[Pastor Ezekiel]

Brothers, the radical sodomite agenda is on the march, and I'm sad to report that they are making in-roads everywhere. Brother Hatchett has documented the homerization of the children's cereal, snack and fast food industry. Today I want to highlight a disturbing new trend, clear evidence that queer marriage is destroying normal marriage.

More men taking their wives' last names

Orenda Fink gave her husband, Todd Baechle, more than just her hand in marriage. She gave him her last name, too. But because men so rarely take their wives' surnames, it can confuse county officials. Todd Fink paid a pretty penny for the privilege: $500 instead of $5.Fans of his band, the Faint, buzzed about it. Music writers were confused when he said he had a brother in the band, even though every member has a different last name. The move initially miffed his parents.

And — most troubling for Fink — it was grueling to navigate the legal process of changing his name. Many county and state officials didn't know what to do.

"Humans trust traditions," said Fink, now married three years. "But some things are worth changing. Sometimes you have to walk off the sidewalk if you want new experiences."

There's a slow-growing trend for men to take their spouses' last names. No local, state or national agency records the instances, but anecdotal evidence nationwide indicates it's more common, said Mark Rosenbaum, a lawyer and University of Michigan professor of law who has led legal charges in California to make the process as easy for men as for women.

Employees at the Douglas County Clerk's Office, which issues marriage licenses, recall about five men who have made the choice in the past decade. Jackie Fairbanks, registration supervisor for the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services' vital records division, hasn't seen many, but she has noticed more in the past year or two.

Todd Fink made the choice for a number of reasons.

His future wife was pursuing a solo music career after having been half of the pop duo Azure Ray. Todd Fink didn't want her to have to change her name after having established her own musical identity. They debated using separate last names, but they planned to have children and thought the different names would be confusing for the kids.

The decision to take his wife's name was one of the easiest parts of the process.

When Todd Fink informed his family, his parents were surprised — and not pleased.

"They eventually accepted it," he said. "They understand I'm still the same son I was before, even though I have a different name."

When Fink couldn't get a straight answer from government officials on how to change his name, he pursued a formal name change — a roughly $500 process that required him to hire a lawyer, file paperwork, have his name change publicized for four consecutive weeks and appear before a judge. Fink had to testify he wasn't changing his name to evade creditors or a criminal history.

In the end, it appears Fink did more than necessary.

Douglas County Clerk Tom Cavanaugh conferred with state vital statistics officials before concluding that, just as a bride would, a bridegroom can simply pay $5 for a certified copy of his marriage license. That document would enable him to change his last name on his driver's license, Social Security card and more.

Fairbanks, of HHS, wasn't sure how long that specific procedure has been in place, because the male last name change is so rare.

"We don't see very much of it," Fairbanks said. "And we've only recently seen it at all."

The confusion is common throughout the United States, said Rosenbaum, the attorney.

"Men who think about it are quickly discouraged either by the process or the public reaction," he said.

That reaction is the product of our roots as a patriarchal society and several hundred years of history, said Cleveland Evans, a member of the American Name Society and a psychology professor at Bellevue University.

People are more accepting when women change their names in marriage because it's an age-old custom — although, he said, in 14th and 15th century England, men were known to take their wives' names if a woman's family was more prominent.

When Omahan Kory Miller married Julie Delka in 1995, he fancied himself a fairly progressive guy. Delka didn't feel comfortable taking Miller's name but ideally wanted to share a name with him. They talked about him taking her name, or having both of their names hyphenated, or making up a last name.

Miller couldn't bite on any of those options. For the first three years of their marriage, he remained Kory Miller while she was Julie Delka-Miller.

When the time came to have children, the couple merged their last names, becoming the Delkamillers. He fleetingly pushed for Millerdelka before relenting.

"Delkamiller just sounds better," said the religion teacher at Marian High School.

Reactions varied. Some friends and family thought it was cool. Some certainly did not. Miller's family, especially, was troubled because he was the only male who could carry on the family name.

"My family wasn't doing cartwheels when I told them . . . but they eventually adapted and accepted it," he said.

That wasn't the only concern.

As with the Finks, the Delkamillers had to navigate a confusing legal process. It's their understanding that it would have been easier if they had done it immediately. Because they waited three years, they had to hire a lawyer, file paperwork and appear before a judge.

They were told they could pick any last name they wanted — as long as it didn't infringe on a copyright.

"I guess I couldn't have been Julie Diet Coca-Cola," Julie Delkamiller said.

All in all, the couple say it has been worth the trouble, because they share a name. There's only one hang-up for Kory Delkamiller: "Women have maiden names. What do I call mine?"

Todd Fink also is happy he made the change. Most of the problems — puzzled fans, sore family, legal bills — went away after the first year of marriage, when the name change became final.

"I don't think I gave up anything I shouldn't have," Fink said. "I'm happy to have her name."

[Ebenezer Wright]

This is disgustingly shameful, how can a man be so foolish!

This article reminds me of a co-worker of mine whose wife proposed to him. To think, her father had no say in the matter.

Why are more and more people making homersexual choices these days?

[Nobar King]

This is even worse than a woman who marries a man and doesn't bother to change her name. Even more insulting is a woman who is divorced and keeps her 1st husband's name even after marrying husband no 2. SHAME!!

[Ezekiel Bathfire]

I think that even if Todd Baechle's last name is foreign, stupid and unpronounceable, it is not the point. The rules governing a woman's name are clear before, during and after marriage and are there to indicate the position of the woman as a possession of the man and her legal and spiritual status.

1. At the wedding, a man marries a woman but a woman is married to a man.

2. After the marriage, where Miss Prudence Smith is married to Mr Adam Jones, Miss Prudence Smith becomes Mrs Adam Jones.

3. If Mr Adam Jones is called to Glory before his wife, after his demise, Mrs Adam Jones becomes Mrs Prudence Jones

Point 1 shows that the man takes on the woman - it is the man who has the responsibility and the power to marry, a woman may only be married.

Point 2 is as an indicator to the world that Mr Adam Jones has accepted responsibility for a woman's (his wife's) legal conduct from her father (who must "give her away") and will endorse any legal or spiritual contracts into which she may wish to enter.

Point 3 gives the world the warning that the woman, as a widow, is responsible for her own legal or spiritual contracts. (Be careful of widows gentlemen, they have lost none of their female charming and uneducated simplicity and do not understand technical terms or obligations.)

This brings up another interesting rule - Women's first names should always be Christian names - that way, by reference to The Bible, the name tells you what sex the person is and point 3 is never a confusion.

In regrettable modern cases where first names could be either male or female, I would impose the rule that the orthodox spelling be used for the male and an unorthodox spelling for the female (liberal sprinkling of 'y' 'k' and 'ie' usually does it).

[Old Iron Crotch]

There is nothing wrong with a woman keeping her own name after marriage or with a man changing his name - as long as the couple is happy with it, that's all that matters. The whole name-changing thing goes back to a time when women were chattel and the woman's name was changed to show that she was now the property of her husband. Wives are no longer considered property, so there is no need for proof of oenership.
When my husband proposed to me, I told him I was not going to change my name to his. I had worked long and hard to establish credit in my own name, and had just bought a house. Changing my name on all my various accounts and the deed to my house would be a major hassle. I told him that if he was set on us having the same last name, he could change his to mine. He considered it, and when he found out just how much of a pain it was, he asked me if it was as big a headache for women when we changed our names after getting married. I told him it was, and he just shook his head and said, "I'm a limp wristed fag, so I'll go along with anything you say. Just don't beat me anymore."
The important thing is that the couple is committed to each other, not that they have the same last name.

[ExGay Alex]

Originally Posted by Old Iron Crotch

There is nothing wrong with a woman keeping her own name after marriage or with a man changing his name - as long as the couple is happy with it, that's all that matters.

This statement exemplifies all that is wrong with America and the liberal, secular, Hollywood, homosexual agenda. If it feels good, do it. If you like it and want to do it, it's OK. As long as you feel pink inside. Nowhere do you even consider the will of God, as told to us through his Holy Word.

Originally Posted by Old Iron Crotch

The whole name-changing thing goes back to a time when women were chattel and the woman's name was changed to show that she was now the property of her husband.

* Genesis 3:6, by which Adam is instructed to rule over Eve, was repealed?
* Epheisians 5:22 "Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord" was repealed?
* Exodus, Chapter 21, and all the lessons about the role of women to be clearly drawn from it, was repealed?

Originally Posted by Old Iron Crotch

When my husband proposed to me, I told him I was not going to change my name to his .... and he just shook his head and said, "I'm a limp wristed fag, so I'll go along with anything you say "

He must make you so proud. I shudder at the thought of where he puts your fingers.

Originally Posted by Old Iron Crotch

The important thing is that the couple is committed to each other, not that they have the same last name.

See comment No. 1. Which scripture supports this view, please?

[Old Iron Crotch]

Originally Posted by Alex the Russian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Iron Crotch
When my husband proposed to me, I told him I was not going to change my name to his .... and he just shook his head and said, "I'm a limp wristed fag, so I'll go along with anything you say "


He must make you so proud. I shudder at the thought of where he puts your fingers.

You changed my post - too bad you can't refute it without lying.


As for the Biblical references, neither of us is Christian, so we are not bound by the Bible's rules of marriage.

[SUV]

Originally Posted by Old Iron Crotch

You changed my post - too bad you can refute it without lying.

So you'd rather see him lie and SIN

[ExGay Alex]

I didn't change the idea; I just edited out the long-winded droney parts. Your point was you didn't want to change your name then blah blah blah then your husband conceded without argument.

EVERYONE is bound by God's laws, even YOU and your stinky-fingered husband. That you don't believe that Jesus died for your sins, was resurrected for you and will return to earth does not relieve you of your responsibility. It just means you will go to Hell, that's all.

[Old Iron Crotch]

Originally Posted by SUV

So you'd rather see him lie and SIN

He DID lie.