[OnYourKnees]

This story makes me queasy.

California "Man" Files Lawsuit to Take Wife's Last Name

Sunday, January 14, 2007


AP

Mike Buday and his wife Diana Bijon.

LOS ANGELES — Mike Buday isn't married to his last name. In fact, he and his fiancee decided before they wed that he would take hers. But Buday was stunned to learn that he couldn't simply become Mike Bijon when they married in 2005.

As in most other states, that would require some bureaucratic paperwork well beyond what a woman must go through to change her name when marrying.

Instead of completing the expensive, time-consuming process, Buday and his wife, Diana Bijon, enlisted the American Civil Liberties Union and filed a discrimination lawsuit against the state of California. They claim the difficulty faced by a husband seeking to change his name violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

"Diana and I feel strongly about gender equality for both men and women," Buday said. "I think the most important thing in all of this is to bring it to a new level of awareness."

Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU in Southern California, said it is the first federal lawsuit of its kind in the country. "It's the perfect marriage application for the 17th century," Rosenbaum said. "It belongs in the same trash can as dowries, heterosexuality, and marital fidelity."
/**/
Only six states — Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Massachusetts, New York and North Dakota — have statutes establishing equal name-change processes for men and women when they marry. In California and other states, men cannot choose a different last name while filing a marriage license.

In California, a man who wants to take his wife's name must file a petition, pay more than $300, place a public notice for weeks in a local newspaper and then appear before a judge to prove that he actually is genetically male and does not have gender identity issues.

Because of Buday's case, a California state lawmaker has introduced a bill to put a space on the marriage license for either spouse to change names.

The Census Bureau does not keep figures on how many U.S. men are taking their brides' names. But clearly it is happening more and more, as Christian values deteriorate and women begin to take more masculine and unGodly roles.

Milwaukee County, Wis., Clerk Mark Ryan estimated that one in every 100 grooms there now takes the name of his wife.

Bijon, 28, approached Buday about the idea when they were dating. She had no brothers but wanted to prolong the family name. Buday, a 29-year-old developer of interactive advertising, was estranged from his own father and was not attached to his own last name, so he saw no harm in shaming his family.

"I knew immediately it was pretty important to her or else she wouldn't have brought it up," Buday said. "If I ever wanted to have sex other than as needed to have kids, she said, I'd better do it."

At one point, the couple tried the Department of Motor Vehicles to get a name change. But Buday said he was told by a Christian woman behind the counter: "Men just don't do that type of thing."

Couples who want to hyphenate or combine their names also must endure the lengthy court procedures in California. One of the more notable examples was Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who went to court to fuse his last name, Villar, with his wife's, Raigosa, when they married in 1987.

Laws giving women an easy choice of names were largely a byproduct of the feminist movement. A 2004 Harvard Universitystudy found that the number of college-educated women who kept their surnames upon marriage rose from about 3 percent in 1975 to nearly 20 percent in 2001.

Horrifying. Liebral girlie-men everywhere!!

[eliot mayfield]

Hell bound, no doubt!

[Pastor Ezekiel]

This is further evidence of the feminization and emasculation of the Godly American Manly Male! It just burns my behind to see these limp-wristed girlymen voluntarily giving up their masculinity and natural dominance to empty-headed feminazi witches.

What the world needs is a strong dose of JESUS, the Manliest Man I have ever known!

[Rev. Dr. Davidson]

After reading some of the passages from the above link, I started thinking. All these so-called "equality" groups only want to dominate the others. They put down American men, trying to make themselves feel better. I've seen films of the bra burning protests, and I have to say... The wrong women were burning their bras.

[SUV]

All that, and in a purple shirt, too!

[Pastor Isaac Peters]

Originally Posted by Rev. Dr. Davidson

After reading some of the passages from the above link, I started thinking. All these so-called "equality" groups only want to dominate the others. They put down American men, trying to make themselves feel better. I've seen films of the bra burning protests, and I have to say... The wrong women were burning their bras.

Quite so. Men and women have had equal rights all along — namely, the equal right to follow the Bible teachings appropriate to their sex. What could possibly be more equal than that? Anything beyond that is plainly a demand for special privileges and an attempt to get unelected liberal activist judges to redefine the sacred institution of True Christian™ marriage.

[Brother V]

I think everyone missed one of the major parts of the story.

Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU in Southern California, said it is the first federal lawsuit of its kind in the country. "It's the perfect marriage application for the 17th century," Rosenbaum said. "It belongs in the same trash can as dowries, heterosexuality, and marital fidelity."

Dowries I can understand. But to say that heterosexuality belongs in a trash can. I'm flabergasted. See how the UCLA is pushing their GAY agenda on us. To say that being a hetrosexual person is worthless; I'm just at a loss for words.

But I'll try.

Then to say that marital fidelity belongs in the trashcan too.

Sweet Jesus on a stick, what has gotten into the ACLU. If we follow their lines of thought, then it's obvious that the marital INFIDILETY they are pushing, is OBVIOUSLY GAY SEX!!!

This is horrible.

Just simply horrible.

YIC
V

[tommy]

I don't see the problem.
It's his decision which name to take. If he's got reasons, why not?

[Rev. Dr. Davidson]

If only McArthy were alive today. He wouldn't be looking for commies... He'd be executing ACLU lawyers, and those other idiots at Amnesty Constipational........

[Rev. Dr. Davidson]

Originally Posted by tommy

It's his decision which name to take. If he's got reasons, why not?

If this were the case, he could have easily went to another state, where it's legal, to get married. This was a shameless ploy to tie up our courts, spend taxpayer dollars, and make a quick buck for both him and the ACLU-tards. How many millions of dollars will be spent on this case?

[Deaner]

Originally Posted by Brother V

If we follow their lines of thought, then it's obvious that the marital INFIDILETY they are pushing, is OBVIOUSLY GAY SEX!!!

Correct. And since the words "fidelity" and "heterosexual" are eliminated; it's obvious the ACLU's not so thinly disguised agenda is promoting homer on homer bathouse / public washroom sex. A legally sanctioned sodomite free for all.

Personally, I think the guy's wife looks like one of those she-men things. Ooops, sorry. Last name is Bijon; she's french. Same thing really.

Dean

[Rachael Van Helsing]

I think it's wonderful that he wants to do that. That shows real devotion. And why is it being made so hard for him? I mean, people can legally change their names to something absolutely stupid if they wish to, yet something as simple and as loving a gesture as this is frowned upon because it goes against TRADITION??
Sheesh.

[Pastor Al E Pistle]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

I think it's wonderful that he wants to do that. That shows real devotion. And why is it being made so hard for him? I mean, people can legally change their names to something absolutely stupid if they wish to, yet something as simple and as loving a gesture as this is frowned upon because it goes against TRADITION??
Sheesh.

Did YOUR husband have that attitude?

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by Pastor Al E Pistle

Did YOUR husband have that attitude?

Well, I did keep my maiden name, and he's never had a problem with that. As to taking my name, well, that's never come up but I wouldn't really want him to seeing as he's happy enough with his own name, and signature, as I'm with mine (so I'm lazy, dammit. Bite me!).

There are better ways of showing love and devotion but if this guy wants to do that, he should be allowed to do so.

[Brother Temperance]

Originally Posted by OnYourKnees

This story makes me queasy.
Horrifying. Liebral girlie-men everywhere!!

Utterly disgusting. Seeing as this man will obviously never be able to become the master of his wife in the way God intends, you'd think he could at the very least just compromise and arrange for them to both change their names to something neutral, like Biday.

[Jesus is Lord]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

Well, I did keep my maiden name, and he's never had a problem with that.

Were you unsure the marriage would last or somethng? For the wife not to take her husband's name tells me she is unsure the marriage will last, why else would she not take his name? Married couples are supposed to have the same last name, the man's. It shows they are devoted to each other for life.

[Rachael Van Helsing]

Originally Posted by Jesus is Lord

Were you unsure the marriage would last or somethng? For the wife not to take her husband's name tells me she is unsure the marriage will last, why else would she not take his name? Married couples are supposed to have the same last name, the man's. It shows they are devoted to each other for life.

No, I kept my maiden name because of the sense of retaining the identity by which I was previously known. Of course I wasn't unsure, if I'd been unsure, I wouldn't have gotten married, would I?
But the point is, it's a personal thing, and a lot of women do the same thing. Why, my co-worker who sits right next to me has been married 15 years or more and has kept her maiden name.

[Dr. Ernest C. Ville, D.C.S.]

Originally Posted by Rachael Van Helsing

No, I kept my maiden name because of the sense of retaining the identity by which I was previously known.

You're a woman, your identity should be defined by your husband, or, lacking that, your father. Surely you've heard the verses by now, since I wouldn't want to cast any more pearls to this swine!