No Military Burial for Wife of 74-Yea...

No Military Burial for Wife of 74-Year-Old Lesbian Navy Veteran

There are 25 comments on the EDGE story from Apr 24, 2014, titled No Military Burial for Wife of 74-Year-Old Lesbian Navy Veteran. In it, EDGE reports that:

Madelynn Taylor says she'll wait an enternity to spend eternity with her wife Idaho says it's a no-go for 74-year-old U.S. Navy veteran Madelynn Taylor to be buried with her wife Jean Mixner's ashes -- at least not as long as that state continues to ban same-sex marriage.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Clarence

Chennai, India

#1 Apr 24, 2014
Good!
david traversa

Cordoba, Argentina

#2 Apr 24, 2014
The usual Pseudo-Christian ( and Pseudo-Human ) pettiness from the small with an even smaller sense of decency .

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#3 Apr 24, 2014
Clarence wrote:
Good!
Yet another reason to allow same sex marriage. Thanks for your support.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#4 Apr 24, 2014
WHAT ?!?!?!?!?!
Latter Day Faints

Philadelphia, PA

#5 Apr 24, 2014
She could re inter / situate her partner in a federally managed cemetary in Idaho (if there is one) or elsewhere and solve her problem.

It doesn't solve the problem, but it would solve her problem.
Latter Day Faints

Philadelphia, PA

#6 Apr 24, 2014
snyper wrote:
WHAT ?!?!?!?!?!
"ID" is an abbreviation for Idaho.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#7 Apr 24, 2014
Latter Day Faints wrote:
She could re inter / situate her partner in a federally managed cemetary in Idaho (if there is one) or elsewhere and solve her problem.
It doesn't solve the problem, but it would solve her problem.
Expensive, even for ashes. She would need a court order permitting alteration of the Death Certificate changing custody of the remains.

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#8 Apr 25, 2014
Latter Day Faints wrote:
She could re inter / situate her partner in a federally managed cemetary in Idaho (if there is one) or elsewhere and solve her problem.
It doesn't solve the problem, but it would solve her problem.
Her "problem" is the fact that her deceased wife wished to be buried in a Veterans cemetery in the state of Idaho and there is no federal cemetery in the state. What would solve the problem would be for Idaho to end the bigotry against Gays and Lesbians.
Evilgelicalling

Philadelphia, PA

#9 Apr 25, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
Her "problem" is the fact that her deceased wife wished to be buried in a Veterans cemetery in the state of Idaho and there is no federal cemetery in the state. What would solve the problem would be for Idaho to end the bigotry against Gays and Lesbians.
Your post adds nothing; allow me to explain what I just posted.

Her self described problem is that she wishes to be buried with her partner.

The overall problem is the one of lgbt equality generally in this regard in Idaho.

Obviously both problems need to be fixed. She can, in the meantime, address the first - her specific - problem. As my post indicated.

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#10 Apr 25, 2014
Evilgelicalling wrote:
<quoted text>
Your post adds nothing; allow me to explain what I just posted.
Her self described problem is that she wishes to be buried with her partner.
The overall problem is the one of lgbt equality generally in this regard in Idaho.
Obviously both problems need to be fixed. She can, in the meantime, address the first - her specific - problem. As my post indicated.
What part of "in Idaho" don't you understand?
Evilgelicalling

Philadelphia, PA

#11 Apr 25, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
What part of "in Idaho" don't you understand?
Again, her _individual_ problem is wanting to be buried with her partner. She can accomplish that in or out of Idaho at the price of either having planned ahead or at the price of some inconvenience and expense now.

The societal problem of bigotry in this state administered cemetary is, of course, valid and should be fixed. And it will be as all these marriage equality matters are fixed.

I was drawing a distinction between what she said was her issue - fixable - and what she did not explicitly present as her problem. She could have, for example, said her problem is with being treated as less than. She didn't. She said her problem is getting buried with her partner.

I note I can't even state a tautology with you.

TomInElPaso

“Impeach the reality show actor”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#12 Apr 25, 2014
Evilgelicalling wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, her _individual_ problem is wanting to be buried with her partner. She can accomplish that in or out of Idaho at the price of either having planned ahead or at the price of some inconvenience and expense now.
The societal problem of bigotry in this state administered cemetary is, of course, valid and should be fixed. And it will be as all these marriage equality matters are fixed.
I was drawing a distinction between what she said was her issue - fixable - and what she did not explicitly present as her problem. She could have, for example, said her problem is with being treated as less than. She didn't. She said her problem is getting buried with her partner.
I note I can't even state a tautology with you.
With her partner, in Idaho, in a Veterans Cemetery. Period.

“and how does this effect you?”

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#13 Apr 25, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>With her partner, in Idaho, in a Veterans Cemetery. Period.
Yeah, they don't seem to be getting it, do you have shorter words?

“and how does this effect you?”

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#14 Apr 25, 2014
Again, this is a case of someone being good enough to protect freedom, but not good enough to get them.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#15 Apr 25, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
Her "problem" is the fact that her deceased wife wished to be buried in a Veterans cemetery in the state of Idaho and there is no federal cemetery in the state. What would solve the problem would be for Idaho to end the bigotry against Gays and Lesbians.
Not just "wished".

Truly entitled.
Evilgelicalling

Philadelphia, PA

#16 Apr 25, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
With her partner, in Idaho, in a Veterans Cemetery. Period.
Again, she didn't specify that as her objective.

She said her objective is to be buried with her partner.

Of course the larger issue you refer to is one that should and will be addressed.

I am sorry that simple distinctions or first principles vex you so.

“and how does this effect you?”

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#17 Apr 25, 2014
Evilgelicalling wrote:
<quoted text>Again, she didn't specify that as her objective.
Yes, she did. She wants to stay close to her family, be buried with her wife, and buried in a military cemetary, am I the only one reading these things in the article?
Dan

Omaha, NE

#18 Apr 25, 2014
Kimberling wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, she did. She wants to stay close to her family, be buried with her wife, and buried in a military cemetary, am I the only one reading these things in the article?
I didn't see where the article said that the deceased wife's ashes were interred anywhere. It certainly didn't say that Mixner's ashes were already at the Idaho Veterans Cemetary.

I read that Taylor wants her ashes and Mixner's ashes to both be buried at the Veterans Cemetary in Boise. That's what I read.

Looks like she can get buried in Boise with her wife, just not at Idaho Veterans Cemetary.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#19 Apr 25, 2014
Kimberling wrote:
Again, this is a case of someone being good enough to protect freedom, but not good enough to get them.
This post is as overheated as the headline.
They can be buried at a federal military cemetary. The article says so.
"...the two could be buried together in a national military cemetery..."
Appears there isn't one in Idaho.
Evilgelicalling

Philadelphia, PA

#20 Apr 25, 2014
Kimberling wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, she did. She wants to stay close to her family, be buried with her wife, and buried in a military cemetary, am I the only one reading these things in the article?
Here are the first two paragraphs stating her wishes:

"Idaho says itís a no-go for 74-year-old U.S. Navy veteran Madelynn Taylor to be buried with her wife Jean Mixnerís ashes -- at least not as long as that state continues to ban same-sex marriage.

"Gay Star News reports that Taylor, who was with Mixner from 1995 until her death in 2012 from emphysema, decided that she wanted to spend eternity with her wife."

It is true that she then approached this particular cemetery and ran into problems. It is true those problems should be fixed. And they will be, at some point, although Idaho will lag.

But what she stated as her objective was not to achieve an lgbt rights victory in general. She stated that her objective is to spend eternity with her partner.

It's a simple point of clarity - those are two different things. Don't talk to me about small words when you are unable to see a basic distinction.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

US Navy Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News First gay Navy Spouse of the Year and husband a... 2 hr EdmondWA 15
News 'Nerves of steel': She calmly landed the Southw... Apr 18 Janet 1
News B.C. VIEWS: Pipeline theatre on TV and in court Apr 15 anonymous 1
News Executive Q&A with Glenn Ashmore: Dental Depot ... Apr 15 Jorge the Illegal 2
News Who is Scooter Libby, and why might Trump want ... Apr 14 bottlecap 1
News Trump says the military will secure the souther... Apr 11 Critical Eye 128
News Raiderettes Visit Japan - Group 2 (Feb '06) Apr 9 RaiderPhart 277