Kentucky Bill Passes: Gay Marriage & Normal Marriage Licenses Now Different

[Bruce_T_Laney]

********
FRANKFORT, Ky. – Kentucky's state Senate approved a bill Thursday that creates different marriage license forms for gay and straight couples, with one Republican senator saying any form that does not include the words "bride" and "groom" is disrespectful to traditional families.

The primary purpose of the legislation was to remove the names of county clerks from marriage licenses, a response to the controversy surrounding Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis and her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

But the Republican-controlled Senate amended the bill as a way to show their support for traditional marriage. Former Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear changed the marriage license form last summer once same-sex marriages became legal, removing "bride" and "groom" and replacing it with "first party" and "second party."

"Quite frankly, it's almost disrespectful to the traditional family," said Republican state Sen. John Schickel of Union. "That's' why, wisely, we decided to have two forms. That has nothing to do with bigotry, nothing to do with discrimination. It has to do with the vast majority of Kentuckians that respect traditional marriage."

Democratic Sen. Morgan McGarvey of Louisville tried to amend the bill to create one form, where a person would have the option to check "bride," ''groom" or "spouse" beside their name. He said having one form would be cheaper and more efficient, and it would treat everyone fairly. It failed. Kentucky Senate approves bill creating separate marriage license forms | Fox News

******

This would make the two unions distinct. It will be helpful when later certain couples try to use "marriage" to adopt children which would strip them of either a mother or father for life as a matter of binding contract.

Nope. They're both still marriage under Kentucky law.

Remember, you don't actually have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

See, there's this thing called "separate but equal" in this country's history. You should look into it.

And where, pray tell, does Kentucky make a legal distinction between same sex and opposite sex marriage?

See, there's this thing called "reading the OP before you start babbling ignorantly". You should look into it.

Why are you arguing with stupidity?

 

[Skylar]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

If you want a marriage that doesn't involve the state nor is recognized by it.....you can totally do that.

So you already have everything you want. Rejoice!

Why is a license required in order to be recognized by the state? But on that note, why does the state need to be in the business of recognizing marriages in the first place?

To verify that the marriage has met the requirements set by the State for marriage, of course.

If you don't want to meet those requirements you can totally make up your own marriage that has nothing to do with the State. And won't be recognized by it.

Everyone wins!

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Here in Texas I was told if my mate lived with me six months we were legally married but in Illinois it would take seven years, so it varies from state to state...

Just living with someone in Texas does not mean you are married -->> FAMILY CODE CHAPTER 2. THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP

Illinois doesn't have common law marriage, you can live with your mate forever and never be common law married -->> Common Law Marriage by State


>>>>

I wrote I was told and there it proves and thank you... ( note I was told part )

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Kentucky Bill Passes: Gay Marriage & Normal Marriage Licenses Now Different

There is no such thing as 'gay marriage,' there's only one marriage law that can accommodate same- or opposite-sex couples; and all marriage contract law is 'normal,' regardless the gender configuration.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

If you want a marriage that doesn't involve the state nor is recognized by it.....you can totally do that.

So you already have everything you want. Rejoice!

Why is a license required in order to be recognized by the state? But on that note, why does the state need to be in the business of recognizing marriages in the first place?

To verify that the marriage has met the requirements set by the State for marriage, of course.

If you don't want to meet those requirements you can totally make up your own marriage that has nothing to do with the State. And won't be recognized by it.

Everyone wins!

That's my whole point. Why do we need the state to set marriage requirements? How is it any of their concern?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Quite frankly, it's almost disrespectful to the traditional family," said Republican state Sen. John Schickel of Union. "That's' why, wisely, we decided to have two forms. That has nothing to do with bigotry, nothing to do with discrimination. It has to do with the vast majority of Kentuckians that respect traditional marriage."

Quite frankly, it has everything to do with bigotry and discrimination, the measure is both unwise and unwarranted, as well as likely un-Constitutional.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

If you want a marriage that doesn't involve the state nor is recognized by it.....you can totally do that.

So you already have everything you want. Rejoice!

Why is a license required in order to be recognized by the state? But on that note, why does the state need to be in the business of recognizing marriages in the first place?

To verify that the marriage has met the requirements set by the State for marriage, of course.

If you don't want to meet those requirements you can totally make up your own marriage that has nothing to do with the State. And won't be recognized by it.

Everyone wins!

That's my whole point. Why do we need the state to set marriage requirements? How is it any of their concern?

I have to agree and it is a money making scheme by religious nutters that have no right to tell us what marriage is... It is like the Catholic Church dictating it and even though I observe Lent I do not obey all the teachings...

 

[Si modo]

And where, pray tell, does Kentucky make a legal distinction between same sex and opposite sex marriage?

See, there's this thing called "reading the OP before you start babbling ignorantly". You should look into it.

Well, see....the piece in the OP says there is a distinction between the two types of marriage certificates.

That would be the "separate" part.

And, as you so nicely highlighted, there is no legal distinction between the two licenses.

That would be the "equal" part.



Separate, but equal. QED.


Thankyouverymuch

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

********
FRANKFORT, Ky. – Kentucky's state Senate approved a bill Thursday that creates different marriage license forms for gay and straight couples, with one Republican senator saying any form that does not include the words "bride" and "groom" is disrespectful to traditional families.

The primary purpose of the legislation was to remove the names of county clerks from marriage licenses, a response to the controversy surrounding Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis and her refusal to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

But the Republican-controlled Senate amended the bill as a way to show their support for traditional marriage. Former Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear changed the marriage license form last summer once same-sex marriages became legal, removing "bride" and "groom" and replacing it with "first party" and "second party."

"Quite frankly, it's almost disrespectful to the traditional family," said Republican state Sen. John Schickel of Union. "That's' why, wisely, we decided to have two forms. That has nothing to do with bigotry, nothing to do with discrimination. It has to do with the vast majority of Kentuckians that respect traditional marriage."

Democratic Sen. Morgan McGarvey of Louisville tried to amend the bill to create one form, where a person would have the option to check "bride," ''groom" or "spouse" beside their name. He said having one form would be cheaper and more efficient, and it would treat everyone fairly. It failed. Kentucky Senate approves bill creating separate marriage license forms | Fox News

******

This would make the two unions distinct. It will be helpful when later certain couples try to use "marriage" to adopt children which would strip them of either a mother or father for life as a matter of binding contract.

they're wasting our tax money. thet will be unconstitutional, too.

idiots.

If there's no legal distinction, it may be irrelevant. And there's no legal distinction.

True.

But a civil rights violation complaint can still be made separate and apart from how marriage contract law is addressed with regard to same-sex couples.

The state is creating a legal device – the marriage license – sanctioned by the state, with the sole intent to designate homosexuals as a class of persons different from everyone else, in violation of the 14th Amendment, absent a rational basis or legitimate legislative end.

 

[Skylar]

And where, pray tell, does Kentucky make a legal distinction between same sex and opposite sex marriage?

See, there's this thing called "reading the OP before you start babbling ignorantly". You should look into it.

Well, see....the piece in the OP says there is a distinction between the two types of marriage certificates.

That's not what I asked. I asked for the legal distinction. Not the font on a certificate.

There is no 'gay marriage' in Kentucky law. There is merely marriage.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

It has nothing to do with 'permission' from the government to get married.

Marriage is contract law, written by the states and administered by state courts. In order for marriage contracts to be valid and enforceable, they must comport with that contract law – hence the license.

Marriage contract law concerns such issues as property rights, spousal rights and responsibilities, child custody, and dissolution of the marriage contract.

Indeed, this is fundamental in understanding why prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law is un-Constitutional, as persons eligible to enter into a marriage contract, they're being denied the benefit of that marriage contract for no other reason than who they are.

 

[Si modo]

And where, pray tell, does Kentucky make a legal distinction between same sex and opposite sex marriage?

See, there's this thing called "reading the OP before you start babbling ignorantly". You should look into it.

Well, see....the piece in the OP says there is a distinction between the two types of marriage certificates.

That's not what I asked. I asked for the legal distinction. Not the font on a certificate.

There is no 'gay marriage' in Kentucky law. There is merely marriage.

Oh my.

You really don't understand separate but equal.

I can't fix stupid, sugar tits.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

It has nothing to do with 'permission' from the government to get married.

Marriage is contract law, written by the states and administered by state courts. In order for marriage contracts to be valid and enforceable, they must comport with that contract law – hence the license.

Marriage contract law concerns such issues as property rights, spousal rights and responsibilities, child custody, and dissolution of the marriage contract.

Indeed, this is fundamental in understanding why prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law is un-Constitutional, as persons eligible to enter into a marriage contract, they're being denied the benefit of that marriage contract for no other reason than who they are.

All of those things can be handled privately without the state's involvement.

 

[Si modo]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

It has nothing to do with 'permission' from the government to get married.

Marriage is contract law, written by the states and administered by state courts. In order for marriage contracts to be valid and enforceable, they must comport with that contract law – hence the license.

Marriage contract law concerns such issues as property rights, spousal rights and responsibilities, child custody, and dissolution of the marriage contract.

Indeed, this is fundamental in understanding why prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law is un-Constitutional, as persons eligible to enter into a marriage contract, they're being denied the benefit of that marriage contract for no other reason than who they are.

And, in a mobile society, we can't forget the protections of that contract under interstate commerce.

 

[Skylar]

Well, Sil gave us her website. And she didn't spend that extra 15 bucks a year on domain privacy.

I have it on all my websites. Its worth every penny.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

It has nothing to do with 'permission' from the government to get married.

Marriage is contract law, written by the states and administered by state courts. In order for marriage contracts to be valid and enforceable, they must comport with that contract law – hence the license.

Marriage contract law concerns such issues as property rights, spousal rights and responsibilities, child custody, and dissolution of the marriage contract.

Indeed, this is fundamental in understanding why prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law is un-Constitutional, as persons eligible to enter into a marriage contract, they're being denied the benefit of that marriage contract for no other reason than who they are.

All of those things can be handled privately without the state's involvement.

Sorry, no.

State lawmakers write the laws, elected representatives, at the behest of the people of the states, sanctioned by the democratic process and the constitutions of the states – including contract law, and including marriage.

 

[Skylar]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

It has nothing to do with 'permission' from the government to get married.

Marriage is contract law, written by the states and administered by state courts. In order for marriage contracts to be valid and enforceable, they must comport with that contract law – hence the license.

Marriage contract law concerns such issues as property rights, spousal rights and responsibilities, child custody, and dissolution of the marriage contract.

Indeed, this is fundamental in understanding why prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law is un-Constitutional, as persons eligible to enter into a marriage contract, they're being denied the benefit of that marriage contract for no other reason than who they are.

All of those things can be handled privately without the state's involvement.

And if you don't want state involvement, you don't have to have it. The state won't even recognize your marriage exists.

See how well that works?

 

[Skylar]

And where, pray tell, does Kentucky make a legal distinction between same sex and opposite sex marriage?

See, there's this thing called "reading the OP before you start babbling ignorantly". You should look into it.

Well, see....the piece in the OP says there is a distinction between the two types of marriage certificates.

That's not what I asked. I asked for the legal distinction. Not the font on a certificate.

There is no 'gay marriage' in Kentucky law. There is merely marriage.

Oh my.

You really don't understand separate but equal.

I can't fix stupid, sugar tits.

Ah, shit-stain.....don't you know that civility pays?

There is no 'separate but equal' in Kentucky. As there is no distinction in the law. The law treats same sex marriage and opposite sex marriage as marriage. All the same laws apply in the same ways.

If they didn't, there would be an issue.

See how that works, boy?

 

[Si modo]

How about getting rid of marriage licensing altogether? Why in a supposedly free country do we need permission from the government to get married?

It has nothing to do with 'permission' from the government to get married.

Marriage is contract law, written by the states and administered by state courts. In order for marriage contracts to be valid and enforceable, they must comport with that contract law – hence the license.

Marriage contract law concerns such issues as property rights, spousal rights and responsibilities, child custody, and dissolution of the marriage contract.

Indeed, this is fundamental in understanding why prohibiting same-sex couples access to marriage law is un-Constitutional, as persons eligible to enter into a marriage contract, they're being denied the benefit of that marriage contract for no other reason than who they are.

All of those things can be handled privately without the state's involvement.

IF we could have a legislative mulligan, that is exactly the best way to handle this. Civil unions for all of us who want it - and protection for that contract through interstate commerce.

But, some idiot a long time ago decided to allow church officials authority to certify a union.

First mistake, for several reasons, most notably the 1st Amendment.

It has become such a statutory clusterfuck, including special courts to deal with dissolution of marriages, that to undo the first mistake, without any collateral damage with unintended consequences, would be near impossible given our feckless legislators.

Sooooooo, state involvement in marriages is a given (unless some miracle occurs and legislators won't fuck it up trying to undo the first wrong). As state involvement exists, we can't have any of that separate but equal shit going on.

 

[Si modo]

Ah, shit-stain.....don't you know that civility pays?

There is no 'separate but equal' in Kentucky. As there is no distinction in the law. The law treats same sex marriage and opposite sex marriage as marriage. All the same laws apply in the same ways.

If they didn't, there would be an issue.

See how that works, boy?

I'll type slowly now, honey chunks:

Well, see....the piece in the OP says there is a distinction between the two types of marriage certificates.

That would be the "separate" part.

And, as you so nicely highlighted, there is no legal distinction between the two licenses.

That would be the "equal" part.



Separate, but equal. QED.


Thankyouverymuch