Prop 8 is to get a ruling today

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by naraht

OK. Let's see if I can boil it down.

In the USA,
Step 1 a marriage license is obtained from the Civil Authorities. Note, in some states this doesn't have to be done in person. If they fit the criteria in the law, it is issued, and the couple can proceed to step 2.

Step 2 *either*
A. A designated representative of the juristiction (Justice of the Peace, Town Clerk, Judge, Supreme Court Justice (yes they are allowed) etc) performs the marriage, signs the marriage certificate and files it. Congratulations.
*OR*
B. A Religious officiant who has been vested with the right to perform a marriage (that's where the phrase "By the power vested in me by the state of Iowa...") performs the marriage, signs the marriage certificate and arranges for it to be sent back to the juristiction that files it. Congratulations.

In France, 2B is not a choice. Whatever a Catholic Priest, Jewish Rabbi or whoeever else religious does in regards to a marriage is *completely* irrelevant in regards to French Law.

BTW, the rules in various states for getting the power vested in a person to perform marriages vary greatly. Some states you just have to ask and pay a small ($25ish) fee. Some states you have to at least come up with a Church name, that's where those advertisements for getting the right to marry. For *certain* states, you send the mail-order church a fee, they send a document saying you are a minister of that church and you can get the right to marry. Consult your local laws...

You've got it (except that it's marriage licenses that officiants sign), including consult your local laws. Where I live, we do not have justices of the peace and judges/justices cannot officiate at weddings. Magistrates are the choice for Option 2A. Also, people who get ordination certificates by mail order are not considered to meet the statutory definition of clergy who can officiate at weddings.

I'll add that as far as I know, many (most?) jurisdictions require witnesses as well as the officiant to sign the marriage license. Traditionally, the best man and the maid/matron of honor are the legal witnesses.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

You've got it (except that it's marriage licenses that officiants sign), including consult your local laws. Where I live, we do not have justices of the peace and judges/justices cannot officiate at weddings. Magistrates are the choice for Option 2A. Also, people who get ordination certificates by mail order are not considered to meet the statutory definition of clergy who can officiate at weddings.

I'll add that as far as I know, many (most?) jurisdictions require witnesses as well as the officiant to sign the marriage license. Traditionally, the best man and the maid/matron of honor are the legal witnesses.

Definitely "consult your local laws". And I'm curious where you live that judges can't perform weddings. I do know of some states where ordination by mail-order is good enough. Also, I know that Pennsylvania tends to have a fairly open concept of who can perform a wedding, mostly because for the Quakers, there isn't really a leader of the flock, just a secretary really. (I'm in Maryland)

Randy

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by naraht

Definitely "consult your local laws". And I'm curious where you live that judges can't perform weddings.

North Carolina.

[BluPhire]

http://sdgln.com/news/2010/08/09/vid...llace-fox-news

Ted Olsen (the lawyer who argued for overturning Prop 8) on Fox News Sunday.

Did you know he was solicitor general during W's administration?

[Amicus]

A Massachusetts case is winding its away through the federal court system that could conceivably strike down the Clinton-Era Defense of Marriage Act. I cannot remember the case name or the gender of the couple involved but the case goes something like this: A couple resides in Massachusetts and gets married in a ceremony recognized by the commonwealth. One member of the couple is a federal employee. The couple is denied spousal benefits due to DOMA. The couple sued to get spousal benefits. A federal court judge in Massachusetts agreed with the couple. The case is going to the First Circuit Court of Appeals.

With the election of a new governor, I suspect Rhode Island will be the next state to approve gay marriage. I believe that the speaker of the lower house of the Rhode Island legislature is an out gay man; the outgoing governor is opposed to gay marriage. Depending on the gubernatorial election in Hawaii, the Aloha State could extend domestic partnerships to civil unions in 2011; again the outgoing governor vetoed civil union legislation.

Consentual incest is permitted in Spain, France and Belgium. Romania voted down such a measure earlier this year.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Hmm that is interesting about Spain. I always thought they were a fairly religious country.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by BluPhire

http://sdgln.com/news/2010/08/09/vid...llace-fox-news

Ted Olsen (the lawyer who argued for overturning Prop 8) on Fox News Sunday.

Did you know he was solicitor general during W's administration?

The two major lawyers for the case, Olsen and Boies argued against each other in the Bush v. Gore case. It was an unlikely pair, and Olsen is a conservative. Which makes this whole thing all the better.

[Amicus]

In the Franco era, Spain was a Catholic theocracy. Once the dictatorship was overthrown and the constitutional monarchy was established, Spain quickly became a secular state. Spain approved gay marriage year, the conservative establishment and Pope Benedict XVI howled their disapproval, but to no avail.

[naraht]

Gay marriage in Europe exists in Iceland, Norway, Sweden, The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and Portugal. All of the rest of countries in Europe that were outside the Iron Curtain except Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey and some of the Micro-states have some level of Civil Union and some like France's PACS being equal or almost equal in rights.

The countries that were inside the Iron Curtain are much more against gay marriage with only the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia having Civil Unions with Gay Marriage banned by the National Constitution in a good number.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_marriage_in_Europe

Randy

[Amicus]

Finland is expected to approve gay marriage in 2011, with legislation becoming law in 2012.

Iceland's out lesbian prime minister married her partner recently

[Amicus]

And the Tory/Lib Dem coalition in the United Kingdom is seriously discussing full marriage rights for gays and lesbians

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by Amicus

And the Tory/Lib Dem coalition in the United Kingdom is seriously discussing full marriage rights for gays and lesbians

I'm still shocked that collation is holding. Though if the Lib Dems push for it, it will happen. The Tories are smart enough to know that the Lib Dems have them by the balls right now.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

I'm still shocked that collation is holding. Though if the Lib Dems push for it, it will happen. The Tories are smart enough to know that the Lib Dems have them by the balls right now.

Yup. And in another year or so, if the government falls, the Lib Dems will be able to do a coalition with either Tory or Labour without suffering for it. No way that you are going to have a Tories-Labour coalition short of some part of the UK glowing at night...

Randy

[AOII Angel]

Don't forget that the central and south American countries are ahead of us, too.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Don't forget that the central and south American countries are ahead of us, too.

Southern Cone (Chile, Argentina, Uruguay) somewhat, Mexico City (which is a very liberal city as opposed to the rest of the Nation). The rest of Latin America, not so much. Some of the caribbean Islands, still jail.