A marriage proposal

[peggygee]

When you guys say you would 'wife somebody up',
or 'marry her', are you referring to a legal civil union
in the case of a pre op, or regular wedding or civil ceremony
in the case of a post op.

Or do you basically mean that you would be monagomous
with 'wifey', but nothing legally binding?

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2/magi43/bridecrop.jpg

[Smog Boy]

I'd do the Civil Union / legally binding deal, your partner should mean the world to you, so yeah, do it properly. Unless one of you just doesn't want to wed...

[trannylover_york]

I've recently become the civil partner of my pre-op girl. Here in UK it is legally exactly same as hetrosexual marriage, just different name.

[Smog Boy]

I've recently become the civil partner of my pre-op girl. Here in UK it is legally exactly same as hetrosexual marriage, just different name.

Congrats :claps

[ChemDawg291]

As much as I would love to, sadly my job wouold keep me from the legal/civil thing with one of these beautiful ladies, unless folling the maggage they don't mind waiting a year or so till the federal time is served and kiss all the VA bennifits goodbye.

[whatsupwithat]

All and/or any of the above depending on the relationship. :)

[bucatini70]

i just got married this past september but unfortunately we can only get married with a Monk in a Buddhist ceremony we are legally able to register the marriage but yes i would make and will make it legal if the opportunity ever presents.
I think the comment that of chem is sad i am hired on my abilty not on who am in love with....i live my my life for myself ...quess i am selfish that way lol

[peggygee]

For those of you who are or would consider marriage,
how do you feel about a pre-nuptial agreement?

To protect her/your assets.

[TheOne1]

For those of you who are or would consieder marriage,
how do you feel about a pre-nuptial agreement?

To protect her/your assets.

the same way i feel about the Iraq war... its a great idea

[roy404]

For those of you who are or would consider marriage,
how do you feel about a pre-nuptial agreement?

To protect her/your assets.

When I married my 1st post-op wife we had a document that neither one of us would ever use out sexuality against the other. Her idea and I totally agreeded.
As far as pre=nup. I think what you had before the marrige should be yours. Remember this INCLUDES Debts.

[TonyStarx]

interesting

[peggygee]

http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2/magi43/bump-1.gif

[mikey_stl]

Well, I'm an old-fashioned guy, in many ways, so I'd like to legally marry the girl of my dreams. Not sure what the legality would be if she happens to be a t-girl, though, especially a pre-op.

[mikey_stl]

For those of you who are or would consider marriage,
how do you feel about a pre-nuptial agreement?

To protect her/your assets.

I think pre-nups are smart -- especially if one has significantly more assets than the other.

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

Hmm...this thread is interesting...

I find it interesting also, considering the majority of fellas that would say "wife somebody up" would primarily be Afro-American

that term as well as "wifey" have always killed me

wifey for you all that don't know means: girlfriend

[hwbs]

my favorite lingo is when girls label themselves trophy wives....i look good now give me my trophy , lmao..

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

where the fuck is your avatar?

[suckseed]

I have been married. I think with the right woman it's a great thing. You have a partner to build a life with. I think the 'keep what you started with' concept makes sense - i don't like my sister's husband, and don't want him getting her house if they split up for instance. On the other hand, there is something to be said for this concept of love. John Hartford wrote it. He died last year. he was a remarkable man.

It's knowin' that your door is always open
And your path is free to walk
That makes me tend to leave my sleepin' bag
Rolled up and stashed behind your couch
And it's knowin' I'm not shackled
By forgotten words and bonds
And the ink stains that have dried upon some line
That keeps you in the back roads
By the rivers of my memory
That keeps you ever gentle on my mind

It's not clingin' to the rocks and ivy
Planted on their columns now that bind me
Or something that somebody said because
They thought we fit together walkin'
It's just knowing that the world
Will not be cursing or forgiving
When I walk along some railroad track and find
That you're movin' on the back roads
By the rivers of my memory
And for hours you're just gentle on my mind

Though the wheat fields and the clothes lines
And the junkyards and the highways come between us
And some other woman's cryin' to her mother
'cause she turned and I was gone
I still might run in silence
Tears of joy might stain my face
And the summer sun might burn me till I'm blind
But not to where I cannot see
You walkin' on the back roads
By the rivers flowin' gentle on my mind

I dip my cup of soup back from a gurglin' cracklin' cauldron
In some train yard
My beard a rustlin' coal pile
And a dirty hat pulled low across my face
Through cupped hands 'round a tin can
I pretend to hold you to my breast and find
That you're waitin' from the back roads
By the rivers of my memory
Ever smilin', ever gentle on my mind

I understand commitment. But I also like the idea of two people remaining together simply by choice.

[yodajazz]

Since marriage is a union between two people, I would say that it is up to both to make those important decisions. To me the biggest question is usually the ceremony. The bride is the star of the ceremony. So what is she willing to settle for? Women dream their whole lives of that great ceremony. It is a symbol to the community as was well as to the couple and their families.

As far a couple where one of the partners is TS, I think the intent is more important than the legal status. I think there are probably ways to circumvent lots of the legal issues. I personally believe that people have a right to swear before God, any positive commitment. Also they have the right to enter into any legal agreement that is not fraud. So most legal issues could be circumvented by making legal agreements, granting their partner those rights.

As for pre-nuptial agreements, I think they are ok, since I’ve seen so many of those real life crime shows. If a person feels better that the other will not make great financial gains from the break up, they will more likely be giving from love, once the financial incentive is reduced.

Speaking of proposals, after I was married a couple of years, my wife started complaining that I never asked her to marry me. I would say, “How did we get married, if I never asked?” I guess my approach must have been too subtle. Anyway, I finally got down on my knee and proposed, after two years of marriage to make her happy. She seemed to be satisfied. At least she does remember that one.

PS. Peggy, that's an interesting wedding picture. Where do you find these things?

[wendy48088]

* Deleted *

[peggygee]

Thank you Wendy, your post provided great insight and information
to the topic. I love the way you bring factual material to the topic
at hand.

As I tell my students I am a big fan of the Socratic method of teaching.
One of the tenets of that method is a practice involving asking a series
of questions surrounding a central issue, and answering questions of
the others involved.

Thus for me it is great when I learn something from a question that I
have asked. My philosophy is that a teacher can learn as much
from their students, as the students can learn from the teacher.
Imagine a class with Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, et al, sitting around
kicking it, imagine the depth and breadth of such a discussion.

Some of my happiest moments at HA have been when I have had a Zen
moment, an epiphany, or some intellectual growth.

This has been one such moment. http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2/magi43/thumbsup.gif

[peggygee]

But what about children, can we have them?
http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l2/magi43/baby-14.gif



http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Parenting&Template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay.cfm&TPLID=26&ContentID=17907

American Bar Association (2003, 1999 and 1995)

On gay and lesbian parenting. The American Bar Association adopted the following position statement in Aug. 2003:

"RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association supports state and territorial laws and court decisions that permit the establishment of legal parent-child relationships through joint adoptions and second-parent adoptions by unmarried persons who are functioning as a child's parents when such adoptions are in the best interests of the child."

On gay and lesbian parenting. The American Bar Association adopted the following position statement in Feb. 1999:

"RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association supports the enactment of laws and implementation of public policy that provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child."

On child custody and visitation. The American Bar Association adopted the following position statement in Aug. 1995:

"BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Bar Association supports the enactment of legislation and implementation of public policy providing that child custody and visitation shall not be denied or restricted on the basis of sexual orientation."


Child Welfare League of America (1988)

The Child Welfare League of America's Standards of Excellence for Adoption Services states:

"Applicants should be assessed on the basis of their abilities to successfully parent a child needing family membership and not on their race, ethnicity or culture, income, age, marital status, religion, appearance, differing lifestyles, or sexual orientation." Further, applicants for adoption should be accepted "on the basis of an individual assessment of their capacity to understand and meet the needs of a particular available child at the point of adoption and in the future."

CWLA source document


Voice for Adoption (2006)

The board of directors of Voice for Adoption passed the following position statement on discrimination in Sept. 2006.

"Voice for Adoption believes that children deserve every opportunity to have a permanent, loving family, and that ruling out prospective parents through discrimination limits children's options for permanency."

"We oppose policies and practices that discriminate against prospective parents, including but not limited to discrimination based on age, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religion, marital status, family size, disability, medical condition, geographic location, employment status, occupation (including employment in the child welfare system), and educational attainment."

"We support making decisions about approving prospective parents and matching waiting children on a case-by-case basis, based on the strengths of the family and the best interests of each child."

National Association of Social Workers (2002)

The National Association of Social Workers approved the following policy statement at in August 2002 at the NASW Delegate Assembly.

"Legislation legitimizing second-parent adoptions in same-sex households should be supported. Legislation seeking to restrict foster care and adoption by gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender people should be vigorously opposed."

Source: Social Work Speaks: National Association of Social Workers Policy Statements, 2003-2006.


North American Council on Adoptable Children (1998)

The North American Council on Adoptable Children issued a policy statement in 1998 (amended April 14, 2002) that states:

"Children should not be denied a permanent family because of the sexual orientation of potential parents. Everyone with the potential to successfully parent a child in foster care or adoption is entitled to fair and equal consideration."

NACAC source document

If interested please take a moment to peruse the rest of the site.

http://www.hrc.org/Template.cfm?Section=Parenting&Template=/TaggedPage/TaggedPageDisplay.cfm&TPLID=26&ContentID=17907