smartestnumber5
<font color=blue>Then it's just a fun time<br><fon
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,916
Are you talking about wondering why gay people from the rest of the country don't go to places where it is legal to get married? (Well in addition to the many gay people who don't get married for the plethora of good reasons straight people don't), I think there are two big reasons why gay people who want to be married and don't like in MA or CA don't travel there to do so MA or CA--1) I believe you can only marry in MA if your state of residence does not prohibt your marrying there or if you are going to become a resident and 2) a piece of paper that says you are legally married in MA or CA is of absolutely no use if you don't live in those states. That piece of paper might as well be toilet paper to the other states, so it would basically be a waste of $100 (or whatever a marriage license costs).
Now I do think that there is some usefulness in getting the piece of paper from a state one doesn't live in given the possibility that the state one does live in will start to recognize the marriages from MA or CA or Canada. GF and I certainly are considering that in thinking about legal protections for us and our future children. That might be a useful thing in some of the blue states that haven't officially instituted civil unions or gay marriage yet, but it's unlikely to be helpful in most of the red states, many of which have enacted constitutional prohibitions on *any* legal rights for gay families. We have no interest in paying for a piece of paper that is completely useless to us, so if we move to a red state I highly doubt we're going to bother with a MA or CA wedding.
I also think that many gay people who have been in very long term relationships have already had some type of event or ceremony or moment when they declared either to themselves or their families or whoever that they were in a committed relationship for the long haul. (And I think many other people had no such moment, because it's not really a kind of commitment you make in a moment, but one that just grows organically out of your relationship--that's how we look at it and so we feel that a wedding/ceremony would be almost a lie. We are already committed to each other and we didn't need to say vows in order for that to be the case. So without the legal part, a commitment ceremony wouldn't be adding anything new but would just be a party.) I assume your BIL's rings symbolized something like that. So given they may have already made a commitment to one another and (if I understand correctly) live in a state where gay marriages are not performed/recognized, then I don't see what a ceremony in CA or MA could do for them except cost them more money. (Perhaps some people just like the idea of state sanction on their relationship? I don't know, for me I think the only thing useful about the idea of legal marriage is the legal rights that come with it. I have no need of the state to sanction anything about my life and in fact would prefer that they get out of the marriage business altogether.)
On the engagement issue, I completely understand the idea that engagement is a vague term. I have friends that I met four years ago when they had been together three years. At that time, they openly spoke about getting married years into the future when the grad student finished her degree. Well she is now finishing her degree in a few months and they are getting married next year and currently planning the wedding. But they did not announce their wedding or start planning it or start referring to each other as fiance or tell their parents they were getting married or set a date or have a ring or any of that until about 8 months ago when the man got down on one knee and asked the woman to marry him and gave her a ring. Now when was this couple engaged? They say they've only been engaged for 8 months, but if you asked when did you decide to get married, they'd probably say over 4 years ago.
GF and I are pretty much 100% committed to the idea that at some point, somehow, somewhere, we will get a legal civil union or marriage. But we don't know when that will be possible. Perhaps in the next 2-3 years if I get a job in a good state, probably more like 20 years if I get a job in a bad one. If we end up getting married in a red state in 20 years, does that mean we've had a 20 year long engagement? (What does engagement even refer to anyway--is it planning the *wedding/commitment ceremony* or is it planning the getting of the *legal contract*? I've also know a same-sex couple who is getting married this summer but in a ceremony that won't be legal given where we live. They are also planning to get the legal contract of marriage if and when they move to a state where they can after graduate school. So the legal contract will come at the earliest 3 years after they have exchanged rings/vows, started calling each other wife, starting referring to themselves as married. But then what period of planning does the engagement refer to--the part that's happening right now where they are planning their wedding which will occur in a few weeks, or the 3 years they have from now until they get the legal contract?)
Exactly, if they can't show even a teensy bit of respect for your long-term relationship choices, why should you be expected to not only respect but even celebrate (meaning buy a gift!) theirs? 
doesn't mean he is obligated to attend. On the other hand, if I was your daughter and had a relationship with the bride and my live in partner (in Canada he would be a Common Law spouse) was not invited, I would choose to decline that invitation, as would be my perogative.
