Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest seicer

Gay / Transgender Rights

Recommended Posts

Without getting into the debate about 'gay' marriage, how did marriage ever develop into a legal contract? I think the debate nowadays is so confused because when it comes to the State's involvement in the "institution of marriage," it's nothing more than a legal arrangement with sexual connotations. In many ways, two people can craft legal arrangements with almost all the characteristics of marriage except tax benefits. I see nothing wrong with, say, a brother and sister have all the same rights as hetero or homo couples, but then the rub is tax benefits which I think belies the bigger, and perhaps the more fundamental, issue underlying the 'gay' marriage debate:

 

How ought 'marriage' and legal partnerships be differentiated in the court of law? The libertarian in me says 'marriage' should be the realm of the church (or whatever) and the State should recognize any two person couple seeking rights of partnership. Thus the 'institution of marriage' and all the details of 'sexuality' and child rearing is left to the private sector to hammer out and the political tensions are removed on the government side. And the tax benefit schemes of marriage should be corrected with a new tax code which this country badly needs anyway, but that's a whole other thread...

timgunn.png

 

I don't see a whole lot wrong with what he said...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ If I were gay, I would push for "civil unions" and not "same-sex marriage," nation-wide ... the two are separate systems, but the the benefits would be the same. The key is getting it on a national level.

 

Sounds a lot like "separate but equal"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sounds a lot like "separate but equal"

 

 

Which is the gay marriage ace in the hole.  The Supreme Court would eventually get a case and would rule that homosexual marriage is a right.  I'd rather not see this country take that path towards it and instead remove marriage from state control (Civil Unions for everyone), but we know it works since it has already happened once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sounds a lot like "separate but equal"

 

 

Which is the gay marriage ace in the hole.  The Supreme Court would eventually get a case and would rule that homosexual marriage is a right.  I'd rather not see this country take that path towards it and instead remove marriage from state control (Civil Unions for everyone), but we know it works since it has already happened once.

 

This is really what needs to happen: separation of church and state. Civil marriage for adult pairs who wish it, and then the same with religious marriage. Any church perform ceremonies for whomever they want, or not. But citizens should have rights greater than those formulated within a belief-based, received-wisdom church community. Or as some feminists have said, "keep your cross out of my crotch". Classy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MTS:

 

timgunn.png

 

LOL...welcome to Dayton. 

 

In many ways, two people can craft legal arrangements with almost all the characteristics of marriage except tax benefits.

 

...except for something as basic as the disposition as ones' partners' remains.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sounds a lot like "separate but equal"

 

 

Which is the gay marriage ace in the hole.  The Supreme Court would eventually get a case and would rule that homosexual marriage is a right.  I'd rather not see this country take that path towards it and instead remove marriage from state control (Civil Unions for everyone), but we know it works since it has already happened once.

 

This is really what needs to happen: separation of church and state. Civil marriage for adult pairs who wish it, and then the same with religious marriage. Any church perform ceremonies for whomever they want, or not. But citizens should have rights greater than those formulated within a belief-based, received-wisdom church community. Or as some feminists have said, "keep your cross out of my crotch". Classy!

 

I don't quite understand this argument.  There already is a separation of church and state in the "marriage" realm.  Churches, temples, mosques, etc can "marry" whomever they want - gay, straight, whatever - and recognize that marriage as it wishes.  I could invent a church tomorrow and marry my dog and cat if I wanted.  The First Amendment protects my right to do so.  But the expression of my religion in no way forces the state to recognize that marriage under the law.  The state must accept all marriages that qualify under the law and must deny all marriages that do not.  On the other hand, Churches and other religous groups have much more discretion.  They are generally free to refuse to marry whomever they want, for whatever reason.  They are also free to not recognize any marriage they wish.

 

Sooo.... I must ask - when this GLBT movement eventually prevails, what will change that is causing all the uproar?  Churches will maintain the same discretion.  They will recognize and preside over gay marriages as they choose.... just as they do now.  The only difference will be the "legal" recognition, which ALREADY is totally different than the religous recognition.  If the people who are espousing this Libertarian viewpoint on this issue really sat down and thought about it, they may come to realize that the difference between their desired result and that of the GLBT movement is completely arbitrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[ If the people who are espousing this Libertarian viewpoint on this issue really sat down and thought about it, they may come to realize that the difference between their desired result and that of the GLBT movement is completely arbitrary.

 

Arbitrary, yes, but psychologically necessary for people to recognize a distinction. It's a long slow road to full acceptance, and we have to take a few extra steps to get there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ If I were gay, I would push for "civil unions" and not "same-sex marriage," nation-wide ... the two are separate systems, but the the benefits would be the same. The key is getting it on a national level.

 

 

 

Agreed

 

mmmmmmm separate but equal.  Seems I've read that arguement before:  Plessey vs. Ferguson I beleive.  It took 60 years to correct that mistake:  Brown vs. Board of Education (Topeka, KS). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^You keep tossing comments like that into the conversation Dan but fail to explain your rationale.  Man up and tell us why gay people should accept something less than the full gambit of rights granted by law to you and me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In many ways, two people can craft legal arrangements with almost all the characteristics of marriage except tax benefits.

 

...except for something as basic as the disposition as ones' partners' remains.

 

^That's my point.  Such legal mechanisms should be made available to any two consenting adults, regardless of orientation or relationship status.  That's none of the government's business.

 

I've never thought through all the kinds of gay rights because they seem so obvious to me.  If I was gay and in a committed relationship, I'd be working the system however I could to strengthen my legal standing.  Are Living Wills / Powers of Attorney options for gay couples when one is hospitalized or deceased?  I'm sorry if I lack perfect clarity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

In many ways, two people can craft legal arrangements with almost all the characteristics of marriage except tax benefits.

 

...except for something as basic as the disposition as ones' partners' remains.

 

^That's my point.  Such legal mechanisms should be made available to any two consenting adults, regardless of orientation or relationship status.  That's none of the government's business.

 

I've never thought through all the kinds of gay rights because they seem so obvious to me.  If I was gay and in a committed relationship, I'd be working the system however I could to strengthen my legal standing.  Are Living Wills / Powers of Attorney options for gay couples when one is hospitalized or deceased?  I'm sorry if I lack perfect clarity.

 

Most straight people take those things for granted.

 

It's hell working with a lawyer to do this if your partners family isn't aware. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We also have the "second parent adoption" debate here in Ohio that, IMO, is even more serious and urgent than the marriage issue.  Right now as I understand it, if a gay couple wants to adopt, go the artificial insemination route, or whatever... only one of the partners is "legally" the child's parent.  There is the argument that Ohio law recognizes shared custody agreements without going through the adoption process, but just as with POA's and living wills, the drafting of those agreements are logistical nightmares.

 

I know a lesbian couple that decided to have a child 10 years ago.  They loved each other very much and wanted to start a family "together".  One of the women was artificially insimenated.  Now, the birth mother has moved on to greener pastures with a younger woman and wants her former partner - the one her daughter refers to as "Mommy" - completely out of the picture.  Of course, they had an "understanding" but never put anything down on paper.

 

This is a problem.  And it is the child who suffers the most through situations such as these. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was going thru my foster parenting interviews, I was told that I must adopt the child and if I "get married" (I couldn't keep a straight face..get it straight face?), my SO would have to then adopt the child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was going thru my foster parenting interviews, I was told that I must adopt the child and if I "get married" (I couldn't keep a straight face..get it straight face?), my SO would have to then adopt the child.

 

Did you have to disclose that you were gay while going through the process?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was going thru my foster parenting interviews, I was told that I must adopt the child and if I "get married" (I couldn't keep a straight face..get it straight face?), my SO would have to then adopt the child.

 

Did you have to disclose that you were gay while going through the process?

I told them, right up front.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was going thru my foster parenting interviews, I was told that I must adopt the child and if I "get married" (I couldn't keep a straight face..get it straight face?), my SO would have to then adopt the child.

 

Did you have to disclose that you were gay while going through the process?

I told them, right up front.

 

Were you trying to adopt in Ohio or NY?  In Ohio, your SO probably would not be allowed to "adopt" the child once you had done so.  The Ohio Supreme Court rejected the idea of "second parent adoption" in a decision it issued, but removed that language upon reconsideration and saved the issue for another day.  However, the way it approached the issue is discouraging.

 

One of my sisters in an adoption lawyer in ATL and her firm is right at the head of the pack on this issue.  In Georgia, it all depends on the judge you draw as to whether the partner would be able to adopt your kid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was going thru my foster parenting interviews, I was told that I must adopt the child and if I "get married" (I couldn't keep a straight face..get it straight face?), my SO would have to then adopt the child.

 

Did you have to disclose that you were gay while going through the process?

I told them, right up front.

 

Were you trying to adopt in Ohio or NY?  In Ohio, your SO probably would not be allowed to "adopt" the child once you had done so.  The Ohio Supreme Court rejected the idea of "second parent adoption" in a decision it issued, but removed that language upon reconsideration and saved the issue for another day.  However, the way it approached the issue is discouraging.

 

One of my sisters in an adoption lawyer in ATL and her firm is right at the head of the pack on this issue.  In Georgia, it all depends on the judge you draw as to whether the partner would be able to adopt your kid.

 

That never really came up.  I didn't want a newborn.  Once they did the in home visits, the agency folks were like you would provide a very nice home for a child. 

 

Plus, I put the PR spin on a the "family unit".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive read that Ohio had one of the earliest laws protecting the right of gblt folks to foster/adopt, but that second parent adoption is out of the question in Ohio.

 

MTS, the agency said that if you foster then you HAVE to adopt? Is that part of the usual deal with fostering? Im thinking of looking into it in the next few years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive read that Ohio had one of the earliest laws protecting the right of gblt folks to foster/adopt, but that second parent adoption is out of the question in Ohio.

 

MTS, the agency said that if you foster then you HAVE to adopt? Is that part of the usual deal with fostering? Im thinking of looking into it in the next few years.

 

No..No.  I wanted to foster then adopt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Malawi 'gay wedding' couple deny indecency charges

 

Two gay men arrested in Malawi after getting engaged have pleaded not guilty to charges of gross public indecency. Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza appeared at a packed court in Malawi's biggest city Blantyre, where they will ask for bail on Monday. The pair held a traditional engagement ceremony over the weekend - believed to be the first gay couple in Malawi to start the process of getting married.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8434743.stm


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gay couple marries in Argentina

 

Two Argentine men have become the first same-sex couple to marry legally in Latin America. Alejandro Freyre, 39, and Jose Maria Di Bello, 41, tied the knot in a civil ceremony in the southern city of Ushuaia, in Tierra del Fuego province. Gay marriage is illegal in Argentina. However, the Tierra del Fuego governor issued a special decree allowing the couple to wed there.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8433240.stm


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same-sex marriage law backed in Portugal's parliament

 

Portugal's parliament has passed a law to legalise same-sex marriage, but rejected proposals to allow homosexual couples to adopt. The bill was approved with the support of the governing Socialist Party and other parties further to the left. Prime Minister Jose Socrates opened the debate with an appeal to back the law, saying it would put right an injustice that had caused unnecessary pain.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8448640.stm


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uganda anti-gay law 'unnecessary'

 

A Ugandan government minister has said that a proposed law which includes the death penalty for some homosexual acts is "not necessary". Aston Kajara, minister of state for investments, added that the government might put pressure on the MP behind the Anti-Homosexuality Bill to withdraw it.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8448197.stm


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uganda anti-gay law 'unnecessary'A Ugandan government minister has said that a proposed law which includes the death penalty for some homosexual acts is "not necessary". Aston Kajara, minister of state for investments, added that the government might put pressure on the MP behind the Anti-Homosexuality Bill to withdraw it.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8448197.stm

 

 

Very interesting buzz on Pam's House Blend and other GLBT blogs about how a cadre of American evangelicals have visited Uganda to incite people there to push for this kind of legislation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uganda anti-gay law 'unnecessary'A Ugandan government minister has said that a proposed law which includes the death penalty for some homosexual acts is "not necessary". Aston Kajara, minister of state for investments, added that the government might put pressure on the MP behind the Anti-Homosexuality Bill to withdraw it.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8448197.stm

 

 

Very interesting buzz on Pam's House Blend and other GLBT blogs about how a cadre of American evangelicals have visited Uganda to incite people there to push for this kind of legislation.

 

That would be what the left-wing media is calling "the Family" and allegedly includes Tom Coburn, John Ensign and Mark Sanford among others.

 

But I don't buy into the conspiracy theory that they pushed for a death penalty for gay people bill.  They probably passed along some anti-gay sentiments and preached that true christians are able to pray the gay away, but I highly doubt this outcome was within their contemplation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uganda anti-gay law 'unnecessary'A Ugandan government minister has said that a proposed law which includes the death penalty for some homosexual acts is "not necessary". Aston Kajara, minister of state for investments, added that the government might put pressure on the MP behind the Anti-Homosexuality Bill to withdraw it.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8448197.stm

 

 

Very interesting buzz on Pam's House Blend and other GLBT blogs about how a cadre of American evangelicals have visited Uganda to incite people there to push for this kind of legislation.

 

That would be what the left-wing media is calling "the Family" and allegedly includes Tom Coburn, John Ensign and Mark Sanford among others.

 

But I don't buy into the conspiracy theory that they pushed for a death penalty for gay people bill.  They probably passed along some anti-gay sentiments and preached that true christians are able to pray the gay away, but I highly doubt this outcome was within their contemplation.

 

Yes, I overstated. Apparently some went there and told them gay men were going to ruin their families, which is like telling an American that they're going to take our oil. This was the logical result. I'd like to think the Americans were just incredibly ignorant about the effects of their speechifying, but I do recall that it took quite a bit of prodding for said evangelicals to distance themselves from this bill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Courtroom showdown set to begin over same-sex marriage

 

San Francisco, California (CNN) -- They've been committed to each other for eight years and have four sons together, but there's a component missing in one Berkeley, California, couple's life that's out of reach for them: getting married. Kristin Perry and Sandra Stier's partnership is one that has taken center stage because of the ongoing debate on same-sex marriage in California.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/01/11/california.prop8.trial/index.html


"You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^

This court case is not going to end well, I fear.

 

 

That's the same thing a lot of people said back in the 1950's when Brown v. Board was heading to the Supreme Court.  But... I find myself in that camp.  I just can't see this Supreme Court, as constituted, finding in favor of this couple.  Everything that happens on the way to the Supreme Court is nothing more than colored bubbles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t ask when: Repeal of gays in military law years away

By The Associated Press

02.16.2010 8:58am EST

 

President Barack Obama, Pentagon leaders and even former Vice President Dick Cheney think it’s time to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military. But a repeal is probably years away.

 

The two Defense Department officials appointed to lead a yearlong internal assessment – Gen. Carter Ham, commander of U.S. Army forces in Europe, and Jeh Johnson, the Pentagon’s chief legal counsel – met for the first time Feb. 9.

 

As that study gets under way, officials were expected by mid-March to suggest ways to relax enforcement of the law. Of particular interest is minimizing cases of “third-party outings,” where a service member is kicked out after being reported by others to be gay.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/dont-ask-when-repeal-of-gays-in-military-law-years-away/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy should apply to everyone who wants to complain to their superiors about somebody else's private life. Live and let live.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New Mexico domestic partnership bill dies

By Ruth Schneider, 365gay.com

02.16.2010 3:03pm EST

 

The progress of New Mexico’s domestic partnership bill came to a grinding halt Tuesday as the state senate finance committee voted 7-4 against forwarding the measure. Supporters of the measure vowed to work on it again in 2011.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.365gay.com/news/new-mexico-domestic-partnership-bill-dies/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God I'm so sick of this issue. Can we please just let people enter into partnerships however they see fit and focus whatever meager energy our broken, shameful government has left on, I don't know, ANYTHING else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha yeah this does seem to sap a lot of political energy out of our broken, shameful government.  That's true for all the wedge issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God I'm so sick of this issue. Can we please just let people enter into partnerships however they see fit and focus whatever meager energy our broken, shameful government has left on, I don't know, ANYTHING else.

I thought that's what healthcare was about...that's turned out really we- oh, wait.

 

Sometimes, I just want to stop keeping up with current events. Is it really worth it? With blogs and all that, it wouldn't be too hard to just have a couple pet issues you keep up on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NH House rejects two anti-gay marriage measures

By TOM FAHEY

State House Bureau Chief

5 hours, 4 minutes ago

 

CONCORD – The New Hampshire House on Monday soundly rejected a bill repealing the state's new gay marriage law, voting by a two-to-one margin to kill it.

 

The 210-109 vote on House Bill 1590 came just an hour after the House rejected a proposed constitutional amendment, CACR 28, that said marriage in New Hampshire could only be between a man and a woman.

 

Opponents of House Bill 1590 said it would be wrong to backtrack and to deny gays and lesbians the equal rights they fought for the state to recognize.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?articleId=1717e12b-3723-49aa-a35c-e9a27445e9a3&headline=NH+House+rejects+gay+marriage+ban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cross-posted in the Religion thread

 

Malawi launches operation against high-profile gay and lesbian people

Fears of backlash across Africa as US evangelists accused of spreading religious zeal behind homophobic campaigns

 

Police in Malawi have launched an operation to hunt down and arrest high-profile gays and lesbians in the southern African state.

 

Fears of an anti-gay backlash across Africa are intensifying after the prosecution of the first gay couple to seek marriage in Malawi, and thousands of Ugandans demonstrated this week in support of a bill proposing the death penalty for some offences involving homosexual acts. Last week five men were arrested at an alleged gay wedding in Kenya.

 

Dave Chingwalu, a spokesman for police in Malawi, said a 60-year-old man was arrested yesterday and charged with sodomy. Chingwalu said he received a complaint from a young man that he had been asked to undress by the older man and was then sodomised. Police investigations had uncovered a network of high-profile people involved homosexual acts, investigations were under way "and we will arrest them all", Chingwalu said.

 

...

 

More at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/16/malawi-operation-against-gays-lesbians

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...