The Cowardly Solution to Gay Marriage

[Alyeska]

This is why the word marriage is so important and why denying Gays the right to use it is wrong.

Gay family denied entry to US

Gay family denied entry to US
A Canadian gay couple has been refused entry into the United States after filling out joint customs forms as a family.

The two men - Joe Varnell and Kevin Bourassa who are legally married under Ontario law - refused to fill out separate forms and cancelled their trip, to a human rights conference in Georgia.

The US Embassy in Ottawa defended the action by US immigration officials at Toronto airport, saying that the 1996 US Defence of Marriage Act defined marriage as "only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife".

We will not deny our marital status in order to get into a country
Kevin Bourassa
"This is the law of the country, so as a sovereign country, the US can definitely do what it wants," embassy spokeswoman Danielle Lorrain said.

Celebrated couple

"We're disappointed," Kevin Bourassa told Reuters news agency.

"It is not up to the US to define for Canada what constitutes a family and that is what they have attempted to do today."

"We certainly could not enter the US in good conscience as singles, hiding behind forms," Mr Bourassa added.

He said that the couple's lawyer had already been in touch with Canada's Foreign Ministry to raise a complaint to the US ambassador.

"We're looking for the recognition of equal marriage abroad. We will not deny our marital status in order to get into a country," Mr Bourassa said.

The couple were married in a religious ceremony in Toronto in 2001.

But their relationship was legally recognised only last June, after a ruling by a court in Ontario.

Since then, they have become one of Canada's most celebrated gay couples, regularly appearing on television shows.

The Canadian Government is currently considering to extend same-sex unions throughout the country.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/a ... 122632.stm

Published: 2003/09/19 12:30:57 GMT

© BBC MMIX

Assholes will use it as justification to punish people overtly such as this poor couple that was denied entry into the US simply because they called themselves married. Personally, I cannot wait for a test case to go against DOMA.

[Oni Koneko Damien]

Why do the vows have to be verbally given twice? Why can't the entire federal/legal aspect of it be nothing more than a simple contract-signing with a government witness who quickly explains and/or shows the paperwork with the tax and other benefits you get from marriage, and then devote the *entire* public ceremony to whatever religious/civil/whatever institution you want afterwards? There's no need to hold/pay for two 'ceremonies' if the legal portion of the marriage doesn't even need a ceremony to be legal, and the only other argument against it relies wholly on the symbolic effect of any ceremony.

You really think people will be happy to reduce something as bound up with emotion as marriage to a coldly business like signing of a contract? Do you really think people want to do that hidden away from their friends and family?

So... you missed the part where I said the actual ceremony itself can take place wherever and however you like, and the 'coldly business' is only for squaring away the various legal benefits? In the US, a lot of people consider buying their first house a huge step/accomplishment and it's often synonymous with 'The American Dream'. Yet the actual sale of the house is a very simple, contract-signing affair. The great housewarming party often given has no legal weight in and of itself, yet no one seems to complain about the actual legal aspect of it being 'hidden away'.

I don't know what marriages are like where you come from but in the UK signing the signing the register is such a important public part of the marriage ceremony in the UK that a break is habitually put in the proceedings for people to take photographs of the couple and witnesses sign the register and then pose with it.

I have only attended two marriages in my lifetime, so take this with plenty of salt, but the entire legal portion of the declaration of marriage didn't even appear in the entire public ceremony, merely the religious aspects of it. Perhaps I've been oblivious and missed that section amidst the religious portion of the ceremony.

Being chosen as a witness is seen as a significant honour and the next best thing to being best man or maid of honour.

So then the legal aspect, at least in the UK, has taken on a ceremonial significance in and of itself. Hooray for the UK, as far as I know, that's still not the case over here, where the religious portion is of overwhelming public importance and spectacle, and the actual legal aspects are often one of the more unnoticed parts of the proceedings. The argument of ceremonial and symbolic importance falls flat if the actual process in question is neither here.

Besides you are still wrong as you still have to pay for two venues and two officiants even if for some reason people are happy to do away with all the symbolism at the actual marriage.

Are you seriously suggesting that the cost of having a civil servant present the proper paperwork and witness its signing by all involved parties is even remotely comparable to the costs involved with renting a location, getting all the food, band, religious officials, etc.? Did you breeze over the part where I said the legal aspect *shouldn't* be a ceremony, and thus incur none of the costs normally associated with a ceremony involving large amounts of people, food, entertainment, and religious aspects?

[Darth Wong]

You're full of shit. The contract signing is usually part of the church ceremony. You just didn't notice because you weren't paying attention, and you never went through it yourself.

You're right in the sense that it's a contract. But here's a news flash for you: not all contracts have to be signed in a courtroom. There's no reason why the contract can't be signed in a church during the ceremony, with a religious official serving as the recognized witness. You get the marriage license much earlier, at a government office.