New York State legalizes same-sex marriage

[Sean]

Why should the contract have an fixed term? Have you never heard of a contract being terminated by mutual consent?

[oldr_n_wsr]

When I married my wife it was "until death do us part" and so far we have kept this. That is, neither of us are dead and we are still together. I do understand that there are marriages that should not be forced to be kept to that promise as they may end up being desolved by the death of one party at the hands of the other.

As far as SSM's, long ago (maybe not so long ago) I concluded (with scotters help) that any two men (or two women) getting "married" does not affect my marriage one bit. I love my wife and as far as I know she loves me. Two men or two women loving each other and getting married affects me not one bit. although I would like to attend a "bachelor" party for either of those involved just to see what it's like

[Rick]

although I would like to attend a "bachelor" party for either of those involved just to see what it's like

I don't know man.

If I had my druthers, Idruther go to one for lesbians.

There is a far greater likelyhood that a woman would be jumping out of the cake...

[Sue U]

But at the other, a greater likelihood that you could get laid.

[Lord Jim]

If I had my druthers, Idruther go to one for lesbians.

I'm not sure about that Keld....

I'm not sure a man would be all that welcome at a lesbian bachelor party...

In fact that sounds like a good saying;

"I felt as unwelcome as a man at a lesbian bachelor party."

[Andrew D]

Why should the contract have an fixed term? Have you never heard of a contract being terminated by mutual consent?

Exactly. As Sue U pointed out, "mutual rescission".

But dgs49 evidently takes a different view. He sees that as breaches on both sides.

And I just don't get that. If each party discharges the other from the obligations, then there are no obligations to breach, and there cannot be any breach.

It seems to me that the subtext is that there is some third party. (I'm not talking about children; assume a childfree marriage.)

In particular, the bride and groom made promises to each other. But they also made promises to God. So even if they agree to discharge each other from their obligations to each other, they cannot agree between themselves to discharge their obligations to God. So they are still bound. That appears to me -- and I could be wrong (it sure would not be the first time) -- to be what underlies dgs49's position.

[Sean]

In particular, the bride and groom made promises to each other. But they also made promises to God. So even if they agree to discharge each other from their obligations to each other, they cannot agree between themselves to discharge their obligations to God. So they are still bound. That appears to me -- and I could be wrong (it sure would not be the first time) -- to be what underlies dgs49's position.

The problem with position is that not everybody who marries makes a promise to God... I know I didn't. Therefore, I should not be bound by a promise I didn't make. If individuals feel that they can't break a promise to God then good luck to them! But that shouldn't affect anyone else's marriage.

[Long Run]

"I felt as unwelcome as a man at a lesbian bachelor party."

Just entered the public domain.

[Andrew D]

I think, Sean, that on this, you and I are in complete agreement.

[Sean]

I concur.

[oldr_n_wsr]

I believe that if you are wed in a Catholic church, you make that promise to God, and of course to your spouse. But seeing as how I doubt very much if a Catholic Church is marrying any gays/lesbians, I there won't be a problem.

[loCAtek]

In past times, a divorce was recommended, if the couple couldn't conceive a child.

[dgs49]

Let's see...

What if I make a promise to give my old Corvette to my nephew, who is a gear-head. There is no consideration for the promise on his part, and he does nothing in reliance on that promise.

I change my mind. I get a good offer for it and sell it. I tell my nephew, "Sorry." He understands, and just shrugs his shoulders - disappointed.

Have I broken my promise?

I submit that I have broken my promise, and if there is such a thing as a "sin," I have surely committed one. I assigned a higher value to my own gratification (i.e., getting money) than my promise to my nephew. The fact that he "forgave" me for my self-indulgence does not change the fact that I have broken my promise.

In like manner, I have promised my wife that I will remain married to her for our joint lifetime. I may come out of The Closet one day and run off with my gay lover. My wife may "understand," and forgive me completely. She me give me the no-faultest no-fault divorce ever given.

But I still have broken my solemn promise, and am morally culpable. I am still married in the eyes of the Church. If butt-fucking were a form of "sex" I would be guilty of adultery (rather than sodomy - arguably less serious).

Now there's a tangential issue for you: Is a husband's giving a BJ to the car mechanic "adultery"? I would say not. Adultery implies having sex,and giving or receiving a BJ is not "having sex."

[Jarlaxle]

Let's see: what if I make a promise to give a dirt bike to my brother. There is no consideration for the promise on his part, and he does nothing in reliance on that promise. A year or so later, I get an offer for the bike, probably about twice what it's worth. I tell him, he responds, "Take the money and run! I'm not that into motorbikes anymore."

It's not a "broken promise" if both parties involve AGREE!

[Andrew D]

And all the more so when each party's motives are simultaneously benevolent and self-aware:

Wife thinks that divorce will be good for Husband.
Husband thinks that divorce will be good for Wife.
Wife thinks that divorce will be good for Wife.
Husband thinks that divorce will be good for Husband.

Who will be disserved by divorce in those circumstances?

Both parties will be disserved by the continuation of the marriage. So why should they continue it?

[dgs49]

So, what you are saying is that, in the absence of measurable harm, all rules are null and void.

You run a redlight at 5am on Sunday morning when you are the only car on the road.

You grow dope in your backyard and smoke it every night before bed.

You fantasize about phukking the next door neighbor while "making love" to your wife.

You have the "perfect" adulterous affair - impossible to be discovered and it is in fact never discovered. You like it, the lover likes it, and the wife never finds out.

When you get divorced, you manifest a lack of character, maturity, and/or integrity. You break the most solemn formal promise that one can make in our society. Indeed, with virtually no remaining social or legal sanctions against cohabitation, there is no reason to get married (assuming kids are not part of the contemplated relationship) OTHER THAN the desire to make this commitment.

And after a time, you just say, "Fuck it."

And that's OK with you. Peachy keen.

Well, I leave it with you. It's all yours.

[Timster]

So, what you are saying is that, in the absence of measurable harm, all rules are null and void.

You run a redlight at 5am on Sunday morning when you are the only car on the road.

You grow dope in your backyard and smoke it every night before bed.

You fantasize about phukking the next door neighbor while "making love" to your wife.

You have the "perfect" adulterous affair - impossible to be discovered and it is in fact never discovered. You like it, the lover likes it, and the wife never finds out.

When you get divorced, you manifest a lack of character, maturity, and/or integrity. You break the most solemn formal promise that one can make in our society. Indeed, with virtually no remaining social or legal sanctions against cohabitation, there is no reason to get married (assuming kids are not part of the contemplated relationship) OTHER THAN the desire to make this commitment.

And after a time, you just say, "Fuck it."

And that's OK with you. Peachy keen.

Well, I leave it with you. It's all yours.

Ok Dave, I'll play.

For argument's sake let's say that I buy into every jot and tittle of your chivalrous utopian ideal of marriage.

Where one keeps their 'vow' at all costs, and reality be damned. Can you please explain to me, rationally, how and why that perfect 'death do us part' commitment cannot be made by a same sex couple?

[Andrew D]

So, what you are saying is that, in the absence of measurable harm, all rules are null and void.

Who said that?

[Grim Reaper]

Who said that?

dgs49 said that we said it so that's all that matters to him.

[Jarlaxle]

You grow dope in your backyard and smoke it every night before bed.

Go for it. Don't give a damn.

You fantasize about phukking the next door neighbor while "making love" to your wife.

Err...so what?