What is the naming convention for a gay marriage?

[fob]

This is my own curiosity, not meant as denigrating anyone or anything. I support whoever wants to get married, regardless of sexual orientation. It seems the majority of people are upset about the cooptation of the word marriage and all the traditions it comprises. Many more people support civil unions. So if the GLBT community came up with a defined set of traditions and a unique name the idea could pick up more support. I understand that means codifying a kind of 'seperate but equal' deal, but I think that puts the idea on a much more solid footing for eventual dropping of any kind of semantics.

So Marriage means;
man/woman
church(or place of religious significance)
woman takes man's last name (traditionally - modern times have either a hyphenated name or no change at all)
exchange rings - Left ring finger

Gay Marriage = Garriage?, Queeriage?
man/man
woman/woman
church/other?
hyphenated names - for one? or both? Maybe a combo name - John Smith and Dave Jones become John and David Smines?
exchange rings - Right ring finger?

Thoughts, comments?

Keep it civil, please (pun for dramatization purposes only, may not be funny)

EDIT Fix typo in header and to clarify the items under Gay Marriage above are my suggestions/questions not a current list of what it is.

[MrMonk]

1. Do gays really wear the ring on their right hand?

Is that meant to be in contrast to hetero couples?

What about the Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox faiths where hetero couples who traditionally wear rings on their right hands?

Would male couples of those faiths wear their rings on the left hand?

[donco6]

2. I wear mine on the left like everyone else. eom

[fob]

3. So wha tyou're saying is, there is no defintion of marriage, there

are definitionS of marraige so why not add another one where the couple are same sex?

Wow, what a concept!

[Samurai_Writer]

4. How about...

Just having MARRIAGE mean...

consenting adult person/consenting adult person

church(or place of religious significance)/other -- straight couples don't all get married in churches you know. Ever been to the drive-thru chapel at Las Vegas? Justice of the Peace? And many gay/lesbian couples DO get married in churches.

who cares about last names? Whatever the couple decide. There are plenty of straight married people who do not take each others' names, hyphenate names, etc.

exchange rings - who cares which ring finger?



Why do people have to make this so difficult? Separate is NOT equal! If gays or lesbians get married, it is NO reflection on straight marriage and no threat to it.

[amandae]

5. I agree with you ...

There are so many variations of straight marriage trends, I don't think gay marriages should have to conform to some ideal that doesn't exist or have it a different way just to be separate.

I completely agree with you when you say "If gays or lesbians get married, it is NO reflection on straight marriage and no threat to it." The main threats to the "sanctity" of marriage are adultery and divorce. Straight couples seem to be doing a wonderful job ruining that "sanctity" on their own, thank you.

:hi:

[geniph]

6. What an odd question

They decide those things between the two of them, just like everyone else.

I've been married - heterosexually, not that it matters - twice. In neither case did I change my name (nor did my spouse). Hell, I won't even combine my books and CDs, let alone my finances. In neither case was I married in a church or other religious venue. In both cases, I probably don't wear the ring as often as I wear it, and the same is true of my husband (I can't remember if my ex-husband wore his or not - he didn't leave all that much impression on me). My husband and I have our wedding bands tattooed on our left wrists.

[geniph]

7. I'm curious why you want to know this

[gator_in_Ontario]

8. queeriage???

are you f*ing serious???:mad:
You ask for civility after having the gall to type that pseudo-word?
There are so many different angles to come at this from, I am overwhelmed.
And I have to complete #36 on the gay agenda...cooking dinner. So this will be brief.

1) 'I'm all for equality, BUT why won't those darn gays just take whatever bones we throw them?'
2) I can tell you experienced the Jim Crow south, because you have such faith in the 'separate but equal' line of crap.

I will not even denigrate my own wedding here by describing it...those who are my friends, and those who were there, know it was a beautiful experience. I hope you enjoyed your brief stay in my head...it's time for #37 on the gay agenda...baking bread.

[fob]

12. Am I serious? Yes. I have a genuine curiosity as to the

sameness/difference of "marriage" as it relates to the GLBT community.

As for Queeriage, I think I clearly stated that I was NOT serious, just presenting some ideas without respect to their merit. I also added an edit to make clear that the ideas presented were just that, NOT a claim as to be dictating process.
"The gall to type that pseudo-word" Are you sure you're not mad? How do you handle your life when a combination of letters can throw you into a spin?

With your comments 1 and 2, it is obvious you either did not read the entire post, or did not get the gist of my question/comments.

Let me state this again, I think that marriage should be whatever people who choose to do it want it to be WITHOUT qualification or restrictions. There are other issues here though. I don't consider myself married since I don't believe in god in ANY form. I was however, "married" in a civil ceremony. A good deal of the current debate it seems to me to surround the issue of what "Marriage" means.

I covered this in that there is much greater support for Civil Unions that cover much of the legal aspects of marriage, but when the question becomes one of "gay marriage", people seem to lose their minds! Why is that? Hence my question.

I got a quality answer with the person who posted about the differing traditions of what most would consider to be traditional marriages. So the point is, if "marriage" can mean many things, why not just add same sex couples to the mix?

Instead you chose to turn and twist my post in an attempt to paint me as a bigot. Shame on you. I thought this was Democratic Underground where ideas are discussed and shared. Sometimes "we" even vote on things like banning certain words, rather than having an overlord reign down from above. Sometimes "we" lose our civility to such a degree that one of the DUer overlords does come down and enforce rules.

Your use of the "gay agenda" stuff was pretty good, but we both know that is pure bunk. I appreciate the attempt at using such a complex use of satire. A real freeper wouldn't get it.

Peace, and reconsider telling us your wedding story I'm sure it was wonderful and I bet would easily fit into a definition of "marriage".

The queeriage thing was no harm intended, please don't take it personal. I thought it was pretty witty.

fob

[foreigncorrespondent]

16. Hmmm!

As for Queeriage, I think I clearly stated that I was NOT serious, just presenting some ideas without respect to their merit.

Then WHY on earth would you add it in the first place? To get a shot in? Really buddy, you need to think before you hit post. You left yourself wide open for a flame.

With your comments 1 and 2, it is obvious you either did not read the entire post, or did not get the gist of my question/comments.

Really? Could it be that the way you have worded your originial post, have something to do with how us "pesky annoying" queers are viewing it?

Instead you chose to turn and twist my post in an attempt to paint me as a bigot. Shame on you.

ROFLMAO! Oh Gosh this is the finniest thing I have ever read. You begin a thread which can and will be considered flame bait, and then you have the nerve to turn around and chew one of us out, for standing up for our lives? No one painted you as a bigot, mate. If you are so worried about that, could it be that you have doubts with in yourself?

[Bertha Venation]

9. No.

Civil, fun, just your curiosity, all cool.

But no.

"Many more people support civil unions." They do?

Civil unions are separate, thus not equal.

PERIOD.

I'm married.

PERIOD.

When we can make our marriage legal, and after her parents are gone (so as not to hurt them) I'll take Mrs. V.'s last name for many reasons -- among them is NOT a sense of subservience.

One thing more: we are not wives.

on edit: "what is the naming convention for gay marriage"? To reiterate: It's a marriage. Marriage is what it's called when two people merge their lives and fortunes and futures in love.

[fob]

13. "Many more people support civil unions." They do?

If the polls cited in (ugh) the media are to be believed, yes they do. When polls ask, 'Do you support Civil Unions for gay couples?' the YES number is greater than when the poll asks 'Do you support marriage for gay couples?'. In fact, the polls I recall seeing the numbers flip. It around 60/40 in favor of CU's but comes up 40/60 for Marriage.

I appreciate that you consider yourself married, that's fine by me, not as if you need my, or anyone's, blessing/support for that. It is funny though that I prefer to NOT consider myself married due to the god/religious aspect of it all.

As for the naming thing: I made no insinuation as to the reason, subservience or otherwise, just that that was/is a tradition. I have no idea IF there's any naming convention with gay marriages, I just wondered how that would work. Seems like a perfectly simple question to ask. No harm was implied or meant by it.

You say you are not wives. That's good information. I remember watching some of the first ceremonies at SF City Hall on tv and it hit me when the pastor/rev/?? got to the part about "I now pronounce you man and wife" but instead said "I now pronounce you spouses for life!", how much BETTER that line was! I was impressed with the thought that had to go into that in what those who can get married legally today take for granted. I think maybe at my 20th or so anniversary I might get re-"married" and this time take that vow instead.

As for your last line; Thank you for "getting" the point of my question. Marriage is marriage is marriage even though they may all mean 3 different things.

[Chilly_Willy]

10. marriage

Well if you are truly religious in any belief, sex is what unites the 2 persons in Gods eyes (or whoever elses). Marriage is a sacrament, then the government decided to make it a category for census & tax purposes...

Why does the US always have to get so touchy about same sex marriages, it's 2 people that care about each other?? I bet it has something to do with the tax bracket and that's why the repugs are always bashing it.... just my thoughts.

[TrogL]

11. Out of the question

If it has a different name, it has a different legal standing.

[kayell]

14. Geez, AGAIN????

What is it with the seperate but equal business here at a "progressive" message board? Go read any of a thousand messages in the archives on gay marriage and you will find plenty from gay and gay-friendly posters on why civil unions are not good enough. If you can't understand what they have to say, you probably aren't going to get it if I or anyone else try to explain it again.

Just in case though, read my sig line. It's pretty clear, especially that last phrase.

[foreigncorrespondent]

15. You just insulted a lot of people...

...and I for one sure hope you are happy with yourself!

"Garriage?", "Queeriage?" Bloody hell, now I have heard everything. Not only are you throwing a word back at us which can and will be taken as an insult unless YOU who says the word is gay, but you have changed that word into something which not only lacks intelligence, but would be considered an even bigger insult.

BTW, if you intend on posting what can and will be considered flame bait, don't ask that your thread remain civil. You cannot shit on people like you have and expect to not get your head chewed off for it.

[Sapphocrat]

17. Thoughts, comments...

Congratulations. My sensibilities have not been so offended, nor have I been so disturbed, disgusted, or repelled by a seemingly well-intentioned post, in many months.

Of course, I would never accuse a fellow DUer of intentional, wholesale disregard of an entire class of people, nor of deliberate belittlement or mockery of same. I assure you, however, that had that been your intention, you would have achieved your goal, beyond your wildest dreams.

But, of course, that was not your intention -- and so I must chalk it up as one of the most wildly oblivious faux pas I have ever had the misfortune of reading.

And yet, it boggles the mind that someone with so many posts to his name could have managed to avoid reading the countless threads on same-sex marriage at DU. Had you read and attempted to absorb just one such discussion of substance, I would be even further stunned by your ability to avoid grasping even the vaguest notion of the myriad reasons your post is so unbelievably offensive.

Kayell is right: There's no explaining it to some people.

"Garriage"? "Queeriage"? You, sir, are the one who should be ashamed.

Sadly, you refuse to even understand why.