Tulsa, Okla – February 13, 2008 —Oklahomans for Equality (OkEq) proudly recognizes the love and commitment expressed through tens of thousands of enduring same-gender relationships across this state and nation. In celebration of the right of each and every American to marry the person he or she loves, OkEq will be holding a series of marriage equality events.

At 2:30 P.M. on Friday, February 13th, same-gender couples will arrive at the Tulsa County Courthouse and apply for marriage licenses in a symbolic show of support for marriage equality. In accordance with Oklahoma Statutes and the State Constitution, the Clerk of the Court will have to deny these couples' requests for a marriage license, highlighting the second class status accorded to same-gender loving relationships. "The freedom to marry whoever you want is, at heart, simply an issue of equal treatment and equal rights," says Oklahomans for Equality Advocacy Chair Matt Warren; "Marriage confers more than 1,000 federal benefits and protections that are unfairly denied to same-gender couples in the status quo."

After the demonstration, participants and supporters of marriage equality are invited to the Dennis R. Neill Equality Center, located at 621 East 4th Street, for a symbolic wedding reception and the Equality Center's first annual Wedding Fair, complete with booths and vendors catering to ***, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender couples who wish to tie the knot.


We want to know what you think...give us your thoughts and we might use it on FOX23 News.

This may get more of a chuckle than anything else, but since when does ANYTHING about marriage have anything to do with equality?

---

jd4fox23

hi...i feel like it should be allowed...at least half my friends are girls who have decided to be each others' life partner...i was not immediately aware of their lifestyle when i met them, but i liked the "person" so the rest was easy...the main issue should be happiness and the desire to contribute to society...i just wanted to give this my vote.....

kioteemee:

hi...i feel like it should be allowed...at least half my friends are girls who have decided to be each others' life partner...i was not immediately aware of their lifestyle when i met them, but i liked the "person" so the rest was easy...the main issue should be happiness and the desire to contribute to society...i just wanted to give this my vote.....

For the sake of argument, and to boost thought and more discussion ...

We all already have equal rights as far as marriage goes.  We ALL already can marry the person of our choice of the opposite gender.  There is no need to create a new law in order to create equality so everyone can marry. That right already exists for everyone.

As far as a rights go, granting the right for people of the same gender to marry would be an entirely new right that has nothing to do with obtaining equality.  How would society be able to insure that everyone was granted a new right in order to maintain equality? There would still be no equality because everyone would not be getting a new right granted to them.

So, where do we want society draw the line?  Should we draw the line at people of the same genders wanting this new right?  What about 3 people who decide they want to marry?  Should we grant them that right in the name of equality?  What about groups of people?  Should we grant those people the same right in the name of equality?  If we do, how do we respond to people who decide they want the right to marry their farm animal? Don't laugh because in some countries people do marry their farm animals in the name of whatever their cause is.

What is this issue really about?  Is it about wanting equality as far as marriage goes, or does it have more to do with people wanting legal rights that they don't normally have as 'partners'.

Food for thought......

---

jd4fox23

Religion says its wrong. Evolution Proves it wrong. Ever see Wild Kingdom doing a show, "The rare mating ritual of the Gay Samoa Monkeys" - Wouldn't that be cool? A bunch of Bonobo's going to planned parenthood?
Next it will be the sheep people, then what?

kindagreywolf:

Religion says its wrong. Evolution Proves it wrong. Ever see Wild Kingdom doing a show, "The rare mating ritual of the Gay Samoa Monkeys" - Wouldn't that be cool? A bunch of Bonobo's going to planned parenthood? Next it will be the sheep people, then what?

Where does equality fit into this issue? 

---

jd4fox23

There's not and never will be. Why kid ourselves? Soon it will be transvestites, Child molesters and interbreeding marriages. (first cousins have only a 1% chance chance of genetics deformity). Granted that was extreme but it gets my point across.
If you choose to live a different lifestyle than the masses it will never be equal.

hi...ok jd, when you put it in political terms, i'm lost...i feel everyone should have the right to be with whatever partner they desire, at this point it is only an issue of same sex marriages, so lets deal with that issue...i thought i had a calculating mind, but you kind of knocked me off my chair with the 3 people or group marriage...that is a little far out there but now that you've mentioned it, i can see it somewhere in the future...thanks for putting this into perspective for me  

kioteemee:

hi...ok jd, when you put it in political terms, i'm lost...i feel everyone should have the right to be with whatever partner they desire, at this point it is only an issue of same sex marriages, so lets deal with that issue...i thought i had a calculating mind, but you kind of knocked me off my chair with the 3 people or group marriage...that is a little far out there but now that you've mentioned it, i can see it somewhere in the future...thanks for putting this into perspective for me  

It wasn't all too long ago that the idea of gay marriage was "a little far out there", and if you go back a few more years it was even more "out there" to openly talk about anything that had to do with sex, let alone same sex dating or co-habitation.

Where do we as a society draw the line for such things?  Why would it be a "right"?  Where in our Bill of Rights or Constitution is there any guarantee of such a right?  Yes, we do have rights, and one that is spelled out specificially is the right "to pursue happiness", but there are no guarantees in any of those documents that we will actually GET happiness, let alone any guarantee that we will be able to marry the person of our choice.  What if the person of our choice is a child?  What if the person of our choice is someone who is already married with children?

When any special interest group begins campaigning for a new "right" or "equality", how is our society compelled to listen to these issues?  Sometimes it takes years for change, and sometimes we shouldn't even open the door.  How far are we willing to go in America with "rights"?  Do we want to become a nation similar to India, for example, where it's perfectly legal to marry ones goat?

How far are any of us willing to go when it comes to changing our marriage laws and what is considered to be a marriage? 

More, food for thought...  :)

---

jd4fox23

hi...you are so right jd, i always thought of myself as being an open minded person & i suppose i am compared to the majority, i just never thought about the scope this idea covers! although i will always support my friends i think the equal rights issue should be put on the back burner ;)

kioteemee:

hi...you are so right jd, i always thought of myself as being an open minded person & i suppose i am compared to the majority, i just never thought about the scope this idea covers! although i will always support my friends i think the equal rights issue should be put on the back burner ;)

So what do you think about how far this could really go?

---

jd4fox23

hi... i think maybe the reason it is being called an equal rights issue is because of the legal benefits that come with being married (he he he) although none come to mind at the moment...also, if a "new law" was passed it could state specifically to allow a marriage between only 2 people...male/female  female/female  male/male all of legal ages...no 3 people or group marriages or animal/human or child marriages...then make this "new law" a closed locked law applying to legal age people, that no amendments can change...that is how far i think it should go

There are benefits and drawbacks. Insurance uses statistics and unfortunately, right now, gays are considered "High Risk". This will result in an insurance snafu. No way around it. As soon as they say "Your a high risk because of your life style", WHAM! Mega Lawsuits were only the lawyers will get rich. So sad.
Whats going to happen next? Religion will have to revamp because there beliefs "Are wrong", More lawsuits.
I'm not against Gays being married, honestly, I'm not. But I am a single white male (I have a fiancee that keeps me on a very tight leash though), and I am tired of everyone getting special rights!

kioteemee:

hi... i think maybe the reason it is being called an equal rights issue is because of the legal benefits that come with being married (he he he) although none come to mind at the moment...also, if a "new law" was passed it could state specifically to allow a marriage between only 2 people...male/female  female/female  male/male all of legal ages...no 3 people or group marriages or animal/human or child marriages...then make this "new law" a closed locked law applying to legal age people, that no amendments can change...that is how far i think it should go

It seems to me that "marriage" used to be a locked law that meant a union between a man and a woman.  Now, it also seems that a group of people are trying to unlock that law and create a new "locked" law.  So, how long will a new "locked" law stay locked before the next 'special' group of people want to create the next version of a "locked" law that applies to the definition of what marriage should be?  How long should we put it in writing that this new definition of marriage be "locked" before it can be challenged and turned into a new "locked" law?   :)

---

jd4fox23

kindagreywolf:

There are benefits and drawbacks. Insurance uses statistics and unfortunately, right now, gays are considered "High Risk". This will result in an insurance snafu. No way around it. As soon as they say "Your a high risk because of your life style", WHAM! Mega Lawsuits were only the lawyers will get rich. So sad. Whats going to happen next? Religion will have to revamp because there beliefs "Are wrong", More lawsuits. I'm not against Gays being married, honestly, I'm not. But I am a single white male (I have a fiancee that keeps me on a very tight leash though), and I am tired of everyone getting special rights!

Are you saying, greywolf, that you feel you are discriminated against?

---

jd4fox23