Posted on 09/30/2015 7:39:35 AM PDT by Zakeet
A wedding is not just two people exchanging rings; it is an entanglement of their personal, legal, and business affairs. For better or for worse, marriage affects a broad and substantial list of rights involving inheritance, property, child custody, and more. Now that gay marriage is legal in all fifty states, both the people involved in gay relationships and the legislators drafting the laws that govern all these rights need to carefully analyze the issues presented.
As it turns out, those who cheered the decision [legalizing homosexual marriage] may have their own reasons to worry. The Law of Unintended Consequences plays no favorites, and the Obergefell decision may create headaches for gay couples, especially in common-law marriage states.
[Snip]
Common-law marriage functions to create the legal relationship of marriage even though the two spouses have not completed the formal procedures to register their marriage with the government.
While the law differs from state to state, generally the requirements are that the couple are both legally able to marry (they both freely consent, are not already married to other people, are of sound mind, and are of legal age or have their parents’ consent), and they hold themselves out to the public as husband and wife. Some jurisdictions require the common-law spouses to be cohabiting, or to cohabit for a certain period of time, in order for them to be considered common-law married. Other states require children, either by birth or adoption.
Currently, common-law marriages are expressly allowed in Alabama, Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and the District of Columbia. New Hampshire recognizes common-law marriages for probate purposes only, and Oklahoma, Utah, and some Native American tribes offer additional limited recognition. ...
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
"Another consequence of same sex marriage being made legal is that same sex couples may not enjoy the same employment benefits if they are not married.
Corporations are dropping unmarried same-sex couples from insurance benefits."
And most sodomite couples despise the thought of entering into a legal relationship that hamstrings them so much, especially the tacit expectation of fidelity. This is going to get interesting.
Heh heh heh.
I've always maintained, especially before queer "marraige" that a queer has as much right to marry a woman as does the next guy.
Faggots simply needed to marry lesbians in order to gain all the equal privileges afforded other married couples. Nobody said they had to be faithful, live with, or even like each other. That way, they could even have their own queer children.
She got awarded sole custody? Is she a child beater? She must be a horrible parent to lose custody to someone she just married. Are people tearing her apart for being such a horrendous parent?
And, what the heck is a proximity parent? Does that mean the neighbors where I grew up were my proximity parents?
First time I realized SSM will end up subtracting fidelity from marriage. Either that, or everybody will have two definitions of marriage.
Heh heh heh heh.
So you’ve been living with your favorite gay squeeze for years, he’s such a lazy slacker, but you keep him in your chic penthouse apartment because hey he cooks and gives good service, and you two have been at every gay marriage success party you could get to in your rainbow shirts. Yay you.
Well, it seems your boyfriend can now grab an attorney and sue you for palimony and half of all your stuff. And you didn’t even GET married. Gee, still cheering????
You apparently don’t know anything about this story.
Lisa Miller left Jenkins when Miller became a Christian. Jenkins never adopted the child, Isabel. She only showed interest in the child after Miller’s conversion and then made claims to “parenthood” rights, which were awarded. Miller reported that her daughter displayed a distraught attitude about going to the non-mother’s home for visits, and later learned that Jenkins would bath naked with Isabel, which made the little girl very uncomfortable.
Understandably, Miller protested the visitation rights granted Jenkins and refused to let her daughter visit in an abusive environment. The court then took ALL rights away from Lisa, the mother, and gave them to Jenkins, the non-mother.
Lisa is now a fugitive from “justice” living with Isabella in some Central American country, all because she didn’t want her daughter molested.
You apparently don’t know anything about this story.
Lisa Miller left Jenkins when Miller became a Christian. Jenkins never adopted the child, Isabel. She only showed interest in the child after Miller’s conversion and then made claims to “parenthood” rights, which were awarded. Miller reported that her daughter displayed a distraught attitude about going to the non-mother’s home for visits, and later learned that Jenkins would bath naked with Isabel, which made the little girl very uncomfortable.
Understandably, Miller protested the visitation rights granted Jenkins and refused to let her daughter visit in an abusive environment. The court then took ALL rights away from Lisa, the mother, and gave them to Jenkins, the non-mother.
Lisa is now a fugitive from “justice” living with Isabella in some Central American country, all because she didn’t want her daughter molested.
OMG! I would say that’s unbelievable, but since SCOTUS’ SSM DECISION, it’s way too believable. How did homosexuals get control of the courts?
As they always do, a little bit at a time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.