16 down, 34 to go...

[zach]

i won't pretend to understand law well enough... will that courts decision set a precedent for georgia as well? i would love to heads exploding around here. a couple guys getting married is sure to do it too

[Hellraiser]

i won't pretend to understand law well enough... will that courts decision set a precedent for georgia as well? i would love to heads exploding around here. a couple guys getting married is sure to do it too

A circuit controls multiple states, I believe there are 13 circuits in total and they all have an appeals court that can override a ruling.  If a decision goes beyond a state's supreme court and court of appeals it goes to the circuit court and their court of appeals.  If it goes beyond that system the next and final court on the list is the US Supreme Court which cannot be appealed.

So if a circuit court for say Louisiana decides that gay marriage bans are unconstitutional and overturns it then each state in that circuit has their bans overturned as well.

This is my understanding of the system and could be wrong

[J.R.E.]

Florida's same-sex marriage stay declined, marriages to begin next month?

http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2014/12/3/gay_marriage_ruling.html

"Even with the ruling yesterday in Atlanta ( With the 11th circuit court), Florida Attorney General Pam
Bondi could  seek a stay  from the U.S. Supreme  Court, but the court has already denied similar requests for stay of extensions in South Carolina, Alaska, Idaho, and Kansas. "

I believe AG Pam Bondi will fight this right to the end.  She refuses to believe that gay people should be allowed to be married in the State of Florida.  And Pam Bondi herself, is twice divorced ! 

http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2014/06/01/floridas-twice-divorced-attorney-general-thinks-gays-don%E2%80%99t


Ray

[zach]

I don't know if I heard about this fucker here, or while I was surfing around doing research after the recent decision. Anyway, google him, scorn and ridicule is all I have.

Eladio Jose Armesto of the Florida Democracy League.

Funny thing is the Democratic Party has filed a cease and desist against them to stop them from using the name.

They call themselves Florida's leading minority-led Democratic voters' civil rights and social justice advocacy organization, firmly committed to ending hatred, ignorance and intolerance.

Logic fails me here. They are nothing more than a hate group.

[zach]

A circuit controls multiple states, I believe there are 13 circuits in total and they all have an appeals court that can override a ruling.  If a decision goes beyond a state's supreme court and court of appeals it goes to the circuit court and their court of appeals.  If it goes beyond that system the next and final court on the list is the US Supreme Court which cannot be appealed.

So if a circuit court for say Louisiana decides that gay marriage bans are unconstitutional and overturns it then each state in that circuit has their bans overturned as well.

This is my understanding of the system and could be wrong

That was my understanding as well. I really can't wait to see the buy bull thumpers melt down over this.

[J.R.E.]

And the insanity continues,...

http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2014/12/15/bondi_files_appeal_t.html



Bondi files appeal to U.S. Supreme Court in gay marriage case


TALLAHASSEE --

Florida has filed a new appeal to keep gay marriages from happening in Florida until the state Supreme Court makes a decision. And this new appeal goes to the highest court in the country.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has filed an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The appeal would extend a stay to put gay marriage licenses on hold until all the consolidated cases on the issue work their way through the judicial system.

As of right now the injunction to stop gay marriages expires Jan. 5, 2015.

A federal court denied a motion to extend the stay past Jan. 5. Bondi's appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court would have the justices decide whether to extend the stay or allow it to expire.

[tednlou2]

SCOTUS schedules conference on Louisiana marriage appeal.  It was due to go before the 5th circuit next month.  But, two gay rights groups asked SCOTUS to review the case, before the circuit hearing-- which is apparently unusual.

http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2014/12/u-s-supreme-court-schedules-conference-on-louisiana-gay-marriage-appeal/

[J.R.E.]

http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2014/12/17/fl_gay_divorce.html

1st Florida gay divorce granted by judge


FORT LAUDERDALE (AP) --

The first formal divorce for a gay couple in Florida has been granted by the same county judge who also declared the state's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional.

Circuit Judge Dale Cohen on Wednesday dissolved the marriage of Heather Brassner and Megan Lade. They were united in a 2002 civil union in Vermont.

Cohen had ruled in August that Florida's gay marriage ban is unconstitutional and that out-of-state gay marriages should be recognized.

Brassner attorney Nancy Brodzki said it was Florida's first gay divorce.

Brodzki says she expects Attorney General Pam Bondi to appeal the decision, just as she has several other rulings against the gay marriage ban. There was no immediate reaction from Bondi's office.

Voters approved the ban in 2008.

[J.R.E.]

FINALLY !!

A decision from the US supreme court !!

http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2014/12/19/gay_marriage.html


Supreme Court won't stop gay marriages in Florida; licenses as soon as Jan. 6?


MIAMI (AP) --

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday refused to block gay marriages in Florida, the latest of about three dozen states allowing same-sex weddings.

In a one-paragraph order, the court decided not to step into the Florida case. A federal judge previously declared Florida's ban on gay marriage unconstitutional and said same-sex marriage licenses could start being issued in the state after Jan. 5 unless the Supreme Court intervened.

Most federal judges and appeals courts have ruled against state bans, but the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati has upheld the right of four states to decide whether to allow gay marriage.

Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi has fought to uphold Florida's constitutional ban, which voters approved in 2008.

Bondi said if the ban was struck down, some, but not all, county clerks in Florida would begin issuing marriage licenses, causing confusion throughout the state. She said that would happen because the lawsuit against Florida's ban only named the clerk in tiny Washington County in the Panhandle.

The state clerks association has warned its members that they could be risking misdemeanor prosecution under state law if they issue licenses before the question is fully settled. It is unclear how many plan to take that advice.

State judges in four South Florida counties have declared the same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional, but those decisions are also being appealed by Bondi and no marriage licenses have been issued.

U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle in August declared the state's ban unconstitutional, but he put his ruling on hold until after Jan. 5 pending appeals.

Like many other judges and appellate courts, Hinkle ruled the state's gay marriage ban violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.

Bondi's office released a statement Friday night in response to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision. The statement is as follows:

    Tonight, the United States Supreme Court denied the state's request for a stay in the case before the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. Regardless of the ruling, it has always been our goal to have uniformity throughout Florida until the final resolution of the numerous challenges to the voter-approved constitutional amendment on marriage. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court has now spoken, and the stay will end on January 5.

[tednlou2]

I will be in Florida that day.  But, I still am waiting for marriage here.  We cancelled plans to marry in NYC on 12-12-12.  We felt we wanted to wait for marriage here.  Our flight home is that day, but we may have to swing by the courthouse that day to see all the couples. 

[buginme2]

If you look at the current map that shows which states you can get married in we have come a long way in just one year.

There are only a handful of states left. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States#mediaviewer/File:Samesex_marriage_in_USA.svg

[Miss Philicia]

Also, if you compare full gay marriage rights between the US and Europe (and no, Western Europe isn't "Europe") the adjust for population totals as a % of the total, you'll see that actually the US is currently more liberal on the issue by far. True, a lot of countries have civil unions but that's not equal status. It amazes me that a place like Germany only has civil unions, instituted in 2001 and hasn't moved further on the issue.

In fact, if you look at "the Americas" as a whole the entire Western Hemisphere is far ahead now on this issue.

[J.R.E.]

Breaking News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMfrLFirGWc      Happy New Year !!

Judge: All Florida counties can comply with gay marriage ruling


http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2015/1/1/judge_all_florida_co.html


WASHINGTON COUNTY --

All of Florida's 67 counties can comply with a federal judge's ruling and issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples starting next week.

U.S. Judge Robert Hinkle issued a ruling Thursday that clarifies his ruling on the issue.

Hinkle originally overturned Florida's same-sex marriage ban, but there were questions as to whether it affected only Washington County, or all counties.

A stay on the ruling was set to end at midnight Jan. 5, and Hinkle said he would not extend the stay. That means on Jan. 6 counties can begin issuing marriage licences to same-sex couples.

Judge Hinkle said this in his ruling:

"History records no shortage of instances when state officials defied federal
court orders on issues of federal constitutional law. Happily, there are many more
instances when responsible officials followed the law, like it or not. Reasonable
people can debate whether the ruling in this case was correct and who it binds.

"There should be no debate, however, on the question whether a clerk of court may
follow the ruling, even for marriage-license applicants who are not parties to this
case. And a clerk who chooses not to follow the ruling should take note: the
governing statutes and rules of procedure allow individuals to intervene as
plaintiffs in pending actions, allow certification of plaintiff and defendant classes,
allow issuance of successive preliminary injunctions, and allow successful
plaintiffs to recover costs and attorney’s fees."

Many counties were preparing to issue those licenses even if they did not have this clarification. A Florida circuit judge Wednesday ordered Orange and Osceola counties to issue marriage licenses on Jan. 6.
latest news: gay marriage

[tednlou2]

We leave florida at 2:15pm January 6th.  We may just get hitched.  No.  I would like to swing by the courthouse and see if there are crowds.  If SCOTUS doesn't take the case for KY this year, we may just come back to Florida and marry on the beach. 

[zach]

when is your birthday again ted?  you know what i'm talking about mmmhmmm 

[tednlou2]

when is your birthday again ted?  you know what i'm talking about mmmhmmm 

January 4th.  I'm legal to marry. 

[J.R.E.]

We leave florida at 2:15pm January 6th.

Hey Ted,

Where you guys at here in Florida ?  Are you close to Clearwater?  Anyway, the reason I ask is because we're going to Derby lane on Saturday, But will be back in Clearwater between 2:00 and 3:00  that afternoon.

If you are in the area, and have no plans why not meet us at the Proshop Pub ( in Clearwater) around that time. I will give you more directions later, if you're in the area, and would like to get together for a few beverages !

Let me know !


Ray 

[tednlou2]

Hey Ted,

Where you guys at here in Florida ?  Are you close to Clearwater?  Anyway, the reason I ask is because we're going to Derby lane on Saturday, But will be back in Clearwater between 2:00 and 3:00  that afternoon.

If you are in the area, and have no plans why not meet us at the Proshop Pub ( in Clearwater) around that time. I will give you more directions later, if you're in the area, and would like to get together for a few beverages !

Let me know !


Ray 

Thanks for that offer.  We are in Englewood, which is between Tampa and Fort Myers.  We may actually be up that way Saturday.  We thought about going to Anna Marie island.  I will certainly let you know.  It would be good to meet up.  We stayed in Atlanta on the way down.  I contacted Zach.  I wanted to meet up with him, but wasn't sure of our schedule.  We drove Brian's parent's van down and will fly home the 6th.  We are flying out of Orlando.  We plan to hit Disney Monday and leave Tuesday. 

[zach]

englewood!? shit man, my family has a condo in nokomis, hit the drum circle while you're there, tell my people i said hello

i'm sorry to laugh, but i see some irony, you'll probably be married before you take your damn meds
 

[GSOgymrat]

According to a friend who is a financial advisor my partner and I need to review our financial situations with a professional before determining whether marriage is in our best interests. Apparently marriage isn't always the smartest way to go. We don't really care about marriage but we do care about saving money.

[Miss Philicia]

How romantic.

[mitch777]

Hmmm... romance or poverty. What a wonderful system.

[leatherman]

Apparently marriage isn't always the smartest way to go.

wonder how come we don't hear about this issue with heterosexual marriages? It seems many straights get married for the benefits and I thought that was actually the basis of most of the legal arguments in these judicial cases for same sex marriage. I'd be curious to hear the general reasoning if your financial adviser says you'd be better off staying single. It's usually not until people are very elderly and relying on government assistance that I've heard that it could be to their benefit to not be married (ie get divorced).

[zach]

not quite true leather, my ex and i put off marriage for years because of the tax hit we would have taken

trust me, marriage sucks, divorce sucks even worse... yall enjoy!

[GSOgymrat]

I don't know the details but I found this online:

For same-sex married couples, like all married couples, the marriage penalty could kick in.

It's especially true if both spouses work, said Barbara Weltman, a contributing editor to "J.K Lasser's Your Income Tax 2014."

That's because filers with higher incomes are now subject to new taxes to fund the health care reform law and a phaseout of personal exemptions and deductions. And if each partner in a same-sex marriage is working, the couple could find themselves over the threshold. They also could find it more difficult to deduct medical expenses based on their joint income. For most taxpayers, beginning with the 2013 tax year, medical expenses have to exceed 10 percent of adjusted gross income to be deductible.

Education credits and deductions also phase out at higher incomes.

However, if only one spouse works, there could be a bonus, Weltman said. The same applies if one spouse has a higher income than the other.


We both work and make around the same income, so the marriage penalty might affect us. We have been very happy together for 22 years and we are completely committed but registering our relationship with the government for tax breaks and inheritance benefits feels to me like the opposite of romance.

[tednlou2]

According to a friend who is a financial advisor my partner and I need to review our financial situations with a professional before determining whether marriage is in our best interests. Apparently marriage isn't always the smartest way to go. We don't really care about marriage but we do care about saving money.

I agree it isn't very romantic to view things that way.  However, it is a good idea to look at financial issues.  For example, I've talked to a few on SSDI.  They get the extra help and the QMB, where their premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and the 20% Medicare doesn't pay paid by Medicaid.  They said if they married, they would use their spouse's modest income.  That would put them over the max, so they would have to pay their Part B and D premiums.  They would lose the extra help, which makes generics $2-something and brand name like $6-something.  They would lose the 20% Medicaid pays.  The donut hole doesn't apply to those getting extra help.  I've learned so much about how all that works, by just talking to these people. 

[bocker3]

It's important to look at the whole -- long range -- picture and not just the current year's tax implications.

Being married saves me the worry of who inherits my things when I die -- it's difficult to go to court and take it away from a spouse, but easier to do so with a partner. 
Inheritance taxes are extremely lower (or non-existent) when it is a spouse.
If there is disparity in SS benefits, the spouse with the lower amount can opt to take their spouses benefits.

While I am NOT saying that one should ignore the potential financial impact in the near term -- and sometimes that impact is more than enough to drive a decision -- one also needs to look longer term.  It's hard to put a price tag on peace of mind.

Full disclosure -- Sid and I save money on taxes as married couple because our incomes are so different, but we are only talking about a few hundred dollars a year, so no material difference really.

M

[Miss Philicia]

I agree with bocker. When you sit down with your financial advisor come up with some worse case scenarios where one of you croak next week and go through what would happen, etc. You need to look at the larger picture.

Of course, as a life-long bachelor I'm not sure why I give a shit.

[buginme2]

Of course, as a life-long bachelor I'm not sure why I give a shit.

Because your a romantic. 


Ya know.  When I got married the tax consequences where not part of the decision making process.  I just loved the guy.  I'm just old-fashioned.

PS.  Our taxes went down.

[GSOgymrat]

My partner just told me that he has a pension that can only be inherited by a spouse, no one else, and it is a lot of money. That will probably tip the scales in favor of marriage but we still need to see a financial advisor or estate planner to figure out how best to proceed.

[Dan0]

Well this makes it a bit more difficult in Florida:

Pathetic!

Citing a litany of excuses, 14 of the County Clerks in the 'redder than red' panhandle will apparently comply with the mandate to issue licenses but will completely stop performing any and all weddings - straight, gay, fourth or fifth.  I would suspect that you would also have a hard time to find but a select few churches in the panhandle, too.

[buginme2]

Well this makes it a bit more difficult in Florida:

Pathetic!

  I would suspect that you would also have a hard time to find but a select few churches in the panhandle, too.

Who wants to get married at the courthouse anyway?  That makes for a pretty boring photo album.  And,What self respecting homo gets married in a church? 

Should we be expecting any other type of reaction? 

[Dan0]

Who wants to get married at the courthouse anyway?  That makes for a pretty boring photo album.  And,What self respecting homo gets married in a church? 

Should we be expecting any other type of reaction?

I wasn't thinking of the Gay-folk.  Lord, they can have nuptials almost anywhere and make it an event.  I was more concerned for all the folks like Florida's Attorney General.  She must be running out of places by now.  I'm going to guess that the bride will not be wearing white the fourth time around.

[buginme2]

With Florida

70 percent of Americans live in a marriage equality state.  That's 216 million people.

[J.R.E.]

    Couldn't have happened on a better day !  Rick Scott gets sworn in today ! I hope this wonderful and long awaited day,  doesn't take away too much from his swearing in ceremonies ! 

http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/bn9/2015/1/5/same_sex_couple_camp.html

Issuing of same-sex marriage licenses begins in Bay area


TAMPA --

Florida's ban on same-sex marriage ended statewide at the stroke of midnight Monday, and court clerks in some Florida counties wasted no time, issuing licenses and performing weddings overnight.

In downtown Tampa,the issuing of licenses started at 8 a.m. with the opening of the Clerk of the Circuit Court offices. About two dozen licenses were issued in the first hour the clerk's office was open.

A group marriage ceremony is planned for noon at Joe Chillura Courthouse Square Park due to the high number of marriages expected.

A three-day waiting period was waived for couples in Hillsborough County.

Ceremonies are anticipated in St. Petersburg as well today. In Pasco County, the clerk's office opened early to accommodate same-sex couple applying for marriage licenses. The Pasco clerk's office, however, is not performing wedding ceremonies.

Thousands of wedding ceremonies are expected to take place statewide by the end of the week.

For Shirley Winslow and Brenda Cuevas, it just makes sense.

They’ve been together 25 years and were first in line to get their marriage license in Hillsborough County. They never thought they’d live to see the day when they could be legally married.

They were married Tuesday morning.

Meanwhile, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi is still pursuing state and federal appeals seeking to uphold the ban voters approved in 2008, but her effort to block these weddings until the courts finally rule was denied by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Her office issued a statement Monday saying: "The judge has ruled, and we wish these couples the best."


Florida becomes the 36th U.S. state where same-sex marriages are legal statewide.

[mitch777]

Anita Bryant is crying somewhere.

[buginme2]

Anita Bryant is crying somewhere.

Heheh crying in her orange juice

[tednlou2]

The 5th Circuit heard the Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas cases today.  It appears the court is likely to strike down the bans.  SCOTUS did not take up the marriage cases today, which include KY, TN, OH, and MI.  They have until the end of the month to decide whether they will take it this term. 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/federal-appeals-courts-appears-likely-to-strike-down-louisia#.chw6aWkZL

[tednlou2]

SCOTUS will take up marriage equality this term.  It would seem unlikely that they would rule states can ban it, after they refused to hear appeals and allowed marriage equality to go forward in several states. 

If they should rule that states can ban it, that would not impact the states that already have it, right?  I mean, could they take it back, after the appeals courts have knocked them down and SCOTUS refused to take the appeals? 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-agrees-to-hear-gay-marriage-issue/2015/01/16/865149ec-9d96-11e4-a7ee-526210d665b4_story.html?wpmk=MK0000202

[J.R.E.]

Related link:

http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2015/1/16/scotus_gay_marriage.html


Supreme Court agrees to hear gay marriage issue


WASHINGTON (AP) --

The Supreme Court says it will decide whether same-sex couples nationwide have a right to marry under the Constitution.

The justices said Friday they will review an appellate ruling that upheld bans on same-sex unions in four states.

The case will be argued in April and a decision is expected by late June.

Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee are among the 14 states where gay and lesbian couples are not allowed to marry.

The number of states that permit same-sex marriage has nearly doubled in three months as a result of federal and state court rulings. The justices' decision to turn away same-sex marriage appeals in October allowed some of those rulings to take effect. Florida last week became the 36th state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

Time is running short for the Supreme Court to get same-sex marriage on its calendar if the justices want to tackle the issue before their current term ends in late June.

They might have to decide to jump in at their closed-door conference Friday if they want to resolve the legal debate over gay marriage in the next few months.

The justices would hear the case in April, the last month for oral arguments before the next term begins in October.

Written arguments already would have to be filed on a compressed schedule, though both sides are well versed in the issues after numerous rounds in the lower courts.

Until now, the court has managed both to contribute to a dramatic increase in the number of states that allow same-sex couples to marry and avoid settling the issue for the entire nation. Last week, Florida became the 36th state to issue licenses for same-sex unions.

In October, the justices offered no explanation when they passed up appeals from both sides calling on the court to take up gay marriage. The court also subsequently refused to block court orders in favor of same-sex couples from taking effect while state officials appealed. As a result, the number of states where same-sex couples could wed nearly doubled.

The appeals before the court come from gay and lesbian plaintiffs in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. The federal appeals court that oversees those four states upheld their same-sex marriage bans in November, reversing pro-gay rights rulings of federal judges in all four states.

Ten other states also prohibit such unions. In Arkansas, Mississippi, Missouri, South Dakota and Texas, judges have struck down anti-gay marriage laws, but they remain in effect pending appeals. In Missouri, same-sex couples can marry in St. Louis and Kansas City only.

Louisiana is the only other state that has seen its gay marriage ban upheld by a federal judge. There have been no rulings on lawsuits in Alabama, Georgia, Nebraska and North Dakota.

[zach]

First, I'm with you guys, really am. I think gay divorce is going to be fantastic to watch. (I'm sorry, I see a lot of humor there) 

It amused me a couple weeks ago bringing up the marriage penalty tax, and child care credits, as reasons my ex and I put of marriage. She had a child from a previous relationship, daycare costs a damn fortune. Not only would we have paid the penalty, but with combined incomes she would have lost the credit as well.

I think this is highly unlikely, but I love seeing heads explode, and I don't think the Bible thumpers have thought of this possibility. The Court could go a direction no one has even considered.

Personally, I don't think the state has any reason to be involved in "marriage" at all. It is a license. They wouldn't deny a drivers license to a homosexual. Marriage is a social construct first.

Eliminating the legal constructs and differential penalties and benefits that go with it is the issue I see.

The court should simply argue that governmental regulation of marital status is not legally founded, and any party is socially free to marry as they wish. Once governmental recognition and endorsement is gone, so are the Equal Protection arguments that go with current considerations. "Marriage" is a religious rite... and should should fall under the "freedom of religion" granted by the constitution. The truth is that the government should not have any power over decisions about what is "marriage". They should simply grant every citizen the same civil, legal rights. Then, it should be up to the people themselves, and whatever religious connections they may or may not have, on what to call the bonding relationship.

My two cents. I want invitations to some gay weddings though, seriously.

[wolfter]

Sheot, if we are allowed to marry, will our spouses' income come into play with things such as qualifying for ADAP?  I have no idea what Greg makes but based on his position and tenure, I'd probably not qualify for drug assistance.  But then again, I could qualify for his insurance benefits!

All too much to fathom at the moment

[zach]

yeppers... this is what i found in one minute off google, this is for new york state, granted things vary... but my bet is... yep

Application & Instructions
for the HIV Uninsured Care Programs
AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP)
ADAP Plus (Primary Care)
HIV Home Care Program
ADAP Plus Insurance Continuation (APIC)

Financial Eligibility
Financial eligibility is based on 435% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL):
FPL varies based on household size and is updated annually. Financial
eligibility is calculated on the gross income available to the household
excluding Medicare and Social Security withholding and the cost of health
care coverage paid by the applicant.

Income Source
Check all sources of income for you and all household members. This
is income only for household members with whom you have a legally
responsible relationship (for example, spouse or child but not uncle, cousin
or roommate). For each source, indicate the gross amount, how often the
income is received, and whether it is your income or a household member’s.
Proof of income is required. Provide complete income documentation for
each source of income checked.

[bocker3]

Well, of course, if you are married your spouses income gets combined with yours.  It's always been so and will continue to be so whether it's a man and woman, two men or two women.  Marriage isn't all about what you "get", it's a legal declaration that you will be responsible for each other.  That responsibility includes financial.
I do think that one makes a mistake if they only focus on the short term financial "gains" or "losses".  If you are married you get access to spouses SS benefits (survivor or retirement), you are able to inherit property, including bank and retirement accounts that might be easily fought if left in a will to a "non-related" person.  Of course, there is the emotional and symbolic aspects too.
Marriage may not be the right thing to do for everyone -- one should look at the near AND the far term implications and make a decision. 
However, I have to say a discussion on whether one SHOULD marry is moot if they are legally prevented from doing so.  Save discussions on whether one "should" for a thread that isn't about whether we even CAN. 

Mike
(who does not regret, in any way, getting married)

[zach]

^+ ∞

bocker, i totally agree with you, i hope you didn't misunderstand my intention... i think you picked up that i was trying to show a broader view, and the many implications involved that some may be overlooking

one benefit i see that you didn't mention... the right to make medical decisions for each other in time of need.

[wolfter]

I don't imagine any of us don't fully understand all the benefits and risks associated with the right to marry.     As someone who lost everything after the sudden death of a long term spouse, I completely understand the need.   

I had no legal right to make any decisions and was treated like just any other "friend" of the deceased.  My mother, sister and I weren't even invited to sit with in the "family" section. 

On the flip side, we must be prepared to weigh everything before making such a legal personal decision.  I see nothing wrong with considering all this (even in this thread). 

[Buckmark]

…
 I think gay divorce is going to be fantastic to watch.
…

Won't it, though?  I wish I had gone to law school.  Also, I envision a reality TV show in the future.

...
I don't imagine any of us don't fully understand all the benefits and risks associated with the right to marry.
...

Au contraire, I think there are a lot of folks who do not understand the benefits and risks of marriage -- both gay folks and straight folks alike.  I base this on conversations with both my friends and family members, and also from silly reality TV shows that over-romanticize marriage.  But of course we should all be able to choose marriage if we want to.

I sure hope the SCOTUS does not take all this sizzling progress on gay marriage and turn it into a big wet fart.

[J.R.E.]

Rachel Maddow had a great show last night on the Supreme court decision to hear the case.




Video:  http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show

Supreme Court agrees to rule on gay marriage
Nina Totenberg, NPR legal affairs correspondent, talks with Rachel Maddow about the implications and expectations of the Supreme Court’s announcement that it will take up the matter of marriage equality in a consolidated set of gay marriage cases.

[wolfter]

I think we've been denied this equal benefit for so long that it will mean much more to us.  Much in the same way that many who were granted civil rights cherished it more than someone who took it for granted.

Yes, there will always be those who don't take this right seriously, but I think many more will.  I guess we'll have to see the divorce rates over the next decade to see the trends.

[mitch777]

^+ ∞


one benefit i see that you didn't mention... the right to make medical decisions for each other in time of need.

A medical power of attorney solves that issue, married or not I would think.