Last night I was on the phone with mom, arguing (as usual), but this time it was actually something "current events" and brought up a good question for which neither of us had an exact answer. I don't know if anyone has seen that vid on youtube where the soldier comes out to his father on the phone after the end of DADT; but anyway, they were talking about it on CNN and and mom claims that the repeal of DADT will "require" military commanders to marry gay officers to their partners in gay marriage states. My reply, was that even "if" gay marriage goes to all 50 states, I don't see how a Captain, Colonel, General, Admiral, (commanding officer) could be compelled to grant or participate in a marriage. I do "believe" they have the authority to officiate and/or legalize a wedding into law, but being that this prerogative exists outside immediate military operations, I don't see how they could be compelled to grant a marriage license or officiate one. Just like canonizing a Saint by the pope, it's a prerogative, not an imperative. (she's concerned that conscientious commanders opposed to it will now be forced to marry people they wouldn't otherwise marry) if the soldiers wanted military weddings. But again, I always believed that matters of that sort were prerogatives of US commanders, not obligations. What say military forge? Then I said, "well mom if you are so anti gay, why do you call me all the time? I don't think anybody should be forced to marry a couple either, for ANY reason." Then the topic abruptly changed to talking about autumn and how cute I looked as Casper at Halloween when I was six.
In my 22+ years I have never seen a commander officiate in any wedding. They may have a military ceremony as part of a wedding, but the legal, binding portion of it is done by an authorized agent, being a chaplain, priest, rabbi, whatever. The exception would be if that commander also happens to be licensed to marry people....all mine were just pilots.
The problem with the captain marrying any couple is that the Romulans always attack in the middle of it.
I always figured it would be fear of the possible guy that stands up and says "I have a problem with them marrying" and then firearms are subsequently drawn from dress uniforms and used to put down the fighting.
Good point. Just because I've never seen doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I will research this further!
Speaking of this... http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/30/military-chaplains-to-perform-same-sex-marriages/?hpt=hp_t2
It seems like a fair compromise to me. It allows all parties involved to adhere to their beliefs or Baca police. However , it won't be enough in the eyes of many that chaplains simply "can" choose to officiate these weddings. Anything other than complete and total love and adoration of the homosexual establishments' marriage desires will be labeled bigotry.
So, same sex marriage between military members can simply happen via civilian (off post) officiates? Am I understanding this correctly?
Only a Navy Captain can do this if he is attached to a ship as far as I know. Other officers cannot marry people, except some of the clergy officers, the Padres. I did however have to ask for permission to get married from my commander as was required. My wife was also military so basically I had to go ask the squardron commander for my wife's hand in marriage. If he had said "no" then we couldn't have got married.
Nobody ever does that "permission to get married" shit anymore in The Army (that I've ever seen anyway).
No shit? We had to go to the base hospital and they run tests and things before we could even go and ask for permission. They don't do pre-marital investigations any more? Perhaps it was because we were overseas, or in the same command and we were both AF and it could possibly affect something. Wife was born in Germany but both parents were US.
Please. There was one woman on my ship that eloped last years with a cheif on another ship, and the only thing they had to do was some retro-active paperwork that would have been done if they'd had asked anyway.
Yeah, any commander that denied someone the chance to get married would be over-ruled in a New York minute. He would get the "Tool Of The Year" award hands down.
Well, as EP said, assume you were Navy and you "wanted" your Captain who commands IDK, The USS Ronald Reagan to marry you. He denies your request (gay or straight) because he believes only a JP, minister, or chaplain should should be involved. Would he be a black sheep as well? In theory of course.
Yes. No. the reverse is actually true. there will be far more grumbling from those who are disgusted that any uniofmred personel would be allowed to involve themselves in a gay marriage in ANY way that there will be anyone expceting it to be required. there's not one pro-lgbt outlet that I'm aware of which advocates ANY one under ANY circumstances performing a wedding which contradicts their faith. the point of controversy has been the associated services. As in the locality which requires business to not discriminate and then a wedding photographer got in trouble (improperly in my view) for declining to work a lesbian wedding. but no one has ever required a church or minister to act in their religious capacity against their faith, nor does anyone i've ever heard of advocate it.
Point of order, IIRC, a Naval Captain does not have by title alone the power to marry anyone. The Captain must also be a justice of the peace.
This is all pretty moot. I can't think of one instance I know of in the entire history of the USN that the captain of a commissioned Navy ship has married a couple at sea. Which is not to say it has never happened, but I sure as shit ain't heard of it.
