|
08-19-2009, 11:04 PM | #1 |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Nevada switch hits with SB 283
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/75th2009/...ory.cfm?ID=764
Nevada Switches its position by the mere change of a word or two from having an anti-gay marriage to having a domestic partnership law which makes them virtually identical to marriages, except you file a business entity. Interestingly, DPs are not limited to gay couples, invoke the divorce statutes and may present fascinating opportunities for legal squabbles down the road. Everybody needs to invest more money with lawyers, God Save the Queen, or at least us lawyers.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
08-20-2009, 03:43 AM | #2 | |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
Quote:
|
|
08-20-2009, 04:05 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,596
|
I think you know the answer.
__________________
"Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?" "And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..." - Cali Coug "Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got." - Brigham Young |
08-20-2009, 11:08 AM | #4 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
No I don't, and neither do you, since I doubt it has ever come up before in the USA.
On my mission, in my area, it was not required to be married to be baptized. Yet in other parts of the mission, it was a requirement. Essentially an arbitrary decision designed to maximize baptisms (where it was required, the missionary work was successful, so they could afford the extra barrier. Where I was, the work was difficult, and such a requirement would have dropped baptisms to almost nil). In this case, I think betting men could all agree that the words "domestic partnership" are nuclear to the church, and for political reasons, they would not accept it. But let's not pretend there is some written-in-stone principle here. |
08-20-2009, 01:42 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,596
|
Quote:
It depends. The basic requirement here is chastity. If you have to homosexual men living together who are in a DP and are living chaste lives, then fine. As I suggest above, seems unlikely.
__________________
"Have we been commanded not to call a prophet an insular racist? Link?" "And yes, [2010] is a very good year to be a Democrat. Perhaps the best year in decades ..." - Cali Coug "Oh dear, granny, what a long tail our puss has got." - Brigham Young |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|