The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-09-2012, 11:23 AM   #1
glatt
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,717
The spousal privilege only applies if both the defendant and their spouse want to keep the secret. If a wife wants to testify against her husband, she can, and there is nothing the husband can do to prevent it. Compare that to the privilege between an attorney and their client. The attorney can virtually never testify against their client, even if they want to.
glatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 01:08 PM   #2
BigV
Goon Squad Leader
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Seattle
Posts: 27,063
meaning they can't be *compelled* to testify against their spouse.
__________________
Be Just and Fear Not.
BigV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 03:13 PM   #3
Lamplighter
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
It's now official in Washington State... Next is New Jersey

MSNBC
2/13/12

Quote:
OLYMPIA, Wash. -- Gov. Chris Gregoire has signed into law a bill that legalizes
gay marriage in Washington state, making it the nation's seventh to allow gay and lesbian couples to wed.
It's a historic moment, but same-sex couples can't walk down the aisle just yet.
The law takes effect June 7, but opponents are already mounting challenges on multiple fronts.<snip>

------------

In New Jersey on Monday, the state Senate passed a bill that
would allow nuptials for same-sex couples.
Gov. Chris Christie has said he will veto such legislation.
The Senate's vote sends the bill to the Assembly,
which is expected to pass it Thursday.<snip>

The governor has said he does not believe marriage laws should be changed,
but he does support New Jersey's civil union law,
which grants gay couples the legal protections of marriage.
Christie said he wants to put a change in the definition of marriage to a public vote.

But gay rights groups oppose a referendum.
They see gay marriage as a civil rights matter and argue that it should not
be up to the masses to protect the rights of a minority group.

Five years ago, New Jersey's state Supreme Court ruled that gay couples should have
the same rights as married heterosexual couples. In response, the Legislature created civil unions.

Gay rights advocates say that because the civil union designation is hard to understand
and still treats committed gays differently from married couples,
the courts should eliminate civil unions and recognize gay marriage.

A lawsuit seeking to do that is in the state court system.
Lamplighter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 06:47 PM   #4
ZenGum
Doctor Wtf
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
Are heteros allowed to have civil unions too? When they brought in civil unions in France, something like a third of hetero couples went the civil union path and cut the church out altogether.
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008.
Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl.
ZenGum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 09:28 AM   #5
Happy Monkey
I think this line's mostly filler.
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZenGum View Post
Are heteros allowed to have civil unions too? When they brought in civil unions in France, something like a third of hetero couples went the civil union path and cut the church out altogether.
Hetero civil unions exist in the US, and are called marriages.
__________________
_________________
|...............| We live in the nick of times.
| Len 17, Wid 3 |
|_______________| [pics]
Happy Monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 06:53 PM   #6
Aliantha
trying hard to be a better person
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 16,493
I'm pretty sure civil unions for hetero couples have been common in the US just as they have been in Australia, for quite a long time. At least since the 60's.
__________________
Kind words are the music of the world. F. W. Faber

Last edited by Aliantha; 02-13-2012 at 06:54 PM. Reason: Can't get my grammar correct. :(
Aliantha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 07:39 PM   #7
Ibby
erika
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: "the high up north"
Posts: 6,127
The issue is that civil unions generally don't afford ALL the benefits of marriage and legally is in a separate category. On top of that, and on top of the longstanding (and constitutional!) problem with "separate but equal", the federal Defense Of Marriage Act prevents civil unions OR gay marriages from "counting" at the federal level. I assume that civil unions are available to everyone regardless of gender, but there is no advantage to civil unions over marriage, and quite a host of drawbacks. I'm sure it's not common, but it happens.
__________________
not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh
Ibby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2012, 07:52 PM   #8
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
I believe whether the benefits are the same depends upon the state.
In VT, for example, they are the same. However those Civil Unions in VT may or may not be recognized in other states.

ETA ... thats not entirely true... read this. I can't paste it because its a pdf.
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt

Last edited by classicman; 02-13-2012 at 07:57 PM.
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 05:06 AM   #9
Sundae
polaroid of perfection
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 24,185
Civil Unions in this country are for same-sex couples only.
To start with I thought we were progressive in introducing them at all. And certainly the gay press seemed to have that opinion.

After a few years now I am of the opinion that separate but equal doesn't cut it.
Civil Unions for all, with the choice of a church wedding for those who require the blessing of God.
There are churches in this country who would bless a same sex union.
I don't believe in forcing those with problems to do so - religion should be a private matter. But the unions should be equal.
Sundae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 01:14 PM   #10
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundae View Post
There are churches in this country who would bless a same sex union.
I don't believe in forcing those with problems to do so - religion should be a private matter. But the unions should be equal.
Agreed.
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 02:27 PM   #11
Ibby
erika
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: "the high up north"
Posts: 6,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundae View Post
Civil Unions for all, with the choice of a church wedding for those who require the blessing of God.
This is my personal solution, too. The government shouldn't be in the business of validating religious ceremony. The civil contract legally uniting two adults, whether you call it a "civil union" or a "marriage", should be an ENTIRELY secular affair from the point of view of the government, and I think the way to do that is to not ("re")define marriage as between a man and a woman OR as between anyone, but to change the law so that the government recognizes ONLY civil unions that are the same as what are now recognized by the name of marriage.
__________________
not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh
Ibby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 04:05 PM   #12
piercehawkeye45
Franklin Pierce
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundae View Post
Civil Unions for all, with the choice of a church wedding for those who require the blessing of God.
There are churches in this country who would bless a same sex union.
I don't believe in forcing those with problems to do so - religion should be a private matter. But the unions should be equal.
Whoa Whoa Whoa. First you secularist declare war on Christmas and now marriage?!? hehe
__________________
I like my perspectives like I like my baseball caps: one size fits all.
piercehawkeye45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 02:50 PM   #13
classicman
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
Let the "religious" have the WORD "Marriage" for their religious ceremonies and let the legal term with all benefits and whatever be "Civil Union" keeping the two separate.

Next!
We have much larger issues to deal with.
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt
classicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 03:06 PM   #14
glatt
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,717
What's the adjective you would put next to the box on forms instead of "married?"
Civil unionized? Civilized?
glatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2012, 03:13 PM   #15
infinite monkey
Person who doesn't update the user title
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 13,002
Civilly unioned?

Then when you break up you are uncivilly ununioned. Nah, that sounds too much like onion.

uncivilly de-unioned?

non-civilly disenunioned?
infinite monkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.