by unclefrunk 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ummm - that has been done. It was done in New York and California. And now it is forbidden.
There already are commitment ceremonies. That is all that can happen in a lot of States.
I think you are missing the point about why we want LEGALIZED marriage. All the rights of marriage like death benefits, insurance, taxes, child rearing/adoption - everything can be easily solved by this institution. But this institution is no good unless it is backed by the State. For example - civil unions - although a step in the right direction - are not nearly sufficient because they give significantly less rights and only work within the State it is performed. So once you leave the State, there may as well be no agreement.
It can be all well and good if the Gay community will acknowledge commitment ceremonies and all other such things as valid marriages. But try and tell that to the judge when someones estranged nephew / heir wants to sell a surviving lovers home that he has been in for the past 20 years after the death of the one whose name it was in when there is no will! A valid marriage would solve that problem - but in this case our gay friend is now homeless - though he might have been paying for the upkeep of the property for years. A committment ceremony would have no bearing in a court of law - even if the judge thought it was all kind of nice.
2006-07-17 07:45:12 · answer #2 · answered by Think.for.your.self 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are two aspects to the issue of same-sex marriage, societal and legal. There is no law that prohibits two individuals from engaging in a ceremonial marriage. If my partner and I wanted to, we could simply decide to hold a wedding and invite our friends and chosen family to attend. To prohibit this would be a violation of the First Amendment, in particular, freedom of assembly. If others want to recognize our committment to each other, then all they have to do is recognize it.
However, legally speaking, such unions are not recognized by law; no legal responsibilities or benefits are conferred by declaring a same-sex couple married. The exception in the United States is Massachusetts, and even then, the legal recognition only goes so far as state law is concerned. No federal rights or protections are granted.
What the religious right has done very well is to confuse and mislead the American public about what gay and lesbians are fighting for. They phrase their homophobia in terms of "protecting traditional marriage," when in fact granting equivalent legal status to same-sex couples doesn't affect straight married couples' rights. They have taken the issue and mixed the societal and legal aspects of marriage, whereas for us, all we want are the legal rights and responsibilities that straights already enjoy. Marriage in the United States is not simply a social construct, it is also a legal contract. Gays and lesbians have a clear constitutional right to the former, but we must fight for the latter. That is what the debate is about, and the more people that realize this, the better our chances. Power of Attorney is not enough; living wills are not enough. Same-sex couples desperately need the same legal protections that straight married couples have. Anyone who says otherwise is either bigoted, naive, or both. It's bad enough that many Americans have left the US to live in countries where marriage laws are more progressive.
2006-07-17 06:25:08 · answer #3 · answered by wickerprints 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In the early days, they did just that. What's being fought for now isn't societal recognition; the people who don't recognize our relationships now probably never will. It's a legal matter, and that's why the fight for law is taking place. Doesn't matter how many friends you have, you still can't see your sick or dying boyfriend in the hospital. Doesn't matter how much they say they agree with you, your recently deceased "husband"s property can be seized by them, often regardless of his intentions. There is a reason it's being done the way it is; for social recognition or even religious binding, those channels DO exist already.
2006-07-18 00:33:35 · answer #4 · answered by Atropis 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you just got married it wouldn't be recognised legally meaning it would only be symbolic which is fine but if a gay couple are wanting to get married for the same legal rights as str8 couple it wouldn't make any difference. The civil unions that gay couples in the UK is marriage in all but name and I think that's good enough.
2006-07-23 10:29:58 · answer #5 · answered by Sleepy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are many churches that would cooperate -- start with the UCC (United Church of Christ) and the Unitarians. Also most NASC (North American Spiritualist Churches) and Episcopal parishes; many Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Parishes, some United Methodist, all Reform Jewish Synagogues; Correllian Natavist Tradition Wiccan Circles; and so forth.
Reyn
believeinyou24@yahoo.com
2006-07-17 10:28:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is done everyday. Gay, lesbian, and bisexuals get married to whoever they love. Being married is to join hearts in love under God (or Goddess.) It is only under laws of the land that you don't have that equal right. Friends and family support it and they are your wife or husband. If you have or adopt kids then they know you two as married. You don't need a legal paper to make it true.
2006-07-17 11:34:40 · answer #7 · answered by MindStorm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you still wouldnt have the benefits of being married. One of those benefits is that its a pain to get divorced. Without a marriage legally recognized, I would be too afraid. What if you get a house in your name (since you cant share a loan) and if he ever left it would be impossible for you to make the payment. Yes we could have the label, but no benefits. It would mean nothing more than the words 'life partner'.
2006-07-17 07:20:41 · answer #8 · answered by stevepuff19 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's rather simple, first plan to live with your partner as a couple, you can wear rings for the symbolism, also in your wills give each other the right of a spouse. I personaly dont believe in marriage, not even between man and woman, do like Oprah!
2006-07-17 07:07:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the government really should be baned from getting involved in marriage. If we didn't have to have a marriage license period then the government would not have the right to say who can and can not get married.
I think the whole marriage license issue should be removed from our society and turn it back into a religious ceremony.
2006-07-17 12:10:08 · answer #10 · answered by ♂ Randy W. ♂ 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋