California gay marriage ruling appealed

Call it want you want...just not marriage.

Why?

Why?


Simply because historically, the common meaning and understanding of the word 'marriage' has always referred to a committed relationship between a man and a woman.

Why?


Simply because historically, the common meaning and understanding of the word 'marriage' has always referred to a committed relationship between a man and a woman.
To whom?
In my understanding, "marriage" is nothing more than a legal contract between 2 people who share their lives together, that has nothing to do with feelings, but everything with assets and children.

Historically, marriage was "till death do us part", but nowadays, we do not have to kill our spouses anymore, but just legally "unbind" the contract. So basicly, that point bullshit...

Why?


Simply because historically, the common meaning and understanding of the word 'marriage' has always referred to a committed relationship between a man and a woman.

Historically women were not allowed to vote and were not considered persons under the law. Marriage back then usually meant a transfer of property, ie the woman, from her father to her husband.

Haven't we got a thread on this already?

I love how the bigots grasp at straws. I read through Judge Walker's ruling, and his conclusion is correct, there is no legitimate or compelling reason to deny same sex couples the right to marry besides ingrained moral prejudice and a general dislike of gay people, which is not a valid reason to deny constitutional rights to a group of people.

These next few years are going to be interesting ones in the U.S.

Why?


Simply because historically, the common meaning and understanding of the word 'marriage' has always referred to a committed relationship between a man and a woman.

Time marches on.

I always thought that we could leave to churches the right to accept marriage as they please. Man/woman or same sex. Leave it up to them.

If same sex couples want to marry and their church refuses, then they get married in a civil ceremony.

The separation of the terms "marriage" and "civil union" would be more to "appease" those opposed to same sex marriage... makes the pill easier to swallow.

So everyone who gets married in church should be able to call themselves "married, till death do them part", without the ability to divorce, and those who don't get married in church but in a civil ceremony (same sex or opposite sex) should call themselves "civil unionized", AND have the right to divorce.

So everyone who gets married in church should be able to call themselves "married, till death do them part", without the ability to divorce, and those who don't get married in church but in a civil ceremony (same sex or opposite sex) should call themselves "civil unionized", AND have the right to divorce.
Nope... you know that even in church today, that "married, till death do them part" is so passé.
Besides, they still need to get the same paperwork done as in a civil union.

So everyone who gets married in church should be able to call themselves "married, till death do them part", without the ability to divorce, and those who don't get married in church but in a civil ceremony (same sex or opposite sex) should call themselves "civil unionized", AND have the right to divorce.
Nope... you know that even in church today, that "married, till death do them part" is so passé.
Besides, they still need to get the same paperwork done as in a civil union.
Nope. We are reforming now anyway, so if gays cannot not "marry" (since that is a church thing), but have to civil union, non-church goers should not be able to "marry" either, but have to civil union as well, and church weddings are not legally binding. The moment you civil union, you are not marrying, and only the civil unions are legally binding.
(yeah, confusing, isnt it )

Brenda, the mariage ceremony and the one performed at a civil union are just that, ceromonies. The important thing is the paperwork, which is the same for both.

Both are legally binding but only if the paperwork is correctly filled out and registered.

Yeah, you missed my point