Are There Transsexuals here who have successfully married?

[fionahavelock]

So if you oppose gay marriage you should also oppose all marriage outside your faith because it all destroys the religious sanctity of marriage.


well said racquel, i agree with it.

[Darha]

people will change and new opportunities exist, all will can live together, I look forward especially to find some tgirl for married with her. Of course I really want a good relationship with someone

[The Conquistador]

But the issue of gay marriage is not a federal matter; it is strictly a state matter and dependent on which states would ratify such legislation and how accepting the people are.

And I quote 10th amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Unfortunately the Constitution does not mention anything about marriage so it will be entirely left up to the residents of whatever state gay marriage is proposed in.

However, I see it becoming more widely accepted sooner if it was brought before SCOTUS. In a legal view, marriage is nothing more than a binding contract between two consenting adults. If it is ruled as such, any legislation prohibiting is would be unlawful. This is one of those issues where it is a matter not of "If", but of "When".

[ila]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

But the issue of gay marriage is not a federal matter;.......

Your statement applies to the U.S. This site has members from many countries around the world and in some of those countries marriage is a federal matter. For example in Canada same sex marriage was made legal by the federal parliament and therefore applies right across the country. There are no exceptions and no province or territory can amend or change or impinge on that legislation.

I am happy that Canada now allows same sex marriage. It means that I may one day be able to marry the girl of my dreams.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by ila

Your statement applies to the U.S. This site has members from many countries around the world and in some of those countries marriage is a federal matter. For example in Canada same sex marriage was made legal by the federal parliament and therefore applies right across the country. There are no exceptions and no province or territory can amend or change or impinge on that legislation.

I am happy that Canada now allows same sex marriage. It means that I may one day be able to marry the girl of my dreams.

I was just pointing out some of the hurdles facing such an issue for people here in the states. I do know that alot of countries have legalized same sex marriage.

As for you ila, Lucky Bastard!

[racquel]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

But the issue of gay marriage is not a federal matter;

Right, so you agree that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by racquel

Right, so you agree that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act

Yes I do racquel. The Constitution was set up as a limit of what the Federal Government can do. This is obviously unconstitutional as it is a legislation passed by "The Man" to limit what it's people can do. It should be the other way around. This act no matter what it's intention, is Unconstitutional and Unamerican.

The same thing goes for the anti-flag desecration legislation. Even though I am a veteran and it hurts me to see weenies and hippies to burn our noble flag, it is still a right of the people to burn it. Norm Eadie says: "Patriotism gives symbols meaning. Enslaving people to symbols destroys patriotism." That is why I am against laws such as flag burning and Defense of marriage act.

I am deeply saddened that such things which are blatantly illegal such as these laws go unnoticed or unchecked by most everyone. People are too comfortable in their everyday lives to actually give a shit. Legislating people's lives is a losing proposition(just look at Prohibition!) Until people start caring about their roles as American citizens, we will continue to have our rights trampled on by Govt. goons. A gay marriage ban here, a anti-flag burning law there and a weapons ban somewhere and before you know it, the public is backed into a corner wondering how shit got like this with federal agents putting them in detention for being a gay, jewish black Klan member who supports abortion.

Sorry if I'm ranting but things like this really burn my ass.

[Bionca]

Originally Posted by TheAngryPostman

But the issue of gay marriage is not a federal matter; it is strictly a state matter and dependent on which states would ratify such legislation and how accepting the people are.

And I quote 10th amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Unfortunately the Constitution does not mention anything about marriage so it will be entirely left up to the residents of whatever state gay marriage is proposed in.

However, I see it becoming more widely accepted sooner if it was brought before SCOTUS. In a legal view, marriage is nothing more than a binding contract between two consenting adults. If it is ruled as such, any legislation prohibiting is would be unlawful. This is one of those issues where it is a matter not of "If", but of "When".

The only problem with this as a "state's rights" issue is that, much like a driver's lisence, the benefits of a marriage lisence transfer from state to state. So, even with a patchwork of stipulations in marriage laws now a valid (hetero-) marriage retains it's legal weight. The 'Full failth and credit' of the state is recognized even in places where that union would not be legal (age of conscent being the one that comes to mind).

So it simply can't work as a state by state proposition with an extreemly mobile population.

[ila]

Originally Posted by Bionca

The only problem with this as a "state's rights" issue is that, much like a driver's lisence, the benefits of a marriage lisence transfer from state to state. So, even with a patchwork of stipulations in marriage laws now a valid (hetero-) marriage retains it's legal weight. The 'Full failth and credit' of the state is recognized even in places where that union would not be legal (age of conscent being the one that comes to mind).

So it simply can't work as a state by state proposition with an extreemly mobile population.

This answers what I've been wondering about since California first allowed and then rejected same sex marriage. As I understand it now there are some states in the U.S. that are proposing same sex marriage legislation or have allowed it.

I had been wondering what would happen if a same sex couple got married in a state that allowed it and then moved to a state that didn't allow it.

Also there are countries, Canada for example, that allows same sex marriage and I had been wondering whether or not a same sex marriage would still be recognized if a same sex couple moved to the U.S.

[The Conquistador]

Originally Posted by Bionca

The only problem with this as a "state's rights" issue is that, much like a driver's lisence, the benefits of a marriage lisence transfer from state to state. So, even with a patchwork of stipulations in marriage laws now a valid (hetero-) marriage retains it's legal weight. The 'Full failth and credit' of the state is recognized even in places where that union would not be legal (age of conscent being the one that comes to mind).

So it simply can't work as a state by state proposition with an extreemly mobile population.

That is true to an extent, but seeing how normally conservative states like Iowa and Maine have passed marriage, it would incline other states to do so. As a state-by-state basis I feel this would be more like a concealed carry permit than a drivers liscence. Even though Commiefornia and alot of other states won't issue a concealed carry permit to its residents, they do recognize CCW permits issued by Nevada, Arizona, Texas and other states and the residents of those states can have their weapon on them and walk through this state unmolested. I can bet you that even if Commiefornia didn't recognize the marriages of it's residents, they would make an exception for those who move here. Sounds backasswards but that is the Golden State for you.

If they do it for weapons, I'm sure they would do it for marriage. If it was a really big, looming issue, then it would come down to the individual states and what they decide on. But since it is not, and since more people are alot more openminded than they were, say 20 years aago, if anything, this marriage issue will be accepted by a large majority, if not all the states.

[fionahavelock]

hmmm i love to read this thread.. keep it more coming..