Marriage Between One Man and One "Wolf-man"

[Celestialwolf]

I saw this on The Onion and couldn't resist posting:

Typo In Proposition 8 Defines Marriage As Between 'One Man And One Wolfman'

I can't stop laughing!

[outwarddoodles]

Oooh! This is too good for words.

[Terastas]

Really?

[Vagrant]

Oh good grief, I'm going to be giggling over this all day, and I really can't wait to tell my roomie about it.

Also...

"defining marriage as between one man and 23 wolfmen."

Cor lumme! That's a Werewolf harem, that is!

[*nagowteena*]

OMG! I can not stop laughing!

[Spongy]

That's really funny! Gonna keep me chuckling all day.

[Aki]

I love The Onion.

They come up with the craziest s***.

[Vagrant]

Agreed, Aki.

I really wish I still had time to keep up with it. But I was glad to hear of this article, nonetheless, definitely a good chuckle.

[RedEye]

Well, in Progressive Kalifornia, Gay Lycanthopes enjoy the protection of law.
This might actually determine if there are any Werewolves or not!

As for the rest of us Hetero types; a Domestic Partnership is just as valid as Marriage*. In fact, I'd vote to remove the "Marriage" thing from the Churches and put it in the hands of the State, where it belongs anyhow.
Get married, then go to the State office and fill out the forms.
Repeat marriages would have an "entertainment" surcharge added to the registration fee. The "entertainment" surcharges would be progressive in nature: the more times you marry, the more it costs.
*Or so the Uber-Xtians claim. Christians don't care: they remember their founder's commandment..."Love one another" and practice it with everyone they meet. The Anti-Gay stuff is not what the Christ said in any way shape or form.

For Midnight and the rest: What I meant with the "Marriage" thing was to eliminate it entirely.
In the Wulfen series, the Wulfen "Declare" in front of their Pack. For them, that is marriage, and lasts a lot longer than the other things because to divorce, you have to stand up in front of the same People you "Declared" in front of and admit you made a mistake.
That would work for Humans as well, I think. We would just need the State to handle the "Official" stuff as a Contract of Co-Habitation; Single Pairing.
That would immediately ruin the day for divorce attorneys, since everything involved with the contract is a matter of public record. That would also end Bigamy, since as a public document, it could be looked up and verified. No "little woman" or "man" in another state who doesn't know...

Of course, the religious could still have their nuptual pagents. That's what they'd be: Pagents, plays, drama. Nothing real or binding (unless you're in a kinky church) outside of your State Contract.

Meh: too simple to work, probably.

[Midnight]

.

[Vagrant]

I get where you're coming from there, Midnight. I used to involve myself in the NationStates forums habitually (which often lead to me being far too thinky, introverted, and generally miserable because I was spending too much time involved in it. so I stopped and hence the past tense, but it was always interesting), and I saw a lot of this kind of debate. Rather than the separation of the Church from the State, there would be the separation of Civil Union from Ceremony.

The Church could handle the ceremony, if they so liked, and any institution thereof; charitable organisation or capitalist organisation, could handle the ceremonial aspect however they liked, providing that the State bureaucracy was dealt with. So a couple could have their own, custom ceremony to dictate their bond (call it marriage, or whatever you'd like) and the State could officially recognise the union of two people.

If such a system was put in place and welcomed, then organised religion could actually find an amount of competition within their traditionalist refusal to marry certain types of couples, and whether they eventually caved or not would be their own choice. But there could be other options which could compete with the Church for the same goals; a celebration of the joining of two people.

As a gay person myself, I find it irritating that there is discrimination abounds, but I'd prefer a system to be put in place to allow any organisation to rise or fall based on the merits of their particular methods of operation. As a gay person, I probably wouldn't want to marry in a Church anyway, but it certainly would be fun to have the option to have a good old celebration and blow-out somewhere.

I do like what you said about the State imposing a rising tax on unions though, RedEye, that I find really appealing. The fact that people can divorce, reunify, divorce, reunify, and so on ad nauseum without any negative side effects is a prominent factor in economically struggling societies. If a group take a union so frivolously, then it shouldn't be unexpected that they'd have to be held responsible (to a reasonable degree) for that.

Edited to add...

Oh and it'll probably go without saying, but I just thought I'd add that in my opinion, the State should always allow union between any two consenting sapient beings, regardless of ethnicity, gender, or anything else.

Those who provide ceremonial functions don't need to respect this, but as I've said, they'd lose out fiscally by not doing so and on their own heads be it, it's their choice.

Any couple can also decide just to get a State marriage and forego the need for ceremony altogether, should they desire that.

[Terastas]

I kinda' agree with RedEye, except I'd word it as taking the "marriage" out of the "state." In other words, null/void all marriages and only recognize civil unions.

Want to have a religious marriage ceremony in a church? Fine, but it doesn't mean anything. You still gotta' come in and get that civil union approved on top of it.

[Greylan]

funny typo link.

Agree's with Terastas, if people want to get married they should get the "civil union" to get any state/government benefits. That way the church can keep their "marraige" definition but not punish anyone else by refusing similar rights to other groups. Besides when "married people" grow appart /wanting to go their separate ways / etc, they have to go through the state courts for the Divorce.

[Scott Gardener]

Gah! Beat me to it! I love the Onion, and I about fell over backwards when I saw this one.

[lycanthropeful]

Haha, a friend of mine knows I love werewolves, so he shared that link on my Facebook wall. When I logged in the next day, I cracked up at it.

[Moonwatcher]

lol that is messed

[Anubis]

*Face palms*

lol, that was good one