On Missouri

[ericaequites]

Missouri, the "show-me" state and a bellwether of American opinion, was the thirty-fifth state to pass a law noting that marriage can take place only between one man and one woman. This is meant to preserve family values

Comments

[msmithy2k]

then again, it's handy over there for transgender folk because you can legally change your birth cert (can't in the UK) thus entitling you to marry someone of the opposite sex.. over here, even when all else sees me as the man i am, i still can't marry my partner because in the law's eyes we are the same gender.

but yes-- i see your point, what kind of jurisdiction lets all kinds of other people get married and adopt kids while gay&lesbian couples can't show their commitment in the same way..

my argument would be that as the lesbian i once was, i wouldn't have wanted a commitment ceremony anyway because it would imitate a str8 wedding too much. if anything, it would have to be a completely different state of affair, to be original and unique to us.

as it is, i will be a str8 (with bi tendancies-- how confusing) male, but again i don't know if i want to get married at all. I don't want to fall in with what everyone else does, but i recognise that there are other transfolk who would want to.

rant over :)

Re:

[ericaequites]

I can see your point quite well. Right now, The US is three states away from being able to pass a Constitutional amendment which would state that marriage can only exist between one man and one woman.
There are rumours over here that Tony Blair will work hard to allow gay marriage in the UK, following the Netherlands and Belgium's lead.
Marriage is a fine istitution, but who wnats to spend pers life in an institution? I merely feel the option should be available.
My point was if a woman can marry the man who sexually abused her daughter, why shouldn't gays be allowed to marry?