|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:14 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:36 pm
YES!
But I still have to wait until all of the US legalizes gay marriage to get married though.
(I ish boycotting marriage.)
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 8:24 pm
That made me so happy when i heard that today, it shows that socially gays are becoming more acceptable but it needs to happen faster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 8:51 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:51 pm
Yay! Go California!
biggrin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 9:10 pm
Although my province was one of the last.... two... to legalize gay marriage... I can honestly say we've had the option for 3 years. :O
Apparently, Gay Divorce is NOT legal here, though. Which is funny, because I think anyone who wants a divorce after three years probably didn't deserve to be married in the first place. Fortunately, the government has been granting divorces despite the technicalities. >.>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 10:16 pm
We've had them since 2004. Civil unions rather than marriage though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:49 pm
Queen of the Radii We've had them since 2004. Civil unions rather than marriage though. Civil Unions are NOT the same. They're unfair is more like it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 12:54 pm
I think it is a HUGE step for the gay community in the U.S. If people want to get married, let them get married. Betadex Although my province was one of the last.... two... to legalize gay marriage... I can honestly say we've had the option for 3 years. Three years! surprised Wow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 2:25 pm
Overall I'd say I'm pretty pleased about this decision, while I'm not a big fan of marriage, mostly because I don't State regulation and Church interference in personal relationships. But I'm glad to see that individuals that are attracted to people of the same sex are not only becoming more accepted in this country but also the hypocrisy of status quo about the institution of marriage is slowly being torn away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 4:39 pm
Conservatives are trying, and probably going to succed, on getting a ban of gay marriage put on the ballot. And there is a good chance California will strike down gay marriage again. It's things like this that make me sad to live in California.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 6:53 pm
CrazieDoily Queen of the Radii We've had them since 2004. Civil unions rather than marriage though. Civil Unions are NOT the same. They're unfair is more like it. I would prefer that they allowed actual marriage, but civil unions are a hell of a lot better than nothing. You get essentially the same rights, the only difference that I'm aware of is that you can't adopt as a couple.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:02 pm
Marriage vs. Civil Unions
Unequal Unethical Unfair
Portability of Rights
Marriage;
Automatically recognized in every state.
Civil Unions;
Recognition is not guaranteed outside state that granted it.
Medical Decisions
M;
Right to make decisions for an incompetent spouse, unless previous written document exists.
Right to visit spouse in hospital.
CU;
Right to visit & make medical decisions may not be recognized outside state that granted it.
Gift & Property Transfer Tax
M;
Able to make unltd. Gifts & transfers w/o paying taxes.
CU;
Must pay Federal & state taxes.
Inheritance
M;
Right to inherit w/o a will.
No state & federal tax.
CU;
No state taxes, yes federal taxes.
Again, may not be recognized outside state that granted it.
Income Tax
M;
Filed jointly.
CU;
State taxes jointly.
Federal taxes filed as Single.
Social Security & Vet. Death Benefits
M;
Receive benefits upon death of spouse.
CU;
NONE.
Retirement Savings
M;
Receive payment upon death of spouse.
May roll over savings for cont. tax deferment.
CU;
May not allow non-spouse to be named beneficiary.
If does, benefits are taxed.
Divorce
M;
Property is divided equitably.
CU;
Property is divided equitably.
May not be recognized outside state that granted it.
Child & Spousal Support
M;
Criminal penalties for abandonment of child and spouse.
CU;
No legal obligation.
Not recognized outside state that granted it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:09 pm
That's for civil unions in the US, right? They're not the same as here. I'll try and find some info. EDIT: Bleh, I can't find anything comparing the two except for on Wikipedia: Wikipedia As a result of these bills, all couples in New Zealand, whether married, in a civil union, or in a de facto partnership, now generally enjoy the same rights and undertake the same obligations. These rights extend to immigration, next-of-kin status, social welfare, matrimonial property and other areas. Non-married couples are not however permitted to adopt children, although people in non-marital relationships can adopt as individuals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 7:56 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
