Show of Hands

I can't tell, are you saying two people of the same gender shouldn't be able to marry, or the fact I said gay marriage? (if that's why, i did it for the sake of clarification)

It's the word Gay.Im sorry it took me so long to respond I was road tripping it. Gender & sexual preferences are not factors that determine the right to marry. DUH!.....lol

Again I was trying to clarify between male female marriage and Sam sex marriage (which I probably should've said). What do you consider the factors to be?

Same

Any two adults can marry even if they are immediate family. Whatever that union means to the two no one gives a rats ass about. Marriage legally protects the benefits of the couple that's it.Polygamy (marry the whole heard) no one cares but the U.S.

Courts will not support a union they do not recognize. So any 2 adults.

I'm fine with that, keep marraige in the church then.

Not necessarily. Would it still be a contract between two adults?

No, why would it? Why the hell do we need a contract?

So basically just cohabitation, not marriage? That wouldn't involve the government. Cole was saying below a contract between 2 adults, which is why I asked

Theoretically, the idea is that stable marriages make for more productive citizens. Whether that is actually borne out by statistics is a great question, though.

I can live and raise kids with three different women if I choose, what difference does it make if I tell people we are married

It depends. There are legal and employment benefits you get if you're married, for instance. If you personally don't care, more power to you, but I completely understand gay couples feeling it's unfair.

There shouldn't be legal and employment benefits. What is the logical difference between me living with my girlfriend and me marrying her?

Bob, as long as there are benefits, should states have to?

Are you referring solely to contracts between adults, or also to, say marriages where there is differences in the age of consent?

If someone is under the age of consent, they are also legally incapable of entering into a binding contract. Not sure why you bring that up?

Consent age varies by state

Again, not sure of your point.

So if they were of age, say 16 in one state and move to another where it is 18, does the 18 state have to accept it?

The marriage, that is

Far as I know, yes.

Just going over what I read, they don't have to recognize the marraige if they are minors and the state law is 18 and above

And if they do have to, then why the difference in consent ages by state when they can just go elsewhere upon parental approval?

You seem to be conflating two distinct concepts: the age of consent to sexual relations/marriage, which differs by state, and the FACT of marriage, which is a legally-binding contract. A married minor is considered emancipated for many purposes.

Strictly going off the age in which the minor can be married (I apologize if consent is the wrong word). Varies from state to state, and from what I read, the marriage doesn't have to be recognized in every state, emancipated in the original or not

What have you read? I'd be curious. I'm not an expert in marriage law but I would be surprised if a marriage's validity state to state depends on the parties' ages.

I've been trying my hardest to find whether they will or won't, closest thing is from uslegal.com saying that the state determines the age minors can be married. Not 100% sure this will nullify a marriage from another state, but still left wondering

If not then what is stopping them from crossing state lines to side step the law, then tying the hands of the state to recognize the marriage?

I'm not clear on what you're asking. If you're talking about a minor crossing state lines to get married, he/she is probably doing it against parents' wishes, which might make that kidnapping, which is a separate question. But if a couple is validly

married, I'm not aware of any operation of law that would invalidate it based on their ages. Any invalidation would be ab initio, eg if it were the result of kidnapping as suggested.

Not kidnapping, but with parents consent, however, they are too young to get married in their home state, can they cross state lines (with parent in tow) to marry, go back home, and have their home state (that didn't allow the marriage) to accept it?

Unfortunately we are getting into an area where I don't have good knowledge. If I'm not mistaken, I believe parental consent is sufficient for marriage/emancipation in any state, but again, family law is not my specialty.

I agree it should be federal. Until the day comes when anyone can marry someone regardless if their partner's sex, should states that dint allow gay marriages have to recognize marriages from those that do, under the full. Faith and credit clause?

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and

The effect thereof
Article IV section 1 us constitution

I thought you were a libertarian.

I considered myself a libertarian for a while.
Then I met libertarians. Particularly Rebelfury76. That's when I realized I am too moderate to be a libertarian.

He's more of a minarchist than a libertarian, so are you just a moderate republican then?

Yes I'm a moderate Republican with some moderate libertarian leanings.
Minarchists are libertarians.

I find myself agreeing with Skinner a lot, FWIW. Haha, if SOH were a Congress, I think you could count on us to vote similarly as some old school Northeast Republicans!

There are some issues I agree with you two. Now, how do we tell congress we've rediscovered bipartisanship?

Moderate there is a virtual congress run by SpeakerAFly. You should join

Matt, I think we should. I feel pragmatism has always been a tenant of the Northeastern Republican! Compromise beats gridlock.

Skinner, how? Do I just follow him?

Yep. Skinner and I are justices on the Supreme Court

Yep it's that simple

Awesome, I just joined. The moderate Republican caucus grows!

Finically, we rediscovered it in Columbus Day.

Whoa, what is this and how does one join/apply?

Ironically*
And just follow SpeakerAFly

Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof."

Yup

Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and

The effect thereof
Article IV section 1 us constitution

Exactly Matt

I have never read the constitution, maybe I should. I was just considering the states would take it to court. If your suggestion applies why doesn't it already happen?

Section 2 of DOMA

I haven't read that either, sorry. You are challenging me here :-)

DOMA was struck down a couple months ago by the Supreme Court.

Not all of it. Only section 3 was struck down if my information is correct

I'll have to look into it more :)

Ok, I read a little more. It's hard to tell exactly what the ruling is, but since the federal government recognizes same-sex marriage, for all practical purposes it makes it very hard for states to enforce anti-gay marriage laws...for example:

I live in TX. If I were a lesbian, I could go to CA or wherever and get married legally. When I come back home, I would change my status with social security etc (for federal benefits). Texas laws can't prevent me from doing that. Next, I'd go...

...to the Texas DMV, armed with my new social security card, marriage license & certificate, and copy of the full faith and credit clause. It would probably work. I had to do a similar thing with my husband (not related to gay marriage obvi) bc he...

...changed his last name when we got married, and Texas is stodgy about that sort of thing. We won. :)

Actually, they do according to the full faith and credit clause, which I posted below

We do not have a legal right to be married. Marriage is not a right afforded by any part of the constitution. I am married, but the govt didn't 'give' me permission to marry my husband... My church did.

If I carry my gun into Illinois I guarantee you I will be arrested.

The full faith and credit clause still applies to any documents, including marriage contracts.

My conceal carry card is a document. It is not honored. I have paperwork and background checks to carry a gun (a paperwork)... Not honored. Again, it can't be sometimes an not others.

Did I say it shouldn't be honored?

Take it to the SCOTUS Rain. Maybe you will win the right to conceal carry in other states.

No, not saying you personally. Just proving a point that the law is apparently subjective to some people. I mean that some forms of paperwork are not subject to crossing state lines. I find it all moronic. If it's good for one, it's good for all.

Skinner, can't tell if I hint sarcasm there or not... But people are already doing it in Illinois. Illinois has been overruled and it was deemed unconstitutional.

Oh no I'm serious. SCOTUS usually rules in favor of nationalization anyways, and this right is enshrined in the Constitution.

There is a legal difference between the license to carry a gun and the contractual license of a marriage. Too difficult to explain here but you are comparing apples to a fence post (meaning they're not even both fruit) as far as the law is concerned

Thinking about it, I think blubbers may be correct. I'll have to double check though.

The effect thereof

1. Humans are primates.

2. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mammals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

You got that right

B you may be interested I found out she is not dobie & setter, but dobie and Huskey & a handful your welcome

Oh that is my recent rescue dog

Hooray for rescue dogs! The one in my profile pic is a terrier mix, and we also have a chihuahua mix (they are ubiquitous in SoCal, haha). Both rescues :)

I think plenty of people are in favor of nationwide gun laws, precisely because so many states are quite lax and it's very easy to get illicit guns across state lines since there is no border patrol btw states.

^^ this

Cole, assume for the sake of the question that as long as marriage isn't just a contract between two people, but is recognized by the government.

Well, technically, if it's a contract the government is by definition involved, at least to the extent you want that contract to be enforceable.

Bethany FTW