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

[mdk]

Good thing this doesn't change a damn thing.

 

[TooTall]

********
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.

Unless you live in Kentucky they are not wasting your tax money. And, if the the majority of Kentuckians do not approve of the legislation, they can vote their representative out of office.

 

[Silhouette]

that whole separate but equal thing hasn't held up since 1950

For race, but behaviors are not about race. So not sure why you brought that up. People make distinctions on behavior every single day of the week. Ever hear of penal codes?

Religion is a behavior. Speech is a behavior. Keeping and bearing arms is a behavior. Yet none of those are the basis of exclusion from marriage either.

Thankfully Kentucky hasn't even tried to change the legal status of same sex married couples. Nor does their law even recognize 'same sex marriage'. Merely 'marriage'. Which both same and opposite sex couples can participate in.

USSC New York vs Ferber (1982) however IS a basis for exclusion from marriage... Here's what it found with respect to the damage to children by legally stripping them of either a father or mother for life as a matter of the newly revised contract and "civil right" your cult is claiming:

New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 756–57 (1982)
It is evident beyond the need for elaboration that a State’s interest in “safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor” is “compelling.” . . . Accordingly, we have sustained legislation aimed at protecting the physical and emotional well-being of youth even when the laws have operated in the sensitive area of constitutionally protected right https://law.ku.edu/sites/law.drupal.ku.edu/files/docs/law_review/v61/02-Preston_Final.pdf

Sorry... kids have rights too. I know that upsets you that they do..

And Kentucky's division of marriage licenses will help identify those people who might try to use that license to adopt a child and plunge them into this mental prison....claiming it's their "civil right" to do so to another person.

 

[mdk]

that whole separate but equal thing hasn't held up since 1950

For race, but behaviors are not about race. So not sure why you brought that up. People make distinctions on behavior every single day of the week. Ever hear of penal codes?

Religion is a behavior. Speech is a behavior. Keeping and bearing arms is a behavior. Yet none of those are the basis of exclusion from marriage either.

Thankfully Kentucky hasn't even tried to change the legal status of same sex married couples. Nor does their law even recognize 'same sex marriage'. Merely 'marriage'. Which both same and opposite sex couples can participate in.

USSC New York vs Ferber (1982) however IS a basis for exclusion from marriage... Here's what it found with respect to the damage to children by legally stripping them of either a father or mother for life as a matter of the newly revised contract and "civil right" your cult is claiming:

New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 756–57 (1982)
It is evident beyond the need for elaboration that a State’s interest in “safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of a minor” is “compelling.” . . . Accordingly, we have sustained legislation aimed at protecting the physical and emotional well-being of youth even when the laws have operated in the sensitive area of constitutionally protected right https://law.ku.edu/sites/law.drupal.ku.edu/files/docs/law_review/v61/02-Preston_Final.pdf

Sorry... kids have rights too. I know that upsets you that they do..

Too bad the court isn't bound by your imagination.

 

[Silhouette]

Too bad the court isn't bound by your imagination.

It is bound by it's own case law though.

 

[mdk]

Too bad the court isn't bound by your imagination.

It is bound by it's own case law though.

Relevant case law. Ferber has literally nothing to do with marriage which explains why it was never cited in a single court case regarding gay marriage. Perhaps if you whine some more it will make a difference but I doubt it.

 

[Silhouette]

Relevant case law. Ferber has literally nothing to do with marriage which explains why it was never cited in a single court case regarding gay marriage. Perhaps if you whine some more it will make a difference but I doubt it.

Loving wasn't about gay marriage either...didn't stop your cult from using it to successfully perform your kangaroo court at Obergefell last year to shove an unconstitutional mandate down the throats of 50 states...well...not quite Kentucky it would seem...

 

[mdk]

Relevant case law. Ferber has literally nothing to do with marriage which explains why it was never cited in a single court case regarding gay marriage. Perhaps if you whine some more it will make a difference but I doubt it.

Loving wasn't about gay marriage either...didn't stop your cult from using it to successfully perform your kangaroo court at Obergefell last year to shove an unconstitutional mandate down the throats of 50 states...well...not quite Kentucky it would seem...

The court cited Loving a few times when discussing gay marriage. You can pretend it doesn't hold any relevance until the cows come home but the court disagree. I wonder which has more sway concerning the matter? I bet it isn't you? lol

 

[Fang]

Two marriage licenses is a good thing since there are obvious differences. Hats off to Kentucky.

 

[BULLDOG]

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

Because we give married people so many extra benefits. Take away the tax breaks and all the other things, and there would be no need to keep up with who was married.

 

[Silhouette]

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

Because we give married people so many extra benefits. Take away the tax breaks and all the other things, and there would be no need to keep up with who was married.

So long as one of the "all the other things" to take away was the ability to adopt from "same sex marriage"....and plunge other people (children) into a permanent motherless or fatherless existence for life as a matter of a new binding contract.

 

[guno]

********
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.

you cross lickers have already lost

 

[Silhouette]

you cross lickers have already lost

1. I'm not a practicing Christian.

2. Do you consider the separate marriage licenses in Kentucky a "loss" for Christians? It is precisely because of Christians the legislation passed. The rationale is that calling a man a "wife" or a woman a "husband' is disrespectful to Christians and the webster's dictionary for that matter.. So the law passed. And it is a small but significant victory in the opposite direction for Christians who don't want to participate in LGBT cult behaviors; which include reinventing the english language to advance their delusionary and perverse behavior into the heart of our culture. (Marriage)

 

[mdk]

Two marriage licenses is a good thing since there are obvious differences. Hats off to Kentucky.

Gays can use either of the lincense to marry. Just like straight couples. Other than wasting paper this doesn't really accomplish very much.

 

[BULLDOG]

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

Because we give married people so many extra benefits. Take away the tax breaks and all the other things, and there would be no need to keep up with who was married.

So long as one of the "all the other things" to take away was the ability to adopt from "same sex marriage"....and plunge other people (children) into a permanent motherless or fatherless existence for life as a matter of a new binding contract.

So you are another one of those who would prefer a child to be bounced back and forth in foster care than to have a loving stable family. How disgusting of you.

 

[mdk]

Sil likes to claim she isn't a Christian despite the fact that her home page is covered in crosses and Bible verses. lol.

 

[BULLDOG]

you cross lickers have already lost

1. I'm not a practicing Christian.

2. Do you consider the separate marriage licenses in Kentucky a "loss" for Christians? It is precisely because of Christians the legislation passed. The rationale is that calling a man a "wife" or a woman a "husband' is disrespectful to Christians and the webster's dictionary for that matter.. So the law passed. And it is a small but significant victory in the opposite direction for Christians who don't want to participate in LGBT cult behaviors; which include reinventing the english language to advance their delusionary and perverse behavior into the heart of our culture. (Marriage)

You lost, but if this makes you feel like less of a loser, it's no big deal. After the dust settles, and your butt hurt is caused by your next loss, they will realize it's more trouble than it's worth to keep two different pieces of paper, and will do away with it.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

you cross lickers have already lost

1. I'm not a practicing Christian.

Do tell?

HOME
Effort Matters Forums

 

[Fang]

Two marriage licenses is a good thing since there are obvious differences. Hats off to Kentucky.

Gays can use either of the lincense to marry. Just like straight couples. Other than wasting paper this doesn't really accomplish very much.

Good. Since it doesn't mean anything no one should have to complain about it. But those of us that understand what true marriage is and what it represents can see the words "bride" and "groom".

 

[mdk]

Two marriage licenses is a good thing since there are obvious differences. Hats off to Kentucky.

Gays can use either of the lincense to marry. Just like straight couples. Other than wasting paper this doesn't really accomplish very much.

Good. Since it doesn't mean anything no one should have to complain about it. But those of us that understand what true marriage is and what it represents can see the words "bride" and "groom".

You'll get over it.