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.
I couldn't agree more. It's why I am pro-marriage for straight and gay people.
The difference is that you cannot assume a gay couple will adopt any children, either knowingly or unknowingly.
On the other hand, we can assume that a married man and a woman can have a baby, even if they were not planning on doing so.
We also assume single men & women who are engaging in sexual relations, can have babies too, whether they wanted to or not. So we encourage them to to think about marriage also. We do not worry that two single gay men will spontaneously adopt a child, without intending to.
There is a distinct difference between gays and straight couples, and it involves the fundamental reason for marriage, only one of them is capable of procreation.
The difference is that you cannot assume a gay couple will adopt any children, either knowingly or unknowingly.
On the other hand, we can assume that a married man and a woman can have a baby, even if they were not planning on doing so.
We also assume single men & women who are engaging in sexual relations, can have babies too, whether they wanted to or not. So we encourage them to to think about marriage also. We do not worry that two single gay men will spontaneously adopt a child, without intending to.
There is a distinct difference between gays and straight couples, and it involves the fundamental reason for marriage, only one of them is capable of procreation.
So your whole argument rests upon the condom breaking? Nice.
And so you'd agree that preventing a gay couple from getting married and raising children would be against the spirit of marriage. After all, there's more than one way to obtain children: artificial insemination, adoption, surrogates, etc We allow straight people to get married and obtain children by means other than penis-vagina interaction. Why not homosexuals? By getting married, they have formed the same kind of stable family unit that heterosexual couples do.
The "spirit" and tradition of marriage is between a man and a woman...but the gays hurt their cause by pushing for "marriage", when they could have all the benefits a married couple enjoys if they just went for civil unions instead.
The only reason they want to usurp "marriage" is for the purpose of then claiming homosexuality is normal and natural....to be taught in schools.
The "spirit" and tradition of marriage is between a man and a woman...but the gays hurt their cause by pushing for "marriage", when they could have all the benefits a married couple enjoys if they just went for civil unions instead.
They can't though. I think we established that a few hundred pages back. There's tons of legal benefits that married couples receive that civil union partners do not.
I'm asking for your personal opinion. You seem to think that marriage is only valid when procreation / child rearing is involved, so I want to know if you think that only couples with children should get the rights that come with a civil marriage.
Yes. If a gay or lesbian couple want to adopt, I'd prefer they enter into a civil union, so as to ensure that child is raised by two parents.
Unlike men and women, who may give birth to an unplanned child, gay same-sex couples cannot. so I am not going to lump all gay and lesbian couples together, because many have no desire to adopt each other's kids
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammertime33
When a couple contracts a civil marriage in the US, they are endowed with some 1400 rights (well, heterosexual couples get these rights - even legally married gay couples in places like New York are denied them).
I think a couple who adopt a child do need legal rights and protections.
When a spouse dies, the surviving spouse is exempt from estate taxes on inherited assets that were not joint marital property.
The right to sue for wrongful death (Do you remember that black man who was recently run over and killed for being black by a group of white teenagers - turns out he was gay and had a husband for over 17 years. Because he's gay, his husband is not allowed to file a wrongful death suit against the murderers).
If a member of a married couple is foreign, he automatically gets a spousal immigration visa.
If one spouse owns a business and employs the other spouse, then that business is exempt from paying unemployment insurance tax on the employed spouse's wages.
If one spouse is in the military, he is paid more. Also, his spouse gets to shop at the base commissary and PX.
If one spouse dies, the other gets social security survivorship benefits.
etc, etc, etc.
We already know you don't think gay people should get them, but, since in your opinion marriage is only valid when children are involved, should only couples with children get these rights?
I think the rights and privileges for a same-sex couple, if they are able to adopt children should closely mirror most of those for hetero couples who adopt.
The "spirit" and tradition of marriage is between a man and a woman...but the gays hurt their cause by pushing for "marriage", when they could have all the benefits a married couple enjoys if they just went for civil unions instead.
When it comes to civil laws, every body should be calling it civil unions. Leave it to temples, churches, mosques... to define and perform marriages.
The "spirit" and tradition of marriage is between a man and a woman...but the gays hurt their cause by pushing for "marriage", when they could have all the benefits a married couple enjoys if they just went for civil unions instead.
...Except for the fact that civil unions do not convey all of the same rights.
I think the rights and privileges for a same-sex couple, if they are able to adopt children should closely mirror most of those for hetero couples who adopt.
Except that now, in the state of North Carolina, this cannot be the case, as Amendment One explicitly states that marriage is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized. A homosexual couple cannot get married in North Carolina, so their union would not have the same rights and privileges as a hetero married couple who have adopted. By that same token, an unmarried hetero couple who've adopted would not have the same rights and privileges as a hetero married couple who have adopted.
And so you'd agree that preventing a gay couple from getting married and raising children would be against the spirit of marriage. {snip}
Yes, if they want to adopt a child, and go into a civil union, to try and ensure they will raise that child together, i'm in favor of it. But i will not just assume that same-sex couples will adopt each others children.
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.
