Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Until Idaho Do Us Part

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • #1

    Until Idaho Do Us Part

    Madelynn Taylor, 74, served six years in the United States Navy. When she passes away, she says she wants to be buried with the ashes of her late wife Jean Mixner in the Idaho State Veterans Cemetery.

    But there's a problem. Because gay marriage isn't recognized in Idaho, Taylor's wish has been denied, even though the cemetery allows opposite-sex spouses to be buried or interred with veterans, KBOI.com reports.

    "I'm not surprised," Taylor said to KBOI.com. "I've been discriminated against for 70 years, and they might as well discriminate against me in death as well as life.
    http://news.yahoo.com/gay-veteran-134538833.html
    "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)
    Tags: None
  • #2
    If I'm reading this correctly, then Minxer preceded Taylor in death, and is buried in a veteran's cemetery. I can only infer from that notion that Minxer herself was a veteran.

    Assuming that to be the case, then it would seem to me that one's veteran status would trump pretty much anything else. At least that's what seems logical to me, anyway.



    There must be some other factor here that isn't in the report.
    It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
    In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
    Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
    Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

    Comment

    • #3
      Originally posted by Adam View Post
      If I'm reading this correctly, then Minxer preceded Taylor in death, and is buried in a veteran's cemetery. I can only infer from that notion that Minxer herself was a veteran.

      Assuming that to be the case, then it would seem to me that one's veteran status would trump pretty much anything else. At least that's what seems logical to me, anyway.



      There must be some other factor here that isn't in the report.
      Both vets. Both could be buried in the veterans' cemetary, in whatever corner is available. Like a lot of married people, the survivor wants to be buried next to her spouse, not half-way to the next county.
      "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)

      Comment

      • #4
        Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
        Both vets. Both could be buried in the veterans' cemetary, in whatever corner is available. Like a lot of married people, the survivor wants to be buried next to her spouse, not half-way to the next county.
        It turns out that no, they're not both vets. Mixner was not a veteran, by any account out there. Mixner was cremated.

        For now, Taylor keeps Mixner's ashes in her closet.


        My, what spectacular irony.


        So Mixner is not interred at all. She's just a box of ashes on a closet shelf. Must be very important to Taylor.
        It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
        In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
        Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
        Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

        Comment

        • #5
          Originally posted by Adam View Post
          It turns out that no, they're not both vets. Mixner was not a veteran, by any account out there. Mixner was cremated.

          For now, Taylor keeps Mixner's ashes in her closet.


          My, what spectacular irony.


          So Mixner is not interred at all. She's just a box of ashes on a closet shelf. Must be very important to Taylor.
          So why doesn't she just have the ashes put inside her casket?
          "Faith is nothing but a firm assent of the mind : which, if it be regulated, as is our duty, cannot be afforded to anything but upon good reason, and so cannot be opposite to it."
          -John Locke

          "It's all been melded together into one giant, authoritarian, leftist scream."
          -Newman

          Comment

          • #6
            Originally posted by Adam View Post
            It turns out that no, they're not both vets. Mixner was not a veteran, by any account out there. Mixner was cremated.

            For now, Taylor keeps Mixner's ashes in her closet.


            My, what spectacular irony.


            So Mixner is not interred at all. She's just a box of ashes on a closet shelf. Must be very important to Taylor.
            OK, I misread the part about who was a vet. What difference does it make? Non-veteran spouses are allowed to be buried with their veteran spouses in that cemetery.

            How does keeping her spouse's ashes at home until they can be buried together make her unimportant to the surviving spouse? My mom has my dad's ashes at home. Trust me, he was important to her and still is.

            Originally posted by scott View Post
            So why doesn't she just have the ashes put inside her casket?
            If that would be enough for you and your spouse, great, that's your choice. This woman is entitled to be buried in the veteran's cemetery and she wants the same treatment for her spouse that yours would be entitled to. What's so hard to understand?
            "Since the historic ruling, the Lovings have become icons for equality. Mildred released a statement on the 40th anniversary of the ruling in 2007: 'I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, Black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.'." - Mildred Loving (Loving v. Virginia)

            Comment

            • #7
              Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
              OK, I misread the part about who was a vet. What difference does it make? Non-veteran spouses are allowed to be buried with their veteran spouses in that cemetery.
              The difference is that if both were vets, then each would have an individual entitlement to be buried in that cemetery (assuming that's the sole/main qualification; I don't know for certain exactly what the requirements are for getting buried there). Furthermore, if Taylor were already interred there, and not a vet, then the cemetery would not have a leg to stand on, but that's not the case at all.

              Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
              How does keeping her spouse's ashes at home until they can be buried together make her unimportant to the surviving spouse? My mom has my dad's ashes at home. Trust me, he was important to her and still is.
              Does she keep his ashes hidden in the closet, or does she keep them in a prominent place, e.g. the mantle in the living room or whatever?

              Originally posted by Celeste Chalfonte View Post
              If that would be enough for you and your spouse, great, that's your choice. This woman is entitled to be buried in the veteran's cemetery and she wants the same treatment for her spouse that yours would be entitled to. What's so hard to understand?
              It's not hard. Her spouse is not her spouse under state law.

              Personally, I think that the state is being silly about this, but the fact is that Taylor does not have this entitlement just because she declares that she has this entitlement. I'd like to be buried under Kennedy's eternal flame, but my declaring that it's my God-given right to be buried there doesn't make it so.



              This is, unsurprisingly, yet another calculated push by the gay mafia to utilize the courts to force everyone to embrace the gay lifestyle and pretend that homosexuality is normal when in fact it is not. In other words, special rights for gays. If her genuine interest was to spend eternity as close to her partner as possible, then the simple solution would already have been arranged: simply mix their ashes together and put them in one urn in the cemetery. Can't get any closer than that. But, as usual, this is someone who is lying about her genuine intentions. Why it is that the gay mafia finds the need to do that on a regular basis is obvious.
              It's been ten years since that lonely day I left you
              In the morning rain, smoking gun in hand
              Ten lonely years but how my heart, it still remembers
              Pray for me, momma, I'm a gypsy now

              Comment

              • #8
                I'm not certain that keeping ashes in a closet means disrespect. Personally, I find ashes in the house at all creepy, but that's honestly just me and I know that many other people feel differently about it. I can understand not necessarily displaying them, perhaps she just wanted to keep them until they could be buried together. But yeah, not certain why they can't just be put in her cast, or perhaps they can be put in one one if she is going to be cremated as well.
                Not where I breathe, but where I love, I live...
                Robert Southwell, S.J.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Originally posted by Adam View Post
                  This is, unsurprisingly, yet another calculated push by the gay mafia to utilize the courts to force everyone to embrace the gay lifestyle and pretend that homosexuality is normal when in fact it is not. In other words, special rights for gays. If her genuine interest was to spend eternity as close to her partner as possible, then the simple solution would already have been arranged: simply mix their ashes together and put them in one urn in the cemetery. Can't get any closer than that. But, as usual, this is someone who is lying about her genuine intentions. Why it is that the gay mafia finds the need to do that on a regular basis is obvious.
                  So suddenly it's about the gay mafia, forced embrace of a lifestyle and normalizing of homosexuality, and not some woman who spent her life loving another woman asking for the simple eternal pleasure of being allowed to be buried next to her even though the law didn't recognize their relationship?

                  The rule about spouses could be changed with little fuss to allow the sort of life-partners relationships to be allowed, even if state law doesn't recognize them. There's no logical reason not to allow that, unless Christian right wingers are so sensitive that they'd be offended at two female names on a tombstone.
                  “Any sufficiently advanced capitalism is indistinguishable from rent seeking.” ~ =j

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    I didn't think gay people were allowed to serve back then? I'm just asking.

                    As far as internment together I would choose another state or a private cemetery. What about a federal veteran's cemetery?

                    It would be nice if they could be buried together in the state cemetery of their choice but I don't see the law changing.
                    Last edited by RobJohnson; Tuesday, April 29, 2014, 5:20 AM.

                    Comment

                    Previous template Next
                    Working...
                    X