Secrets of the City

I’d think those who are for more freedom from government would acknowledge that more freedom in this case (freedom from religiously-defined civil marriage) would attract more people to this state and make us more competitive.

Did you want that headline to have the word “Same” in it?

I think a big part of the reason same sex marriages are a conservative’s nightmare is because of the economic impacts. Surviors benefits, welfare benefits, health insurance costs, and many other benefits will increase.

Yes, same sex marriage. Thanks! Fixed.

It’s distracting

And I think you want the tag to be GLBT not GLBD. Or I think it is now supposed to be LGBT.

Fixed again. Damn these palsied fingers. It’s the drink!

I’m surprised there wasn’t anything addressing this in the porkulous bill that just passed, seemed they hit about everything but actual stimulus (even dropping one of the actual good stimulus parts, the housing credit). No surprise that the tactic of linking everything in your agenda has now trickled down to the state level.

Linking everything in your agenda to the economy I meant, if it wasn’t apparent.

Since we have already turned this thread into the Max can’t type thread…

A UCLA researcher, in the meanwhile, has amde the case that gay marriage…

I believe “amde” in this sentence should be “made”…

That’s it, Max, your fired…

Damn it…now I’m fired!

It’s like game!

Is putting gay marrige into…

Marriage is spelled wrong.

wories should be worries!

I think Max is doing more than drinking while he types….

It’s hard to MnSpeak and RedTube at the same time.

Can we get a moderator who knows how to type?

What a great opportunity to make us more economically competitive and do the right thing at the same time. Perhaps having to decide between the economic advantages and their bigotry will make conservatives’ heads explode. Or more likely, we won’t be so lucky and they’ll simply deny the benefit, thus restoring things to order.

I was once a witness at a French wedding. The ceremony required two parts. Since the couple wanted to be married in the church, they were, by a priest. Then we all walked down the street to the municipal building where the civil part of the ceremony was performed. It was the first that made them married in the eyes of the church, the second in the eyes of the state. I was told that the church part was not necessary. Why does our cherished “separation of church and state” not extend to marriage in this country. As many courts have said, an honest reading of the Constitution would not prohibit a civil union of a same sex couple. Let’s just put the term marriage aside for the purposes of the state and say we’re all in a civil union. If the church wants to call it marriage, let them.

As for the benefits question, if we weren’t the only industrialized country in the world without national health care, that would be moot.

Tom, there is a separation. The only legal marriage document that the state recognizes — and which is considered a legally binding contract — is the marriage license. A church wedding, in and of itself, is not legally binding without a state-issued marriage license.

I was married by a Hennepin County judge. We later had a church blessing (not a full-blown church wedding) because of our parents’ religious devotions. (When we divorced, her religion was of more consequence to her than mine. She was Catholic.)

I think religion-as-state went out the window in Europe after World War I. How could one keep a deep faith in the face of losing so many millions of young men on the battlefield — upwards of 25%? As a result more secular, and liberal, authority came into being.

Has anyone checked to see if Michelle Bachmann is in town? I thought I saw her at Sportmart buying some shrubbery colored camo.