Question about mariage

  • bigpipe

    Posts: 2

    Mar 28, 2012 11:35 AM GMT
    Hey guys this is my first post on this site even after more than one year as subscriber. Normally I would prefer to write in French my native language but I must cope with the fact English is more standard here.

    My question is a simple one but, of the uttermost importance for many of you: Is gay’s marriage important?

    From my viewpoint: it seems that a legal union is a mere paper on which we sign an act of property (like: your ass is mine so behave dude! XD).

    If love exist I don’t think it’s crystallized by a simple signature, after all each day we so how solid is this traditional form of union we love someone so it is.
    Note dear friends, I presume I will get some reaction, some violent one since some of could think that I’m trampling on your dream… But please keep in mind that I’m only a person in a quest of a better comprehension.

    24, I’m from a country where a person with our exotic tastes lives in discretion, with a certain silence about our existence. And if I feel that it’s really a hindrance to be in front of the radar which by the way seems sadly to imply, in most of the case, a transsexual behavior (behavior that personally I frown on in a partner.), when I think seriously about marriage it’s appears like an empty shell too.

    Ps: My response to this topic could be a little delayed by the fact that the net connection isn’t at my residence so preventives excuses if delays come up.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 3:12 PM GMT
    Are you from French Guyana or English Guyana? My Grandparents are from Surinam...
  • maineguy101

    Posts: 5

    Mar 28, 2012 3:33 PM GMT
    Marriage for anyone is a legal recognition by the state of the union on two people. Marriage for same sex couples is important as only marriage grants the same rights, protections and benefits under the law to gays and lesbians as it does for straight couples.

    Further more, the word "marriage" is understood by everyone and all that it encompass, not only legally but, also the love and commitment entailed.

    Finally, "Separate is not equal" If you call it something different, it is different. Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships are not the same - I ask any straight married person to trade in their marriage for a domestic partnership or civil union - Funny, none are willing to do so. . .
  • BardBear

    Posts: 533

    Mar 28, 2012 7:41 PM GMT
    Il n'a rien à voir avec la propriété. Il a tout à voir avec l'obtention des droits juridiques pour couvrir votre relation devrait-il aller en long terme. J'aime mon mari. Je devrais avoir le droit de le voir à l'hôpital, il devrait avoir le droit de prendre des décisions juridiques pour moi avant que ma famille. Propriété? S'il vous plaît, pas de.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 7:45 PM GMT
    I think this will evoke a lot of responses from guys who never see themselves marrying another guy.

    I think it's important because of the legal rights and the symbolism as well.

    Some straight people say "I don't need a marriage license to prove my love" so opinions vary.

    I personally think saying a piece of paper doesn't define love probably is linked to some internal fear. I also think some people just want to go against every societal construct to be seen as "free thinking" or whatever...but to each his own.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2012 7:46 PM GMT
    Love would be nice.
  • Suetonius

    Posts: 1842

    Mar 28, 2012 7:52 PM GMT
    BardBear saidIl n'a rien à voir avec la propriété. Il a tout à voir avec l'obtention des droits juridiques pour couvrir votre relation devrait-il aller en long terme. J'aime mon mari. Je devrais avoir le droit de le voir à l'hôpital, il devrait avoir le droit de prendre des décisions juridiques pour moi avant que ma famille. Propriété? S'il vous plaît, pas de.

    BardBear a raison.

    Et aussi: In the law of the US, whether or not one is married, determines many legal rights and monetary benefits. If one is married, one is entitled to them. If one is not married under US law, one is not entitled. It is a matter of equal rights in the US.
  • BardBear

    Posts: 533

    Mar 29, 2012 12:13 AM GMT
    Are there civil unions or some sort dans France?

    Peace,
    Bardy
  • bigpipe

    Posts: 2

    Mar 29, 2012 3:43 PM GMT
    Interesting … Je suis plus que content des différentes réactions
    Briefly understand from your different points that:
    - One of the great deals about marriage is the protection that it provides. Cause many little legal intricacies (as commercials) ones make the “legal couple” the best way to cope with a life of partnership.
    - Then by habit many since in many culture some values are “de facto” attached to marriage it’s fitting that we have a label that offer the same covertures.
    Relatively to my situation, (by the way I’m from French Guyana –Cayenne living since 12 year old in Haiti GreenHooper), In Haiti where I live for the moment marriage (they don’t legally accept gay marriage) doesn’t seem to offer a real thing to the contractor if only the social and moral label of not being some adulterous blokes.
    In the end I suppose that our perception of this formality depend on our socio-cultural environment. In some country where marriage is strongly intertwined with law we feel more “naturally” the reason of marriage than in another were law is marriage is more parallel.
    For me it appears that marriage was invented in the first moment:
    1. For the sake of assuring the transmission of legacy. By it, the men accept that each child is his and no one for that shall contest right of this child on his father’s legacy. An economic contract…
    2. For possessing the women (As it was in most of the primitive country)
    An economic contract… In think In some way we transcend these two problems since obviously:
    1. We will not have a true Lineage
    2. Our partner is by default an equal
    Nevertheless this is not a total contestation of the importance of marriage since it is objectively proved that you can get something from it security and facility… If not only a symbol ( Some friend of mine dream to buy a church… And decorate it with red rose for his wedding… And of course kidnap a priest for the ceremony mouahahahaahah! )
    But really: Ce n’est surement pas le symbole que je choisirais pour témoigner mon amour à quelqu’un. ^^
    Flatly I would say that choosing “marriage” (with all the contingent ideas attached to it) to: define our relation, naming our lover, my wife/husband is a pitiful imitation of straight marriage. The nature of our union, even with roughly the same objectives is totally different.
    With the glimpse I get about marriage, all that came to my mind is: “Un manque criant d’originalité” (I didn’t find the right way to put in English)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2012 3:49 PM GMT
    I have no intentions of getting married - to anyone.

    However, the whole point behind gay marriage is that if it doesn't pass, it could have a snowball effect, starting the process to slowly erode what rights we do have. The ultimate effect could be the re-criminalization of homosexuality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2012 5:05 AM GMT
    paulflexes saidI have no intentions of getting married - to anyone.

    However, the whole point behind gay marriage is that if it doesn't pass, it could have a snowball effect, starting the process to slowly erode what rights we do have. The ultimate effect could be the re-criminalization of homosexuality.

    True. If we are second-class citizens regarding marriage, can we not be second-class citizens in everything else?

    Indeed, it's already legal in some States to fire us because we are gay, to evict us from rental properties, to deny us the right to adopt, to keep us from our partner's hospital bedside. (Though Obama has tried to correct the latter by withholding HHS Federal funds from hospitals that do so, there is still no Federal law that specifically prevents it, with penalties)
  • TR_Latitude10

    Posts: 206

    Mar 30, 2012 5:50 AM GMT
    My partner and I were legally married in CA during the brief time it was allowed. Below is Patricia Clarkson re-enacting testimony given during the Prop 8 trial. The testimony is so true for us. It's not just about property rights and other rights, it's about family.and how parents, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles, etc interact with us.

    My own parents did not come to our wedding, and it was only about 18 months ago that they finally accepted and welcomed my spouse. BTW, June of this year is our 20 year anniversary.

    Ironically, I think they finally came around because we ARE married. They know what that means. Wally isn't a "friend" who happens to live with me. He is my SPOUSE.

    Please listen to the first 5 minutes of this re-enactment.if not the whole 9 minutes.Towards the end, she talks about a family member's death and the social ritual we go through. This is exactly how I felt this past summer. I wasn't a "partner in life", I was simply Wally's husband.

    Patricia Clarkson reenacts Perry v Schwarzenegger

    [url][/url]
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2012 6:41 AM GMT
    paulflexes saidI have no intentions of getting married - to anyone.

    However, the whole point behind gay marriage is that if it doesn't pass, it could have a snowball effect, starting the process to slowly erode what rights we do have. The ultimate effect could be the re-criminalization of homosexuality.


    But Paul, I thought masturbating to yourself in the mirror amounted to an informal self-marriage contract.