tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6775601543504931076.post8621487735661481261..comments2023-10-23T10:48:21.362-07:00Comments on Red Lion Reports: Here Comes the "Party A"?Marie T. Reillyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04697870656185092759noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6775601543504931076.post-13234623191455099242008-09-13T09:52:00.000-07:002008-09-13T09:52:00.000-07:00Civil unions are not equal as noted by the CA Supr...Civil unions are not equal as noted by the CA Supreme Court because they imply a lesser or inferior status and are not universally recognized.As for the bride/groom issue,it really is a non issue.Whwn one is married they is a bride and groom or perhaps a groom & groom,or bride & bride.The marriage certificate is merely a supporting legal document,in no way does it diminish the nature or status of traditional marriage terminology.No one is going to say "oh, what a lovely Party A & her handsome Party B".Just as you will hear at same gender weddings where people remark on "how happy the grooms look".This is merely a fundie couple wishing to stir up trouble and influence the vote on Prop 8.I live in CA and marriage equality is being accepted and embraced by most Californians.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6775601543504931076.post-86427215405479531172008-09-11T12:25:00.000-07:002008-09-11T12:25:00.000-07:00Maybe so, Tom, but I thought an argument in suppor...Maybe so, Tom, but I thought an argument in support of gay marriage was the legal right to be recognized as a married couple with all of the attendant status. If legal recognition by certain terms is not important, then why aren't civil unions - with all of the same marital benefits - sufficient for gay couples? I think the reason is that there is something about the terms. Assuming that is the case, if a bride wishes to be legally recognized as such, it seems an infringement of her rights to deny her that status.<BR/><BR/>As for polyamorous marriage, Anonymous, I think I will leave that can of worms alone for now! Thank you for the comment, though.Kelly Joyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07576564623143850806noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6775601543504931076.post-3710892903822406422008-09-11T10:36:00.000-07:002008-09-11T10:36:00.000-07:00I think we're talking tempest in a teapot here. I...I think we're talking tempest in a teapot here. Isn't the most important part of marriage the part that takes place in church? And certainly no pastor or priest is required to say, "You may now kiss Party B."Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03139711818373541945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6775601543504931076.post-84886868982552427652008-09-11T10:09:00.000-07:002008-09-11T10:09:00.000-07:00I'm curious how long the sovereign Supreme Court o...I'm curious how long the sovereign Supreme Court of the state of California will continue to discriminate against parties C and D...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com