So, I\’m astonished at how much people get these days for x-spousal support, and furthermore, after reading the courts transcripts, I\’m MORTIFIED that she was worth $4K monthly. However, I remain in great gratitude to her husband for fighting this and making it know that same-sex relationships are valid…LIKE IT OR NOT, America!
They aren\’t valid in the eyes of GOD. May be OK\’d by people in this life. But, wait until they have to answer to their Maker when they meet Him face to face.
Sometimes it feels to me a like a Christian agenda is being forced on me by my government, in this country where I am supposed to have freedom to be whatever religion I want… or no religion at all.
From how the article describes it, the ex-wife\’s relationship with the other consenting adult (who happens to be a woman) is similar to, but not the same as marriage. If she is \”cohabitating\” with this woman, and the contract states that as grounds to terminate the (outrageous) spousal support, then by all means, I think the right decision was finally made.
In my opinion, banning same-sex marriage between two consenting adults is utterly unfair. Other than for \”moral arguments\” which really hold no legal water, my question is why?
It\’s very interesting to me that some would point out \”God\’s view\” on same-sex relationships but not on divorce. Regardless of the gender of the person one is with, according to scripture, it\’s adultery to be intimate with anyone after marriage. As society as deemed divorce acceptable, we don\’t now say that people that divorce and remarry (or date those of the opposite gender) have to answer to God. However, it\’s still pointed out anytime the same sex issue comes up. Seems a bit out of line to me. As a side note, I\’m prepared to answer for my life with my same sex partner when the time comes. We\’ve made it through decades without cheating, lying or disrespecting each other while our heterosexual siblings have gone through numerous partners and spouses. My God made me and is a God of love.
Forced on you? Please recall that our nation was founded on Godly principles and WE have decided to revise those principles. \”One nation under God\” means exactly what it says and our laws did-and still should follow those established guidelines. God created Adam & Eve to be a family unit, not Adam and \”Bob\” or \”Sue\” & Eve. My God is NOT a myth, Jesus D. If our founding fathers thought He was important enough to include Him in our country\’s documents, I find it difficult, in fact, impossible, to understand how folks today are OK with casting him aside from our legal system.
Are you implying that by being born American, I must worship christian god?
If so… why?
I wasn\’t around when Adam and Eve were created and no one consulted me on how the family unit was intended to be; so why would I presume to know that same-gender couples were excluded from the definition of \’family unit\’?
Perhaps same-sex couples are excluded from YOUR definition of \’family unit\’ and that\’s your perogative. Do you think your definition of \’family unit\’ should be imposed on everyone else? If so… why?
BTW, Puzzled, you raise some most interesting points! I\’d like to see \”Don\’t Agree\” debate some of the things you\’ve said.
This case had nothing to do with same-sex partnerships, but the findings of the case logically conclude that same gender people can live together, and that situation is marriage like. The court made no statemetn about the position of VA on gay marriage. However, ANYONE who understands how law works can see this will set a new precedence that is based on very strong logic.
Wow, these points are vastly different than lots of the points I see posted here. They have merit and basis in fact. Seems to me they are not opinions that way (that\’s great!). I agree 100% with everyone (I think) except don\’t agree. Yeah, I guess I don\’t agree with don\’t agree. Your FEELINGS about same sex relationships (and I am heterosexual) do not belong in the context of law. Plus, uhm, our forefathers lived hundreds of years ago, before we had cars. Maybe you should get rid of your car then; that isn\’t what our forefathers wanted. (Sorry, I\’m throwing out utterly ridiculous logic there- my bad). Oh, and the whole religion thing- this *is* the USA- I can choose my own religion (or lack of) thank you, don\’t push your views on me. If you have facts, then I can listen.
Thanks for making this post\’s arguments intellectual everyone.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
So, I\’m astonished at how much people get these days for x-spousal support, and furthermore, after reading the courts transcripts, I\’m MORTIFIED that she was worth $4K monthly. However, I remain in great gratitude to her husband for fighting this and making it know that same-sex relationships are valid…LIKE IT OR NOT, America!
They aren\’t valid in the eyes of GOD. May be OK\’d by people in this life. But, wait until they have to answer to their Maker when they meet Him face to face.
your god is a myth and has nothing to do with the legal system.
By the way, I\’m a Christian.
I agree with Continuously Thankful.
Sometimes it feels to me a like a Christian agenda is being forced on me by my government, in this country where I am supposed to have freedom to be whatever religion I want… or no religion at all.
From how the article describes it, the ex-wife\’s relationship with the other consenting adult (who happens to be a woman) is similar to, but not the same as marriage. If she is \”cohabitating\” with this woman, and the contract states that as grounds to terminate the (outrageous) spousal support, then by all means, I think the right decision was finally made.
In my opinion, banning same-sex marriage between two consenting adults is utterly unfair. Other than for \”moral arguments\” which really hold no legal water, my question is why?
It\’s very interesting to me that some would point out \”God\’s view\” on same-sex relationships but not on divorce. Regardless of the gender of the person one is with, according to scripture, it\’s adultery to be intimate with anyone after marriage. As society as deemed divorce acceptable, we don\’t now say that people that divorce and remarry (or date those of the opposite gender) have to answer to God. However, it\’s still pointed out anytime the same sex issue comes up. Seems a bit out of line to me. As a side note, I\’m prepared to answer for my life with my same sex partner when the time comes. We\’ve made it through decades without cheating, lying or disrespecting each other while our heterosexual siblings have gone through numerous partners and spouses. My God made me and is a God of love.
Forced on you? Please recall that our nation was founded on Godly principles and WE have decided to revise those principles. \”One nation under God\” means exactly what it says and our laws did-and still should follow those established guidelines. God created Adam & Eve to be a family unit, not Adam and \”Bob\” or \”Sue\” & Eve. My God is NOT a myth, Jesus D. If our founding fathers thought He was important enough to include Him in our country\’s documents, I find it difficult, in fact, impossible, to understand how folks today are OK with casting him aside from our legal system.
Are you implying that by being born American, I must worship christian god?
If so… why?
I wasn\’t around when Adam and Eve were created and no one consulted me on how the family unit was intended to be; so why would I presume to know that same-gender couples were excluded from the definition of \’family unit\’?
Perhaps same-sex couples are excluded from YOUR definition of \’family unit\’ and that\’s your perogative. Do you think your definition of \’family unit\’ should be imposed on everyone else? If so… why?
BTW, Puzzled, you raise some most interesting points! I\’d like to see \”Don\’t Agree\” debate some of the things you\’ve said.
I would encourage you to read the courts briefing (Stroud v. Stroud:
http://courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavwp/3158054.pdf)
This case had nothing to do with same-sex partnerships, but the findings of the case logically conclude that same gender people can live together, and that situation is marriage like. The court made no statemetn about the position of VA on gay marriage. However, ANYONE who understands how law works can see this will set a new precedence that is based on very strong logic.
Wow, these points are vastly different than lots of the points I see posted here. They have merit and basis in fact. Seems to me they are not opinions that way (that\’s great!). I agree 100% with everyone (I think) except don\’t agree. Yeah, I guess I don\’t agree with don\’t agree. Your FEELINGS about same sex relationships (and I am heterosexual) do not belong in the context of law. Plus, uhm, our forefathers lived hundreds of years ago, before we had cars. Maybe you should get rid of your car then; that isn\’t what our forefathers wanted. (Sorry, I\’m throwing out utterly ridiculous logic there- my bad). Oh, and the whole religion thing- this *is* the USA- I can choose my own religion (or lack of) thank you, don\’t push your views on me. If you have facts, then I can listen.
Thanks for making this post\’s arguments intellectual everyone.