|
size1one posted:The hoops are pretty basic, at least in some places. I was legally married by a friend who became a minister online. Our ceremony was literally him making an exaggerated fist pump. We had zero issues getting our marriage certificate or a permanent residence visa for my wife using it. Our only problem was that a gay friend boycotted the wedding out of protest. (we weren't hurt in the least). Pretty much. In Minnesota you don't have to be an ordained anything, just fill out a form that registers you as an officiant so that your signature if valid on the marriage license. Hell, our officiant was a gay guy. That didn't sit too well with grandma-in-law but whatever, it didn't even cross our loving minds until older family members bitched about it.
|
# ? Feb 23, 2012 16:25 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 13:22 |
|
blackguy32 posted:To add more to the discussion, this is about controlling what is seen as "normal". After reading Navigating Interracial Borders, a book about interracial relationships and how society views them, the author shows that Americans use marriage as a method to constitute what is normal. Its the reason why interracial marriages are frowned upon in the United States and why many religious conservatives are fighting so hard to keep gays from getting the right to marry. Well it looks like my idea is bunk anyways since it looks like any random person can gain the rights to make marriages official, not just priests. My idea was to make marriage "nothing special" by removing the legal rights from the religious organizations so that all they can perform are unofficial ceremonies but clearly I was confused about how things work.
|
# ? Feb 23, 2012 18:04 |
|
BattleMaster posted:Well it looks like my idea is bunk anyways since it looks like any random person can gain the rights to make marriages official, not just priests. My idea was to make marriage "nothing special" by removing the legal rights from the religious organizations so that all they can perform are unofficial ceremonies but clearly I was confused about how things work. The way it works here () is you absolutely must get married by the state at the city hall by the mayor or an appointee first and after that you can go do whatever religious thing you want. For obvious reasons I can't see Americans being too happy with that sort of thing. Maybe if it was the Sheriff, right wingers seem to love Sheriffs for some reason.
|
# ? Feb 23, 2012 18:15 |
|
Senate in the US state of Maryland approves legalisation of same-sex marriage Breaking - BBC Very good.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 01:16 |
|
Is the Maryland governor expected to sign this tonight? Also, what drink would be very traditionally "Maryland"? My circle of friends has a tradition of drinking in celebration of each state as it passes marriage equality, but we're Westerners and never know anything about these East Coast states
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 01:24 |
|
MrChupon posted:Is the Maryland governor expected to sign this tonight? Crab juice and cocaine?
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 01:32 |
|
The article I read on The Huffington Post stated the governor is expected to sign it. I'd link to it if I had access to my laptop, sorry.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 01:33 |
|
The Battle Axe posted:The article I read on The Huffington Post stated the governor is expected to sign it. I'd link to it if I had access to my laptop, sorry. Considering he helped shepherd it through, it's not a surprise that he's signing. IIRC, the bill doesn't take effect until January 1, 2013, though.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 01:37 |
|
Patter Song posted:Considering he helped shepherd it through, it's not a surprise that he's signing. IIRC, the bill doesn't take effect until January 1, 2013, though. From what I heard, that's right. One Republican senator tried to amend the bill to make it take effect earlier...which would put it up for a revote in the House. That and a few other, worse amendments were rejected.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 01:45 |
|
MrChupon posted:Is the Maryland governor expected to sign this tonight? Natty Bo
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 01:54 |
|
MrChupon posted:Is the Maryland governor expected to sign this tonight? You'll never find it outside of Maryland, but National Bohemian Beer, colloquially known as Natty Boh.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 02:04 |
|
blackguy32 posted:Its the reason why interracial marriages are frowned upon in the United States and why many religious conservatives are fighting so hard to keep gays from getting the right to marry. quote:In Gallup polls asking "do you approve or disapprove" of marriage between blacks and whites, the results have shifted dramatically over the past half century.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 02:21 |
|
ChadSexington posted:You'll never find it outside of Maryland, but National Bohemian Beer, colloquially known as Natty Boh. Ah yeah I think I did know about Natty Boh from when I had a guy from Baltimore at my work, but not even the giant liquor warehouses here in Colorado carried it and we checked several. Thanks anyhow.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 02:25 |
|
MrChupon posted:Also, what drink would be very traditionally "Maryland"? My circle of friends has a tradition of drinking in celebration of each state as it passes marriage equality, but we're Westerners and never know anything about these East Coast states "Which beer is cheapest?" Is what I hear at bars a lot.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 03:10 |
There are enough signatures and Maine will have a ballot initiative to legalize same sex marriage in November. Vote YES. Marriage lost in 2009 with only 47.25%.
|
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 18:03 |
I have a question about the religious side of the marriage equality movement. Has there been any legal push by religious establishments which do support same sex marriage? I would think that would be an extraordinary powerful case because you can make the argument that by banning same sex marriage the states are enshrining the beliefs of one religious belief system in law to the direct detriment of another, without a pressing state interest in doing so.
|
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 19:01 |
|
I've seen that map in the OP a few places before and every time it makes my eyes bleed. Those red and blue stripes give me migranes!! In fact, I hate it so much that I made this one today: do you want to add it to the op or replace the one in the op? With this one, it's easier to see at a glance which states have any sort of same-sex unions. The constitutions and statues are presented as clear objects, so it's easy to see where they exist. So rather than looking at two clashing colors you're only looking for the presence one color and the presence of one icon. Polo-Rican fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Feb 24, 2012 |
# ? Feb 24, 2012 20:22 |
|
I think it's great that so many states are voting on marriage equality this year - between that and the presidential election, it keeps religious groups from piling their money into a single state. It'll still be rough, but every little bit helps.
|
# ? Feb 24, 2012 20:27 |
Marriage equality possibly coming to the ballot in Ohio.quote:The Freedom to Marry Coalition expects to file more than 1,700 signatures of registered Ohio voters; 1,000 valid signatures are required in the first step of placing a constitutional issue before Ohio voters this fall or possibly next year.
|
|
# ? Mar 1, 2012 14:49 |
|
Governor O'Malley just signed Maryland's Civil Marriage Protection Act Now for the referendum...
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 00:17 |
|
VROOM VROOM posted:Now for the referendum... I'm going to miss all of this the fun in the Fall. I live in MD but will be moving to CA for a while. So I guess it's kinda the same but CA is a bit farther along.
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 01:43 |
|
Cicero posted:Well, used to be frowned upon, anyway. But this is precisely what the book is about. People will say one thing, especially in public for polls, but when it came to putting it into practice, they were much more likely to disapprove. Interracial marriage was always A-Ok with people until they found out it was their daughter that was going to marry a black guy or vice versa. Although I don't know how similar the statistics are for LBGT stuff. blackguy32 fucked around with this message at 03:23 on Mar 2, 2012 |
# ? Mar 2, 2012 03:20 |
|
VROOM VROOM posted:Governor O'Malley just signed Maryland's Civil Marriage Protection Act More than likely, I'll be voting for the first time ever, just to vote no on this referendum and tell conservatives to go gently caress themselves.
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 03:30 |
|
blackguy32 posted:But this is precisely what the book is about. People will say one thing, especially in public for polls, but when it came to putting it into practice, they were much more likely to disapprove. Interracial marriage was always A-Ok with people until they found out it was their daughter that was going to marry a black guy or vice versa. Although I don't know how similar the statistics are for LBGT stuff. I'm not sure there's a hard rule about this either way. I mean there's plenty of scummy people that say bunches of dumb poo poo until they actually know someone in their close family that's going through whatever. I think it's more likely that people are willing to make blanket statements about stuff they don't understand, and then retract or make exceptions when it finally touches their lives. Though, like you said, maybe this reverses depending on the issue.
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 03:51 |
|
VROOM VROOM posted:Governor O'Malley just signed Maryland's Civil Marriage Protection Act I was going to update the map I made until I read that this wouldn't take effect until January of 2013? I guess it takes a state 11 months to "prepare" for gay marriage.
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 15:46 |
Polo-Rican posted:I was going to update the map I made until I read that this wouldn't take effect until January of 2013? I guess it takes a state 11 months to "prepare" for gay marriage. It really is just so that there isn't a lawsuit to stop it while a referendum happens, isn't it?
|
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 15:49 |
|
U.S. having the state system makes it exist in this wierd limbo where it is both more progressive and less progressive then my country. Yes, you have gay marriages, that is awesome and I am ashamed that my country doesn't. Buuuuuttt then you have places where you can't even have same-sex civil unions...just strange, is all.
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 16:17 |
Polo-Rican posted:I was going to update the map I made until I read that this wouldn't take effect until January of 2013? I guess it takes a state 11 months to "prepare" for gay marriage. ...Also there's going to be a second marriage referendum (1192) in Washington that we need to vote No on because it's easy to abuse the process and confuse voters. Delaying the bill in Maryland was a compromise that brought in some necessary votes at the cost of losing 1 month of marriage licenses before Election Day. If you want to bitch about a totally needless delay check out Hawaii. July 2010: Governor vetoes civil unions bill. February 2011: New Governor approves civil unions. July 2011: Three other states have already implemented their 2011 marriage/civil union laws. January 2012: Civil union law goes into effect. e: If anyone lives in Colorado and has a GOP state representative, please harass them over civil unions. We still need a Repulican sponsor for the House bill to have any hope of getting out of committee. Anything will help but these votes should be easier to get. quote:Republican representatives that have publicly endorsed the bill but have yet to attach their name to the legislation include Reps. Kevin Priola, Laura Bradford, and Larry Liston UltimoDragonQuest fucked around with this message at 05:56 on Mar 5, 2012 |
|
# ? Mar 2, 2012 18:21 |
|
silvergoose posted:It really is just so that there isn't a lawsuit to stop it while a referendum happens, isn't it? I think the main cause for the delays is just giving the various fence-sitters the ability to boot responsibility onto their constituents "I voted yes because I knew it was going to referendum. Because this should be up to YOU the public to decide not little ol'me". The threshold for referendum is only 55,736 signatures, which is probably going to be reached after a couple Sunday Church drives. Since this came up in the last Legislative session, the anti-ssm side supposed built an online signature verification system to help them combat any challenges to their support numbers. Lawsuits are another issue though. There was an amendment that passed in the House of Delegates that puts a stay on implementation if there are any ongoing lawsuits (I assume ongoing prior 1/1/13). So even if we win the referendum, California could still possibly beat us to legalization. I'm really upbeat about the New Jersey referendum numbers. Quinnipiac University is showing 57-37 in support of SSM, but I really like how Catholics are in favor 52-43. That combined with 98% of Catholic women use contraceptives just goes to show how out of touch the Bishops are.
|
# ? Mar 5, 2012 05:39 |
Those polls are nice but I would be shocked and very unhappy if the legislature tried to pass a referendum. New Jersey does not exist in a bubble and allowing a legislated referendum would make it harder to get "moderate" legislators in other states to vote for marriage/union laws. Waiting sucks, but a legislated referendum messes with the process well beyond NJ. There are 21 months to override the veto and a very viable lawsuit in superior court. e: 3/8 New poll in Maryland poll (PPP) has marriage winning 52-44 in a specific question about a referendum. No details/crosstabs yet. UltimoDragonQuest fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Mar 9, 2012 |
|
# ? Mar 5, 2012 06:18 |
|
Another state legislature is taking on gay marriage! Oh wait... they want to repeal it after it was legalized. quote:New Hampshire lawmakers are considering whether to take the first step toward making their state legislature the first one to repeal a gay marriage law, even as the governor threatens a veto. Republicans: looking at the marriage clusterfuck in California and saying, "Yeah, that seems like a reasonable compromise."
|
# ? Mar 21, 2012 16:56 |
Yeah they're finally voting in the NH House today. If you live in New Hampshire, please contact your legislators. I'm sure we would win any lawsuit but that will take a long time and waste a ton of money. @NHFamilies has a good liveblog of the House floor. There's also an audio stream if you are compelled to hear warnings of man on dog and box turtle marriages. e: Man I was totally wrong about this. Repeal failed 133-202 (63 abstained!) Bill was declared inexpedient 211-116 and is completely dead. We won! UltimoDragonQuest fucked around with this message at 22:36 on Mar 21, 2012 |
|
# ? Mar 21, 2012 21:59 |
|
Awesome! But unfortunately an admendment to the bill that would ban marriage between lefties also failed
|
# ? Mar 21, 2012 23:49 |
|
Crazy victor! Any reasons why the it got shot down? The huffpo piece makes it sound like repealing rights already given and the amendment for the non-binding referendum were the main causes. It is interesting when you read the comments by some opponents to SSM make resigned statements to it passing like Maryland Senate President Mike Miller's "I am probably on the wrong side of history opposing this". I'm used to most anti-SSM making comments more along the lines "I will fight this to the grave, and then my quiver full of children will carry on in my name!""Huffington Post posted:State Rep. David Welch, R-Kingston, said he had opposed gay marriage, but the time for a repeal was past because "the Legislature has given certain rights to members of our community and now we're being asked to take them away. Also I enjoy Thomas Roberts whenever he does SSM segments like today's, especially when the supporter for SSM marriage is New Hampshire republican and the opponent is Brian Brown in Philly. Around the 4:50 mark Roberts starts getting a bit into the Brown. I particularly enjoy when he asks the "How exactly has this weakened heterosexual marriage? No one cited it in their divorce". Though eye rolling when Brown says fighting same sex marriage is a First Amendment battle, worked in one right wing fight keep slinging it until it sticks in another. MSNB Interview New Hampshire Bill 3/21
|
# ? Mar 22, 2012 01:20 |
|
Irishdrunk posted:Crazy victor! Any reasons why the it got shot down? The huffpo piece makes it sound like repealing rights already given and the amendment for the non-binding referendum were the main causes. It is interesting when you read the comments by some opponents to SSM make resigned statements to it passing like Maryland Senate President Mike Miller's "I am probably on the wrong side of history opposing this". I'm used to most anti-SSM making comments more along the lines "I will fight this to the grave, and then my quiver full of children will carry on in my name!" New Hampshire (and New England) Republicans are quite a bit different from ones in the rest of the country. I've always felt they're more ideologically driven than religiously so. So, they would see that taking away something they had already given was a terrible idea. As well, New Hampshire with it's libertarian streak is the perfect place for SSM.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2012 15:33 |
|
Kem Rixen posted:New Hampshire (and New England) Republicans are quite a bit different from ones in the rest of the country. I've always felt they're more ideologically driven than religiously so. So, they would see that taking away something they had already given was a terrible idea. As well, New Hampshire with it's libertarian streak is the perfect place for SSM. There was also, until fairly recently, enclaves of holdout Rockefeller Republicanism in New England generally and Vermont in particular, which tends to be more inclined towards not joining the larger GOP in these stupid culture war crusades.
|
# ? Mar 22, 2012 21:51 |
|
Kem Rixen posted:New Hampshire (and New England) Republicans are quite a bit different from ones in the rest of the country. I've always felt they're more ideologically driven than religiously so. So, they would see that taking away something they had already given was a terrible idea. As well, New Hampshire with it's libertarian streak is the perfect place for SSM. Yeah, "Live Free or Die" is actually taken moderately seriously by a lot of people here. e- I'd have to look at statistics, but religion isn't really a big deal up here.
|
# ? Mar 24, 2012 19:45 |
|
Polo-Rican posted:When Maryland is added to this map, here's how it breaks down by population:
That's pretty impressive to me considering most these laws were passed in just the last few years. I know that for gay Americans wanting to get married, equality can never come fast enough, but the sweeping pace of progress is pretty undeniable, and in my opinion, cause for optimism. My prediction is that within a decade or so, conservative politicians will realize that gay rights is an issue they just can't win on, and you'll see fewer and fewer mainstream Republicans willing to fight about it.
|
# ? Mar 24, 2012 20:59 |
Corrupt Politician posted:When Maryland is added to this map, here's how it breaks down by population: 2009: NH, VT, NV and WA passed something similar CO and WI passed limited rights. 2010: DC passed marriage. 2011: NY passed marriage. RI, DE, IL, HI passed something similar. 2012: WA, MD passed marriage. Vetoed in NJ.
|
|
# ? Mar 24, 2012 21:16 |
|
|
# ? Apr 28, 2024 13:22 |
|
UltimoDragonQuest posted:...Also there's going to be a second marriage referendum (1192) in Washington that we need to vote No on because it's easy to abuse the process and confuse voters. Could they legally keep this off the ballot by saying it's redundant? Also, looking at that list, we need a referendum to stop Tim Eyman from proposing referendums.
|
# ? Mar 25, 2012 04:03 |