Susan's Place Logo

News:

Based on internal web log processing I show 3,417,511 Users made 5,324,115 Visits Accounting for 199,729,420 pageviews and 8.954.49 TB of data transfer for 2017, all on a little over $2,000 per month.

Help support this website by Donating or Subscribing! (Updated)

Main Menu

Lesbian charged with bigamy

Started by Thundra, March 30, 2007, 05:27:34 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Thundra

Wow!  This surprised me. But I guess I should not be since it goes on all of the time.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/shropshire/6507003.stm

This complicates things for bisexual women.
  •  

taru

Doesn't it just complicate things for all non-monogamous people?

The law is stupid, but according to the article seems quite clear she broke it.

http://www.shropshirestar.co.uk/2007/03/gay-marriage-mother-in-court/
  •  

Thundra

QuoteDoesn't it just complicate things for all non-monogamous people?

Fer sure.

But there had always been an unwritten agreement between the str8 communities and the lesbian community to accomodate those women that wanted the security of a male spouse, and a woman on the side. Since her relationship with her female lover was not officially recognized, it had never been a problem.

But now, we have a whole new level of complexity, and perhaps legal wrangling based on this type of relationship. Plus, it allows a guy to jetison his wife if he catches her messing with a woman. In the past it was a wink-wink, nod-nod kind of deal.  I mean, I don't know of any precedents where a guy could file for divorce based on infidelity if he caught his wife with another woman. Wouldn't he have been laughed out of court with that claim in the past?

Can you imagine the level of complexity if the wife gets caught with a woman that had transitioned? The legal status of the the transitioned person is kind of screwy in the law currently, so I am not sure how that would play out either?

It's an interesting new world, for sure.
  •  

taru

And it hasn't become a larger problem if they don't want to hold a ceremony to recognize it.

As I see it this is actually holding a registered partnership equal to marriage which is a good thing. Thus they treat trying to establish a registered partnership if one is already married the same as trying to marry a second person.
  •  

AlwaysLauren

I see this as a good sign. The law says a person cannot be married to two people at the same time. If this ceremony is violating the law, wouldn't that mean that this same sex marriage is as valid as the heterosexual one?

Looks like equality to me. I like it.
  •