Marriage in California

[James NM]

In honor of Prop 8 being overturned in California, I give you a little humor, and take you inside city hall in San Francisco where people in love are picking up their marriage licenses so they can live happily ever after in matrimonial bliss.

City Hall: "Next." "Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license." "Names?" "Tim and Jim Jones." "Jones? Are you related? I see a resemblance." "Yes, we're brothers." "Brothers? You can't get married." "Why not? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?" "Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!" "Incest?" No, we are not gay." "Not gay? Then why do you want to get married?" "For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other. Besides, we don't have any other prospects." "But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've been denied equal protection under the law. If you are not gay, you can get married to a woman." "Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have. But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim." "And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us just because we are not gay?" "All right, all right. I'll give you your license. Next."

"Hi. We are here to get married." "Names?" "John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson." "Who wants to marry whom?" "We all want to marry each other." "But there are four of you!" "That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert, Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship." "But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples." "So you're discriminating against bisexuals!" "No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that it's just for couples." "Since when are you standing on tradition?" "Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere." "Who says? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The Judge says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!" "All right, all right. Next."

"Hello, I'd like a marriage license." "In what names?" "David Deets." "And the other man?" "That's all. I want to marry myself." "Marry yourself? What do you mean?" "Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together. Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."

As the clerk looks over at the last two customers of the day, he sees two men on opposite side of the room. One has Dolly the sheep on a leash, and the other has a new 3D LED TV sitting beside him.

"That does it! I quit!! You people are making a mockery of marriage!!

 

[JerryLove]

Hrm

I'm not a fan of the government being in the marriage business to begin with, but it's interesting to see the "mockery of marriage" brought up.

I'll assume you are thinking in Judeo-Christian terms (several other cultures have had homosexual marriage for centuries or more).

It's interesting to see a polygamy example (which was allowed under Jewish law) brought up in the "mockery" group, while a divorcee marrying (divorce being strictly prohibited by Jesus) is not considered a mockery of marriage.

I believe marrying close relatives was also not a mockery in the bulk of the OT (Amram and Jochabed, or the half-sister in Gen 20:12), though Leviticus has something that seems to remove it after the land of Canin.

So to make sure I follow:
A committed till-death relationship with someone of the same gender = mockery
Multiple committed till-death relationships with two people of the opposite gender (bigamy) = mockery

Divorce <> mockery
Marrying your former mistress <> mockery
Adulterers remarrying <> mockery
People getting married just because the girl got pregnant <> mockery
People going through a dozen marriages <> mockery

Is that about right?

(the post is non-conformist, so I suppose the flood of reds should start showing up now)

 

[gkaste]

Did you really share this for reasons of 'humor'?

 

[highfigh]

Hrm

I'm not a fan of the government being in the marriage business to begin with, but it's interesting to see the "mockery of marriage" brought up.

I'll assume you are thinking in Judeo-Christian terms (several other cultures have had homosexual marriage for centuries or more).

It's interesting to see a polygamy example (which was allowed under Jewish law) brought up in the "mockery" group, while a divorcee marrying (divorce being strictly prohibited by Jesus) is not considered a mockery of marriage.

I believe marrying close relatives was also not a mockery in the bulk of the OT (Amram and Jochabed, or the half-sister in Gen 20:12), though Leviticus has something that seems to remove it after the land of Canin.

So to make sure I follow:
A committed till-death relationship with someone of the same gender = mockery
Multiple committed till-death relationships with two people of the opposite gender (bigamy) = mockery

Divorce <> mockery
Marrying your former mistress <> mockery
Adulterers remarrying <> mockery
People getting married just because the girl got pregnant <> mockery
People going through a dozen marriages <> mockery

Is that about right?

(the post is non-conformist, so I suppose the flood of reds should start showing up now)

Royalty married close family members for hundreds of years because they wanted to "keep the bloodlines pure", by avoiding dilution from other bloodlines and when close relatives marry, we all know that doesn't work well for the offspring (or the people they rule). Islam allows up to four wives and has other provisions when women are won in battle or when the man kills the husband, with a requirement for separate and equal housing for each wife. This is based on Judaic Law, since Christians never allowed multiple wives, AFAIK.

The position of a local morning radio show is "Let 'em get married, so they can be as miserable as the rest of us".

 

[JerryLove]

Royalty married close family members for hundreds of years because they wanted to "keep the bloodlines pure", by avoiding dilution from other bloodlines and when close relatives marry, we all know that doesn't work well for the offspring (or the people they rule).

Around Deuteronomy, Judaism seems to have decided that marrying "too related" was bad. A sister by the same dad was OK, but by the same mom was not.

I agree that, genetically, siring offspring with a sibling is a terrible idea.

I also agree it's "icky".

Islam allows up to four wives and has other provisions when women are won in battle or when the man kills the husband, with a requirement for separate and equal housing for each wife. This is based on Judaic Law, since Christians never allowed multiple wives, AFAIK.

I'm a little rusty on my early Christian history: but I think that polygamy (as allowed in Judaism) was practiced in much of Christianity in the early years.

Eventually the Roman empire united Christians under a single church and single Bible; and that seems to have included monogamy.

At least: that's how I recall it. I'd have to go look up some references to be sure.

 

[Nemo128]

Here's a reference for ya:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm

Marriage rate: 7.1 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate: 3.5 per 1,000 population (44 reporting States and D.C.)

This country is a mockery of marriage.

You could rest assured that the guy marrying the sheep isn't likely to get divorced.

 

[mtrycrafts]

....

I also agree it's "icky".

...

Well, that too is relative

 

[mtrycrafts]

..
Marriage rate: 7.1 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate: 3.5 per 1,000 population (44 reporting States and D.C.)

This country is a mockery of marriage.

...

I don't think it is a mockery. Who said one cannot or shouldn't divorce? Is that worse than driving a partner to insanity? Or the kids? It is a contract and contracts are broken all the time.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Around Deuteronomy, Judaism seems to have decided that marrying "too related" was bad. A sister by the same dad was OK, but by the same mom was not.

I agree that, genetically, siring offspring with a sibling is a terrible idea.

I also agree it's "icky".

I'm a little rusty on my early Christian history: but I think that polygamy (as allowed in Judaism) was practiced in much of Christianity in the early years.

Eventually the Roman empire united Christians under a single church and single Bible; and that seems to have included monogamy.

At least: that's how I recall it. I'd have to go look up some references to be sure.

Women were given or forced into marriage for gain of property, empires, etc in history. It is an arcane idea all around.

 

[JerryLove]

I don't think it is a mockery. Who said one cannot or shouldn't divorce?

I think that was Jesus.

 

[Patrukas777]

I think that was Jesus.

Jesus did say if there is unfaithfulness in the marriage, then one can get a divorce.

 

[Alex2507]

Jesus did say if there is unfaithfulness in the marriage, then one can get a divorce.

... not quite.
He just said that if there was unfaithfulness in a marriage then divorce is not the cause of adultery.
You're still suppose to stay married to the whore.

I'd like to spend the rest of my day teaching Sunday school but I got stuff to do.

 

[highfigh]

I don't think it is a mockery. Who said one cannot or shouldn't divorce? Is that worse than driving a partner to insanity? Or the kids? It is a contract and contracts are broken all the time.

Sure beats killing the family and then eating a bullet. The whole "If I can't have her, NOBODY can!" thing is like a kid destroying a toy so the other kids can't play with it.

 

[lsiberian]

Here's a reference for ya:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/divorce.htm

Marriage rate: 7.1 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate: 3.5 per 1,000 population (44 reporting States and D.C.)

This country is a mockery of marriage.

You could rest assured that the guy marrying the sheep isn't likely to get divorced.

Yeah but that includes remarriers. First timers have much better odds at making it stick especially if they have their head on their shoulders. I think my aunt did all the divorcing stats for my family tree so we are safe. I don't actually know how many divorces she's had.

 

[Rickster71]

In honor of Prop 8 being overturned in California, I give you a little humor........

James it looks like the humor and irony were lost.

I don't have a horse in this race, though I can promise that if the Sheep / Man, and the 3D LED TV / Man, and Polygamists had as big a voting block as other special interest groups, we would also see those pairings allowed.
If anyone thinks this is about doing what's fair & right, you don't know politics.

 

[lsiberian]

... not quite.
He just said that if there was unfaithfulness in a marriage then divorce is not the cause of adultery.
You're still suppose to stay married to the whore.

I'd like to spend the rest of my day teaching Sunday school but I got stuff to do.

In the Gospel of Matthew 5:32 Jesus is recorded in the Greek as literally saying, "the one who divorces his wife except a word of sexual immorality makes commit adultery, and whoever marries the divorced one , commits adultery."

I see no implication in the scriptures that he suggests they should remain married.

In the Gospel of Mark 10:1-12 An exception isn't listed. These are the two places where Jesus is quoted as discussing marriage. It stands to reason that the exclusion was probably there. Different reporters remember different details concerning events so I think the exception certainly applies. Paul discusses marriage in greater detail, but reading Paul in Greek is more advanced than my meager training at this point.

 

[lsiberian]

personally I could care less about the prop 8 and laws like it. The church is supposed to be in the business of savings souls, not policing societal morality like the Pharisees Jesus despised.

 

[highfigh]

personally I could care less about the prop 8 and laws like it. The church is supposed to be in the business of savings souls, not policing societal morality like the Pharisees Jesus despised.

The problem with all of this, IMO and it's part of the schism between the Ancient Catholic Church and the Roman Catholic Church, is that the RC and some other denominations believe that salvation comes from beliefs, while the Orthodox Church beliefs that it comes from thoughts, beliefs and actions. I agree more with the Orthodox version because everywhere I look, people do terrible things and when it comes to being held responsible, they bring religion into it. One Day of Atonement, going to confession and someone telling people that "they have accepted Jesus Christ as their personal Savior" doesn't right the wrong. It makes them think that there's no consequences for their actions.

I have a major problem with "The church is supposed to be in the business of savings souls, not policing societal morality like the Pharisees Jesus despised" being used as a way to live a life of crime, debauchery and immorality when all it takes to be saved is to repent. Left to their own devices, people will do things that are unspeakably bad, so laws and religious teachings are there to guide people toward civil actions and behavior. Even with these in place, it's not working.

Prop 8 is a government issue, not a church issue.

Our leaders are taking us straight to a world of crap and they're making it hard, if not impossible, to stop them.

 

[10010011]

James it looks like the humor and irony were lost.

I don't have a horse in this race, though I can promise that if the Sheep / Man, and the 3D LED TV / Man, and Polygamists had as big a voting block as other special interest groups, we would also see those pairings allowed.
If anyone thinks this is about doing what's fair & right, you don't know politics.

Why do you people make this leap that allowing same sex marriages will lead to people marring sheep?

The difference is the sheep can not say "I love you" nor can the TV.

 

[Rickster71]

Why do you people make this leap that allowing same sex marriages will lead to people marring sheep?

The difference is the sheep can not say "I love you" nor can the TV.

I don't know what you mean by "you people"?

I suggest you re-read the part of the OP that said "I give you a little humor"

The fact that you've totally misunderstood my post is a good example why I always say...
Kids stay in school!