California Prop 8 overturned

[edgray]

A dictionary is not a rule book, it's more of a report. When we change the meaning of a word, the dictionary records the new meaning without questions or complaint. Words mean what we want them to mean.

:homo:

 

[Minor Axis]

Why?

(extra letters because the post nazi said my post is too short)

Because a civil alternative is needed to protect the rights of committed couples who don't belong to a church.

 

[Accountable]

Because a civil alternative is needed to protect the rights of committed couples who don't belong to a church.

Protect them from what? What does a church wedding alone protect people from?

 

[itsmeJonB]

marriage is totally gay

 

[Minor Axis]

Protect them from what? What does a church wedding alone protect people from?

Wha? A church wedding does not protect people from anything.

 

[itsmeJonB]

Wha? A church wedding does not protect people from anything.

not any different from a court wedding imo

 

[edgray]

Wha? A church wedding does not protect people from anything.

Lucifer?

 

[itsmeJonB]

Lucifer?

a gay wedding in a christian church.

isnt that like, an oxymoron or something?

 

[edgray]

a gay wedding in a christian church.

isnt that like, an oxymoron or something?

 

[porterjack]

Wha? A church wedding does not protect people from anything.

i think he meant protect their rights from what

 

[Accountable]

Because a civil alternative is needed to protect the rights of committed couples who don't belong to a church.

Wha? A church wedding does not protect people from anything.

I'm having trouble lining up these two statements.

A church wedding does nothing civilly ... okay that doesn't look right, but bear with me.
The only thing that a civil ceremony and a church wedding have in common is the marriage license - a legal document. If the government stops acknowledging marriage in any form, the legal document no longer exists.

 

[retro]

The only difference between a church wedding or one performed by a minister and one performed by a judge is the location the officiant.

 

[Tim]

I'm having trouble lining up these two statements.

A church wedding does nothing civilly ... okay that doesn't look right, but bear with me.
The only thing that a civil ceremony and a church wedding have in common is the marriage license - a legal document. If the government stops acknowledging marriage in any form, the legal document no longer exists.

So you are ok with doing away with the legal part of marriage?

A church cannot marry anyone, only the state can. The church only performs the ceremony.

You cannot have a legal marriage without the state, but you can without the church :dunno

 

[itsmeJonB]

A church cannot marry anyone, only the state can. The church only performs the ceremony.

You cannot have a legal marriage without the state, but you can without the church :dunno

winnar

 

[Accountable]

So you are ok with doing away with the legal part of marriage?

A church cannot marry anyone, only the state can. The church only performs the ceremony.

You cannot have a legal marriage without the state, but you can without the church :dunno

That's exactly what I've been suggesting since this controversy cropped up.

You cannot have holy matrimony without the church, but you can without the state. A church marriage is meaningless to anyone outside the church, but for the truly religious it's the only marriage that matters. Anybody can write a contract. For many, marriage is far more than a piece of paper or a tax break.

It's the commitment that's truly important. The legal crap is just gravy.

 

[darkangel]

You cannot have holy matrimony without the church, but you can without the state. A church marriage is meaningless to anyone outside the church, but for the truly religious it's the only marriage that matters. Anybody can write a contract. For many, marriage is far more than a piece of paper or a tax break.

It's the commitment that's truly important. The legal crap is just gravy.

I hate to say this but I am not truly religious and I got married in Vegas. It is the commitment that's most important. The hell with the church! I would never get married in a church because of the garbage that they shove down your throats about divorce. Holy matrimony is all in the eyes of the beholder...

 

[Accountable]

I hate to say this but I am not truly religious and I got married in Vegas. It is the commitment that's most important. The hell with the church! I would never get married in a church because of the garbage that they shove down your throats about divorce. Holy matrimony is all in the eyes of the beholder...

Thus my last line.

 

[darkangel]

Thus my last line.

Yes indeed!

 

[Accountable]

This November will be our 25th anniversary. I doubt she would get the same attention she did the day we met on the beach, but then again, today I'd probably say "why's that little girl wearing next to nothing with no parental supervision?!?"

 

[Minor Axis]

I'm having trouble lining up these two statements.

A church wedding does nothing civilly ... okay that doesn't look right, but bear with me.
The only thing that a civil ceremony and a church wedding have in common is the marriage license - a legal document. If the government stops acknowledging marriage in any form, the legal document no longer exists.

I'm having trouble lining up your statements in your previous post responding to me. I never said anything about needing protection for or from a church wedding. I said a civil marriage document is needed to protect peoples rights to get married , without having to go through a church. That is all, a very simple process once the requirements are set, such as who can get married to whom. Marriage is all about legalities, responsibilities, rights, custody, and ownership of property. Even the church marriage requires a marriage license, a government document. The civil marriage is a must imo. I know you know this.

* Are you really advocating only being able to get married in a church? If so, why?
* Is your deep seated mistrust of government is so severe, you would not trust the local Justice of the Peace to marry two people- why? I imagine if government can't handle this job, then according to you, government should be totally dismantled and we might as well rely on anarchy which might make Ed happy.