Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So let them marry--as long as they follow the exact same parameters for marriage that I'm required to.
And what would those be? Loving one's spouse? check. Being faithful? check. I can't really think of anything 'required' of a heterosexual married couple that a gay or lesbian couple would have any more problem with than most heterosexual married couples do.
Marriage shouldn't even be a state issue. This means anyone should be able to marry with anyone (or two or more) else, but also without the state granted privileges marriage may give you access to.
Amen!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD
What about the birth defects that may arise? Just overlook them and let the child suffer or abort all attempts?
What about the birth defects that may arise? Just overlook them and let the child suffer or abort all attempts?
The taboo about close relations with your close relations stems from not being able to move a long distance from where you were born. In our modern mobile society the effects of inbreeding on the general population are lessened.
Like the benefit you get when you file an income tax return as 'married filed jointly' that is higher than single? 'Government' benefits? The rights you're talking about (survivorship, guardianship) can be taken care of with legal documents.
We should ALL challenge the governmnent to get OUT of our private lives.
The amount of taxes we were paying seperately was actually higher than our combined "married" taxes. So our taxes went down upon becoming married.
As for the assertion that these benefit/protection/right/privilege/etc can be provided via legal documents, I wish it were so. However, stories like this are not rare.
Quote:
Mr. Greene said that he and Mr. Scull had previously specified each other as executors in case either became incapacitated, but the county ignored the legal documents and the history of their relationship, and at one point referred to Mr. Greene as Mr. Scull’s “roommate.”
Most of them are not nearly as obscene and disgusting, but there are countless stories of relationships where, despite having legal documents in place, are treated as merely "long term friends" or "room mates" and denied benefits/protections/rights/privileges that a simple state-sponsored "marriage certificate" would provide.
Aside from taxes and things like guardianship and survivorship, there are marriage benefits that same-sex couples just can't write a document to obtain. FMLA does not currently cover caring for a same-sex partner, for instance. Also, there are other non-government benefits that a marriage certificate provides. Most rentals I looked at (when searching for a place) had $X fee per person or per couple to apply. Now, that "couple" actually meant "married couple" - and required proof of marriage (marriage certificate). It's also shown that car insurance rates are higher for unmarried persons.
Whether we get rid of state-sponsored marriage in leiu of "civil unions" or keep it "marriage", it does not matter to me.
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
There really is no uniform "rose with another name" for homosexual relationships or any other relationship of consenting adults aside from one unrelated female to one unrelated male.
Last edited by gallowsCalibrator; 02-07-2011 at 10:09 AM..
And what would those be? Loving one's spouse? check. Being faithful? check. I can't really think of anything 'required' of a heterosexual married couple that a gay or lesbian couple would have any more problem with than most heterosexual married couples do.
When I got married, they never asked if I loved my wife or would be faithful. Try again. Love is not a prerequisite.
Opposite gender is one. I have to live by it, don't know why you're in favor of special exceptions being given based on love or attraction.
When I got married, they never asked if I loved my wife or would be faithful. Try again. Love is not a prerequisite.
Opposite gender is one. I have to live by it, don't know why you're in favor of special exceptions being given based on love or attraction.
Why should there be any prerequisites on state-sponsored civil unions (marriage) aside from the parties being consenting adults?
There is nothing special about one-man-one-woman relationships that make them better, more important, or superior to any other relationship style.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
