Before you make your summer plans to visit the Outerbanks ofNC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amendment 1 states that “marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.” It's totally unclear how this amendment will actually play out in practice, but legal scholars are saying that it could create many problems not only for gay couples, but for straight unmarried couples. Theoretically any straight or gay couple could show up at a hospital, and have the hospital staff say "family only, and according to our laws you are not family."

I'm a married lesbian, and I actually agree with the poster above that marriage shouldn't be tied to rights. If I could get the rights without the marriage, I would be happy to do so. Unfortunately, those who don't want gays to marry are also the first to deny us because we are not married. I got married because it is one more way to protect my partner and our child.

I won't be going to North Carolina, not because I want to deny hardworking NCers their livelihood, but because I don't want to risk dying alone, and I certainly don't want to be in a situation where our daughter would be in the hospital and be denied one of her moms.

Clearly, the movement doesn't agree with you on this one, as these battles have always focused on the right to "marry." I for one will always vote against gay marriage, as I do not support a fundamental redefinition of marriage, period. I stand on firm ground alongside the majority of Americans on this one, as evidenced by the way the votes have fallen. However, I do believe that any adult in this country should be able to legally declare another adult, who would have legal rights in certain situations. I personally know so many people who share this view, even though they are against gay marriage.

As for hospital situations involving children, aren't both mothers (or both fathers) considered the legal parents of the child? In those cases, it doesn't matter if mom and mom (or dad and dad) are married, divorced, unmarried, domestic partners, or any other arrangement - they may still see or make decisions for their children. Right?

Would that it were so! Parental rights are really state by state. In DC what you describe is true. In Virginia, the second mom or second dad is a legal stranger to the child (sometime through some legal wrangling you can set up a guardianship that is concurrent with the legal rights of the "parent" but it's not easy or cheap, and it also takes a long time. In the MA marriage case, the non-bio mom had been denied access to her baby in the NICU-until a shift change when she lied to the new nurse and said she was the baby's aunt. Legally she was a stranger to that baby. I'm in MD and a few months our baby was born the Attorney General agreed that gay married couples who had a child would both be presumed parents; however, at the time my baby was born my partner did not have legal standing until our 2nd parent adoption went through (can't file until the baby is born). We took her down to the city courthouse a week after she left the NICU for our adoption hearing. It is crazy out there, and good and decent people will help us gays out, but we can't count on any rights without an affirmative protection.

[Anonymous]

Weeeeeee I am going to NC to piss off the clan at DCUM!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

[Anonymous]

I would discourage people from spending their vacation dollars in MD too. It is a one party state. Very undemocratic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

you don't choose your race and you don't choose your gender. some choose their sexual orientation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is marriage off limits? For a long time marriage was about combining families of a certain pedigree, obtaining property, etc. What does it matter to me personally that 2 men or 2 women marry? It doesn't affect me.

it affects others. some people take sacraments seriously.

Your "sacrament" doesn't change if you're married in the church. Marriage is a legal status recognized by countries and states. My marriage is strictly a civil one; I was not married in the church. Your religious sacraments do not affect me one bit and a civil marriage between same sex couples in no way affects or threatens your marriage.

Your lack of knowledge clearly demonstrates that you are unable to differentiate between the two. It's a civil rights issue, and I'm not at all surprised that someone like you fails to see it as such.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree the passage of this is shameful and discriminatory. However, I don't see how you are advancing your goal by boycotting OBX. Instead, you will be depriving many families of their primary source of income for the year (tourism), presumably a chunk of which are not even against gay marriage.

Yes, but many of the families are the ones who voted for people who passed this amendment. Maybe when it hurts THEM they will care about OTHERS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is marriage off limits? For a long time marriage was about combining families of a certain pedigree, obtaining property, etc. What does it matter to me personally that 2 men or 2 women marry? It doesn't affect me.

it affects others. some people take sacraments seriously.

Your "sacrament" doesn't change if you're married in the church. Marriage is a legal status recognized by countries and states. My marriage is strictly a civil one; I was not married in the church. Your religious sacraments do not affect me one bit and a civil marriage between same sex couples in no way affects or threatens your marriage.

Your lack of knowledge clearly demonstrates that you are unable to differentiate between the two. It's a civil rights issue, and I'm not at all surprised that someone like you fails to see it as such.

no, I've thought about it a good bit and recognize the points you make. but I don't want to lessen the importance or change the meaning of my sacrament. I'm ok with civil unions, just don't call it marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

Love this quote by Wanda Sykes, because it's so freakin' true:

“To a certain point, yes. I believe [it's harder to be gay than black]. I’m not talking about the history of African-Americans. Today. I’m talking about at this point right now. I don’t know of organizations and groups like Focus on the Family and such anti-gay organizations who are putting so much money, millions and millions of dollars, into stopping me from being black or telling me that I can’t exercise my blackness or whatever. So it is. There’s no equality, there’s no equality for the LGBT community.”

And another:


"It’s harder being gay than being black. There’s some things that I had to do as gay that I didn’t have to do as black. I didn’t have to come out black. I didn’t have to sit my parents down and tell them about my blackness...Mom, dad I have to tell ya’ll something…I hope you still love me. Mom- dad I’m black."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is marriage off limits? For a long time marriage was about combining families of a certain pedigree, obtaining property, etc. What does it matter to me personally that 2 men or 2 women marry? It doesn't affect me.

it affects others. some people take sacraments seriously.

Your "sacrament" doesn't change if you're married in the church. Marriage is a legal status recognized by countries and states. My marriage is strictly a civil one; I was not married in the church. Your religious sacraments do not affect me one bit and a civil marriage between same sex couples in no way affects or threatens your marriage.

Your lack of knowledge clearly demonstrates that you are unable to differentiate between the two. It's a civil rights issue, and I'm not at all surprised that someone like you fails to see it as such.

no, I've thought about it a good bit and recognize the points you make. but I don't want to lessen the importance or change the meaning of my sacrament. I'm ok with civil unions, just don't call it marriage.

Do you know the legal difference between a civil union and a marriage? I'm pretty sure you haven't a clue.

Again, it doesn't lessen the importance of your "sacrament," because a sacrament is a religious rite, not a legal one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amendment 1 states that “marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State.” It's totally unclear how this amendment will actually play out in practice, but legal scholars are saying that it could create many problems not only for gay couples, but for straight unmarried couples. Theoretically any straight or gay couple could show up at a hospital, and have the hospital staff say "family only, and according to our laws you are not family."

I'm a married lesbian, and I actually agree with the poster above that marriage shouldn't be tied to rights. If I could get the rights without the marriage, I would be happy to do so. Unfortunately, those who don't want gays to marry are also the first to deny us because we are not married. I got married because it is one more way to protect my partner and our child.

I won't be going to North Carolina, not because I want to deny hardworking NCers their livelihood, but because I don't want to risk dying alone, and I certainly don't want to be in a situation where our daughter would be in the hospital and be denied one of her moms.

Clearly, the movement doesn't agree with you on this one, as these battles have always focused on the right to "marry." I for one will always vote against gay marriage, as I do not support a fundamental redefinition of marriage, period. I stand on firm ground alongside the majority of Americans on this one, as evidenced by the way the votes have fallen. However, I do believe that any adult in this country should be able to legally declare another adult, who would have legal rights in certain situations. I personally know so many people who share this view, even though they are against gay marriage.

As for hospital situations involving children, aren't both mothers (or both fathers) considered the legal parents of the child? In those cases, it doesn't matter if mom and mom (or dad and dad) are married, divorced, unmarried, domestic partners, or any other arrangement - they may still see or make decisions for their children. Right?

Would that it were so! Parental rights are really state by state. In DC what you describe is true. In Virginia, the second mom or second dad is a legal stranger to the child (sometime through some legal wrangling you can set up a guardianship that is concurrent with the legal rights of the "parent" but it's not easy or cheap, and it also takes a long time. In the MA marriage case, the non-bio mom had been denied access to her baby in the NICU-until a shift change when she lied to the new nurse and said she was the baby's aunt. Legally she was a stranger to that baby. I'm in MD and a few months our baby was born the Attorney General agreed that gay married couples who had a child would both be presumed parents; however, at the time my baby was born my partner did not have legal standing until our 2nd parent adoption went through (can't file until the baby is born). We took her down to the city courthouse a week after she left the NICU for our adoption hearing. It is crazy out there, and good and decent people will help us gays out, but we can't count on any rights without an affirmative protection.

Thank you for clarifying that for me. It sounds like in some states it requires the second parent to legally adopt the child, or the state has some other provision to allow the second parent to be a legal parent. And still other states have no provisions at all. I would be curious to see which states do what; maybe I will spend some time investigating it.

Still, as I said initially, I do not and will never support the redefinition of marriage to allow it between anyone other than one man and one woman. For me, it is as much of a social issue as it is a moral issue. Those of us who have this belief are often classified as bigots, hicks, stupid, intolerant, and undeserving of our opinion. However, I know that I for one am none of these things, and do have a genuine concern for the welfare of people who have to deal with the unfortunate situations like PP described above. Domestic partnership, civil co-habitation, joint household....call it whatever you want, and I will vote for it. But as long as you are trying to change the definition of marriage, no way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is marriage off limits? For a long time marriage was about combining families of a certain pedigree, obtaining property, etc. What does it matter to me personally that 2 men or 2 women marry? It doesn't affect me.

it affects others. some people take sacraments seriously.

What a horrible rationale. Your sacraments - your religion - get to dictate what other people do???? If this is a sacramental issue for you then fine, abide by YOUR sacraments. Don't get gay married. Why should anyone else have to follow your god?

And since you take your sacrament so seriously I imagine you never had premarital sex. Right?

What if we end up with a majority religion in this country which decides that all women have to wear burquas? Let's say they tell you, "it's a sacrament (or other religious priority). Why do their religious beliefs get to impact your life or mine?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not gay. I'm a woman married to a man - however, the thought that a friend or a coworker would not have the same rights to marry or visit a loved one that I would. I wonder how many of these people who voted against equal rights would have voted against rights for African Americans? Would have voted against rights for women? To me it is the same thing - equal rights for everyone - or for nobody.

Please don't bring black people into this discussion. I HATE it when folks make this comparison. It's short-sighted and stupid.

Love this quote by Wanda Sykes, because it's so freakin' true:

“To a certain point, yes. I believe [it's harder to be gay than black]. I’m not talking about the history of African-Americans. Today. I’m talking about at this point right now. I don’t know of organizations and groups like Focus on the Family and such anti-gay organizations who are putting so much money, millions and millions of dollars, into stopping me from being black or telling me that I can’t exercise my blackness or whatever. So it is. There’s no equality, there’s no equality for the LGBT community.”

And another:


"It’s harder being gay than being black. There’s some things that I had to do as gay that I didn’t have to do as black. I didn’t have to come out black. I didn’t have to sit my parents down and tell them about my blackness...Mom, dad I have to tell ya’ll something…I hope you still love me. Mom- dad I’m black."

Absolutely terrible quotes to pick. I guess because Wanda is black, you think her opinion carries some sort of weight?

But yeah, comparing coming out and/or anti-gay groups to the hundreds of years of degradation of a race is...................short-sighted, at best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is marriage off limits? For a long time marriage was about combining families of a certain pedigree, obtaining property, etc. What does it matter to me personally that 2 men or 2 women marry? It doesn't affect me.

it affects others. some people take sacraments seriously.

Ah, so the law is necessary to give effect to religious beliefs? I was under the impression that was a no-no, but now I see you're only against laws about religion when they are part of the (imaginary) "war against Christianity." Anything that supports Christianity is A-OK.

Please go look up the definition of hypocrite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is marriage off limits? For a long time marriage was about combining families of a certain pedigree, obtaining property, etc. What does it matter to me personally that 2 men or 2 women marry? It doesn't affect me.

it affects others. some people take sacraments seriously.

Your "sacrament" doesn't change if you're married in the church. Marriage is a legal status recognized by countries and states. My marriage is strictly a civil one; I was not married in the church. Your religious sacraments do not affect me one bit and a civil marriage between same sex couples in no way affects or threatens your marriage.

Your lack of knowledge clearly demonstrates that you are unable to differentiate between the two. It's a civil rights issue, and I'm not at all surprised that someone like you fails to see it as such.

no, I've thought about it a good bit and recognize the points you make. but I don't want to lessen the importance or change the meaning of my sacrament. I'm ok with civil unions, just don't call it marriage.

Do you know the legal difference between a civil union and a marriage? I'm pretty sure you haven't a clue.

Again, it doesn't lessen the importance of your "sacrament," because a sacrament is a religious rite, not a legal one.

we can change the definition of civil unions so the same rights are afforded. stop trying to label me. I am probably sitting in the office next to you and we probably go to lunch twice a week. we just have a different opinion. sorry.