Liz Smith | 07/21/2008 12:00 am

An Out-of-This-World Wedding in L.A. for Mr. Sulu

A big wedding will take place this September when George Takei – best known for his role as Mr. Sulu on ‘Star Trek’ – weds his partner Brad Altman. Who will and who won’t attend the September ‘Star Trek’ nuptials?
Watch me on FOX News by clicking the video below …

Click here on this text to read my nationally syndicated daily column.

Read more about: Celebrities, George Takei, Gossip, Lips and Ears, News, Star Trek

33 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

So now it comes out. Star Trek - Gays in Space.

By Emcye Edwards on 07/21/2008 1:53 pm

e-mail alert

Emcye, I was going to say something to you but it ain’t worth my breath … make your comment walkin’ and don’t let the cyber door in you in the a&&.

By Blue Circle Girl on 07/21/2008 3:56 pm

e-mail alert

Mmkay…..(?)

By Emcye Edwards on 07/21/2008 9:17 pm

e-mail alert

Emcye, Were you not making fun of George for his choice of life partner? Perhaps, I missed understood your the meaning of your comment.

By Blue Circle Girl on 07/21/2008 9:46 pm

e-mail alert

Sheesh. Yes, you misunderstood.

By Emcye Edwards on 07/21/2008 10:10 pm

e-mail alert

Emcye, I apologize. Email and blogs … they have only one problem …. it is hard to tell a joke from a statement or some kind of remark …. there is no inflection, tone or crappy drum roll to follow the joke. I think your remark would be appreciated by Guy Noir.

By Blue Circle Girl on 07/22/2008 12:51 am

e-mail alert

Congratulations to George and Brad. Best wishes, Blue

By Blue Circle Girl on 07/21/2008 3:58 pm

e-mail alert

First of all, I would like to say best wishes to George Takei, our very own Mr. Zulu. I think if we all were invited to the ceremony, we would be sitting on his side of the aisle…..he is like an old friend. I have yet to read the proposition that will appear on the November ballot in California regarding the definition of the word marriage. However, I have a few questions if any participant here would care to answer: (1) How to address a married gay couple: Is it simply Joe and John Smith or Janet and Jill Jones or are the terms Mr. and Mrs. used? (2) If Mr. and Mrs. are used, do we wait for the couple to identify who is who. (3) I do remember when Rosie O’Donnell married in San Francisco, she referred to her partner as her wife. So, how do we identify a wife versus a husband or will those words not be used by a married gay or lesbian couple? I’ve not seen anything about the proposition in the news but then it is still early days. And, yet, the mood of the people seem to be more relaxed about associating the word marriage to a same sex couple. I could be wrong but unless the folks against the proposition go crazy, I think it may not pass. And that would be an added step for the gay community. In California, there is already a Domestic Partnership Agreement so that the rights of a gay couple are the same as any other couple. The proposition is written to legally define the word “marriage”.

By Bonnie Oliver on 07/21/2008 9:14 pm

Frankly, I think the gov’t should get out of the “marriage” business altogether. We should have civil unions only as far as legality goes and civil unions should be allowed for both hetrosexual-couples and gay-couples. Then for those who believe marriage is a sacred thing, the sacrament part of it can be between the couples and God. Folks who choose to can go to their places of worship and have a marriage ceremony with all the sacraments that go with it. There will be some churches which will refuse to marry same sex couples, but many who will be happy to perform same sex marriage ceremonies.

By DeBúrca obj on 07/21/2008 11:55 pm

e-mail alert

It will probably come down to just that, De Burca. The whole tax code needs to overhauled or banished, anyway, and this gay/hetero marriage circus is Exhibit A as for why.

By James the Game on 07/22/2008 12:06 am

e-mail alert

Your argument would, of course, not allow for divorce because who then would decide custody of children, dissolution of properties or alimony if applicable to any one partner. Last I hear the Judiciary was part of the government. Of course, along with your civil union, you could force everyone to draft a prenup as to the dissolution of the union but then again the lawyers would become involved and bingo everyone in back in the courthouse - and the Judiciary is called into action. So it would seem that you might want government out of the marriage business but have to accept the governement into the dissolution of marriage business. Does not make sense.

By Bonnie Oliver on 07/22/2008 1:19 am

Civil Unions would allow for divorce. It would be the exact same thing, just not the religious aspect. Having Civil Unions wouldn’t change anything, except it would take the religious argument out of it. People can then go to their churches for a religious ceremony if they choose.

By DeBúrca obj on 07/22/2008 7:30 am