The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Calif.: Clergy Can Perform, Deny Any Wedding

This is like passing the Water is Wet Act. It just restates an existing fact.

(Now when will the religious groups pass the Clergy Can Perform Any Wedding act?)
 
priest have never been compelled by law to perform a marriage.
 
I wish we had never allowed the clergy to perform marriage. Many, many countries retain civil jusidiction over marriage. If the couple has a religious one they still need to stop at the civil authorities to make it legal. We have co-mingled Church and State with regard to marriage.
 
Well, maybe it will stop the religious political extremists from foaming at the mouth. But then again, maybe not. I just got to thinking about the rabid right, and I'm not sure anything will stop them from foaming at the mouth.
 
^
during the prop 8 trial, the people attending from both sides actually talked to each other. One of the things that the other side brought up was their fear that their church would be forced to perform marriages which go against their beliefs. This legislation was created for this reason.
 
metta said:
^
during the prop 8 trial, the people attending from both sides actually talked to each other. One of the things that the other side brought up was their fear that their church would be forced to perform marriages which go against their beliefs. This legislation was created for this reason.
Click to expand...

Droid is right. The religious political extremists may say they fear it, but if they do, it's just their anti-gay paranoia--"OOOOoooo, the gays are going to make us do terrible things!" If they don't fear it (after all, it's not a real threat), then it's just cynical posturing to fool the idiot Christians (and whichever other idiot religioinists might be susceptible).

This legislation does nothing more than say that something is off the table that was never on the table in the first place.
 
It's very "no duh" to many of us, but it's important to have such things in writing.

One of the many issues with the laws we have in this country is that they are vague and subject to interpretation. The Obscenity Laws are one such examples (you can be put to jail for video taping two dicks touching in the wrong county due to this federal law).

While many feel that this law doesn't mean anything, having it in strict writing simply makes an implied law into a real law. This way, other implied clauses from any law (future or past) cannot violate this law.
 
metta said:
^
during the prop 8 trial, the people attending from both sides actually talked to each other. One of the things that the other side brought up was their fear that their church would be forced to perform marriages which go against their beliefs. This legislation was created for this reason.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean it was 'on the table'.
 
construct said:
Well, maybe it will stop the religious political extremists from foaming at the mouth. But then again, maybe not. I just got to thinking about the rabid right, and I'm not sure anything will stop them from foaming at the mouth.
Click to expand...

Sew their lips shut and make it permanent with a skin graft.

construct said:
Droid is right. The religious political extremists may say they fear it, but if they do, it's just their anti-gay paranoia--"OOOOoooo, the gays are going to make us do terrible things!" If they don't fear it (after all, it's not a real threat), then it's just cynical posturing to fool the idiot Christians (and whichever other idiot religioinists might be susceptible).

This legislation does nothing more than say that something is off the table that was never on the table in the first place.
Click to expand...

Oh, they believe it. It's something I never could figure out when I was among them, the phobia that government is going to "make us do <X>". From my current perspective, I think it comes from the fact that they're so hot on using government to make other people do things.
 
evanrick said:
government does not belong in the marriage business.
Click to expand...

confetti.gif
2thumbs.gif



Droid800 said:
That doesn't mean it was 'on the table'.
Click to expand...

That phrase was a bad choice of words. "In play" would have been better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top