Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Legal union/versus Marriage


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Legal union/versus Marriage Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 3:25:19 AM   
meatcleaver


Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: leakylee

The colonies may have been founded to escape religious persecution, but they were still under the rule of England. And only tolerated what they allowed. So in someways morality stills rules the day.

lee


Many so called people escaping persecution were not actually escaping persecution but went to the Americas because they were too intolerant to stay amongst people of other persuasions. Why do you think America has more religious fundementalists than Europe? I live round the corner from a chapel the founding fathers visited before they left on the Speedwell to Plymouth to change onto the Mayflower. That chapel is still a black stocking chapel today and its congregation is known for being traditionally intolerant. Fortunately there are so few of them that they are looked on as freaks.

As for marriage, it is a legal contract and that's why it has to be taken seriously. Breaking the contract can be financially painful. I've been married and wouldn't marry again, perfering if a relationship brokedown both parties could simply walk away without legal entanglement. Most people I know who have been married say that piece of paper called the marriage contract impacts on the relationship in psychological ways that aren't always positive which was my experience too. I've never been on so good terms as with my former wife now we aren't married. The problem is if children are involved and then no marriage contract means nothing anyway. You have obligations and if you don't accept them there is always the court behind you with a stick.

As the saying goes- Marriage is a fine institution but who wants to live in an institution?

(in reply to leakylee)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 7:04:18 AM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom


quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

Many people, including the dictionary, make the mistake of thinking that marriage is a contract.  Marriage is not a contract, it is a covenant.  There is a difference between the two.  A contract can be broken by only one party, a covenant must be broken by all involved.  In a church marriage, that includes God.  The State cannot rule whether anyone can speak on behalf of God.  Homosexuals, whether they want to or not, can not stand before God and demand marriage.  It just does not work.  I guess they can go through the motions, but that does not mean it is valid in God's eyes, and that is what matters.

The State has no right to impose upon the Church to marry homosexuals.  They have no jurisdiction, thanks to Jefferson.  They have tried to sink their teeth into it because it is a cash cow for them, but as far as I am concerned they can butt out.

A legal union, on the other hand, is a contract that either can break.  Let the State dictate it.  It is their institution, they have the right to do with it what they want.  If the homosexuals want to marry, let them have a union.  Suits Me just fine.  After all, I believe in common-law marriages.  I am not a big proponent of Church marriages.


Isn't this a two-way street? If the State can not be permitted to impose homosexual marriage upon the Church, what right can the State call upon to prohibit homosexual marriage from the Church?

My church marries homosexuals. A large number of other churches also marry gays. If the State is as compelled to remain out of the affairs of Church as you claim, how can they refuse to recognize those religious rites which formed a marriage between same-sex partners?





If the Church chooses to marry homosexuals, I agree that the State is not in a position to not recognize them.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to ArtCatDom)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 7:08:40 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin
If the Church chooses to marry homosexuals, I agree that the State is not in a position to not recognize them.


Good deal. As a cavaet though, I'm a filthy Unitarian-Universalist and we let almost anybody in.

By the by, I just noticed your signature footer about Wicca. It gave me a good full minute laugh.

*meow*

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 8:01:28 AM   
sleazybutterfly


Posts: 2801
Joined: 5/15/2006
Status: offline 		my ex-partner and myself talked about marriage.. both in a legal sense and a religious sense many times over our four years together.  Though being recognized by the church was important to us (us both being christian).. we came to accept it wouldn't be welcomed in most churches. The main reason marriage meant so much to us is because of the need in ourselves to be accepted by our faith and the ppl in it.
It's all about legal terms..and the way things are put.. i can tell you that when we were trying to have a baby.. the last thing we worried about was what a group of ppl thought.. we were worried about being protected legally..and a legal union would have solved that problem a lot.  If something happened to either one of us.. it would have been nice to know that she or i had the right to be taken care of.. i mean.. we both pay taxes..and social security like everyone else..why couldn't we have the same peace of mind that others get.  Then whenever the whole "right to die" thing came up.. it was even more scary..what if something happened when the baby was being born.. i wouldn't have had any say in the way things were handled.  That is what it's really about.. i mean.. yes it's nice to be recognized by our church..but.. we live in the real world...and other things matter just as much..if not more.  Just because the church didn't want to see us.. doesn't mean God wouldn't.  i think we all need to put that in perspective.  The churches are wonderful..great places..but.. they are buildings just the same..God does not live there only.. so to us.. we could have had a legal union in the middle of the field..and it would have been in the sight of God..and no church or group could have changed that.  Marriage is in the hearts of the two ppl involved.. and nobody can change what is in those hearts by a few changes on a piece of paper.  

_____________________________

~Flutterby
~Curvylicious
Just when the caterpillar thought the world was over, she became a butterfly.
Life is not a popularity contest, it's better to be hated for what you believe, than loved for a lie.

(in reply to leakylee)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 8:32:08 AM   
petwolf22


Posts: 343
Joined: 9/5/2005
Status: offline 		im feeling the same way leakylee...

< Message edited by petwolf22 -- 5/30/2006 8:38:31 AM >

(in reply to sleazybutterfly)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 8:38:18 AM   
petwolf22


Posts: 343
Joined: 9/5/2005
Status: offline 		So if marriage is a "covenant before God" and i don't claim to any particular faith and don't really believe in God, am i being blasphemous by getting married?

Go inform the powers that be that for some reason consider marriage to be a contract....then they can just give all us non-believers the opportunity for civil unions and cut us out of the marriage pool altogether.

(in reply to petwolf22)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 8:51:10 AM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline 		Petwolf, just think about it for a second.  Go to get divorced.  You want it, but your partner does not.  Come back and tell Me what happens.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to petwolf22)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 8:52:14 AM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom


quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin
If the Church chooses to marry homosexuals, I agree that the State is not in a position to not recognize them.


Good deal. As a cavaet though, I'm a filthy Unitarian-Universalist and we let almost anybody in.

By the by, I just noticed your signature footer about Wicca. It gave me a good full minute laugh.

*meow*


lol.    Glad you liked it.  I thought it was funny too.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to ArtCatDom)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 8:56:49 AM   
petwolf22


Posts: 343
Joined: 9/5/2005
Status: offline 		Sorry, what is your point?

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 10:00:02 AM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		I already said that if you want to go back to the Declaration of Independence, that would be a reasonable view too.  That's even before the Articles of Confederation.  But please let's not pretend that the United States of America was founded in the 1600's.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArtCatDom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

No COUNTRY was founded here in the 1600's.  Colonies, settlements--sure.  But the country we live in was founded in 1789.  If you want to use the date of the Declaration of Independence, that's fine, but the structure of the country wasn't established until the Constitution was ratified.

Otherwise you might as well say that Italy was founded by Romulus and Remus.


What about the Articles of Confederation?

(in reply to ArtCatDom)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 1:26:11 PM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lordandmaster

I already said that if you want to go back to the Declaration of Independence, that would be a reasonable view too.  That's even before the Articles of Confederation.  But please let's not pretend that the United States of America was founded in the 1600's.


Didn't mean to imply that it goes back that far. Most people just forget about/ignore the Articles and the Presidents who served under them. I feel it's a great disservice to recognize the efforts of those brave men. Every one remembers Washington, but who remembers President Huntington's serious contributions to our early country?

I also mentioned the Articles because that is where you find the confederation officially named the United States of America.

*meow*



(in reply to Lordandmaster)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 9:56:24 PM   
HarryVanWinkle


Posts: 1720
Joined: 5/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMacComb

quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryVanWinkle
To quote George Carlin, "I firmly believe, looking at these results, that if there is a God, it has to be a man. No woman could or would ever have fucked things up like this."
 

George has a point. Or perhaps its that She made things right, true and good, and man (not mankind, just man) fucked it all up, lol.


This logic doesn't work.  After all, who made man?

(in reply to MsMacComb)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 10:24:59 PM   
MistressLorelei


Posts: 997
Joined: 11/7/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryVanWinkle

quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMacComb

quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryVanWinkle
To quote George Carlin, "I firmly believe, looking at these results, that if there is a God, it has to be a man. No woman could or would ever have fucked things up like this."
 

George has a point. Or perhaps its that She made things right, true and good, and man (not mankind, just man) fucked it all up, lol.


This logic doesn't work.  After all, who made man?


She knew that some inferior creature would have to take out the garbage.

(in reply to HarryVanWinkle)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 11:25:05 PM   
MsMacComb


Posts: 808
Joined: 3/30/2005
From: My Mothers womb.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryVanWinkle
This logic doesn't work.  After all, who made man?
 

Woman. She took a rib (from a jackass), added some hair (also from jackass), found two small eggs (made them more delicate in case she needed to kick or torment them) and a floppy stick (with a spring inside), deleted the "wo" from her name and just left it as man. Her mistake was not focusing on the brain enough. Somehow just enough jackass got mixed into the pot so most men ended up as barbarians.

_____________________________

Not looking for anyone for anything, any time.

(in reply to HarryVanWinkle)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 11:36:55 PM   
SirKenin


Posts: 2994
Joined: 10/31/2004
From: Barrie, ON Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: petwolf22

Sorry, what is your point?


My point is simple.  You can not get out of a marriage without both party's consent.  Therefore it is not a contract, but a covenant.

_____________________________

Hi. I don't care. Thanks.

Wicca: Pretending to be an ancient religion since 1956

Catholic Church: Serving up guilt since 107 AD.

(in reply to petwolf22)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 11:38:47 PM   
MsMacComb


Posts: 808
Joined: 3/30/2005
From: My Mothers womb.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin
My point is simple.  You can not get out of a marriage without both party's consent.  Therefore it is not a contract, but a covenant.
 

I don't know where your from but you have no idea what you are taking about. Divorce in the USA takes about 3 seconds and can be done with one party present only in a variety of situations. Your point may be simple, its also simply wrong.

_____________________________

Not looking for anyone for anything, any time.

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 11:41:17 PM   
HarryVanWinkle


Posts: 1720
Joined: 5/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMacComb

quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryVanWinkle
This logic doesn't work.  After all, who made man?
 

Woman. She took a rib (from a jackass), added some hair (also from jackass), found two small eggs (made them more delicate in case she needed to kick or torment them) and a floppy stick (with a spring inside), deleted the "wo" from her name and just left it as man. Her mistake was not focusing on the brain enough. Somehow just enough jackass got mixed into the pot so most men ended up as barbarians.


Hmm, you may be onto something there.  When you add in the problem of having put the brain in the wrong head, you just might have something there.

But wait, what about George's original quote, "No woman could or would ever have fucked things up like this?"

(in reply to MsMacComb)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/30/2006 11:46:28 PM   
MsMacComb


Posts: 808
Joined: 3/30/2005
From: My Mothers womb.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: HarryVanWinkle
But wait, what about George's original quote, "No woman could or would ever have fucked things up like this?"
 

George is a man. He may stand by all his misstatments, his misunderestimations and his quotisms.

_____________________________

Not looking for anyone for anything, any time.

(in reply to HarryVanWinkle)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/31/2006 3:01:02 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin

quote:

ORIGINAL: petwolf22

Sorry, what is your point?


My point is simple.  You can not get out of a marriage without both party's consent.  Therefore it is not a contract, but a covenant.


Please stop before you stick that foot any further into your mouth.

You need both parties consent to get out of any contract.

When I sign a contract to produce a piece of writing for a publisher, neither I nor my publisher can on our own negate the contract. If either of us backs out without the permission of the other, that is a breach of contract and the offended party is awarded damages for the breaking.

Marriage is not differant in this regard. If one of you commits adultery (breaking the contract), you can take it to court, show the contract was violated and be awarded damages (alimony).

*meow*

(in reply to SirKenin)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Legal union/versus Marriage - 5/31/2006 3:03:19 AM   
ArtCatDom


Posts: 478
Joined: 1/20/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MsMacComb

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirKenin
My point is simple.  You can not get out of a marriage without both party's consent.  Therefore it is not a contract, but a covenant.
 

I don't know where your from but you have no idea what you are taking about. Divorce in the USA takes about 3 seconds and can be done with one party present only in a variety of situations. Your point may be simple, its also simply wrong.


Um, he's wrong, but you're not presenting an accurate picture. In absence of violation of the marriage compact, it's exceedingly difficult to get a divorce in most states. In most of the states it's almost impossible to get a divorce without the consent of both parties or proof of violation of the marriage contract.

*meow*

< Message edited by ArtCatDom -- 5/31/2006 3:06:20 AM >

(in reply to MsMacComb)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Legal union/versus Marriage Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094