Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 12-12-2009, 04:36 AM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,020 posts, read 14,198,297 times
Reputation: 16747

Advertisements

A marriage contract for homosexuals is a nullity... except where socialist benefits are involved.

A marriage is a legal joining of two property rights into one for the benefit of progeny. Since homosexual couples are not currently capable of gene splicing progeny, a contract for marriage has no purpose under the common law.

They would be better served with a domestic partnership contract, and wills to endow the survivor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-12-2009, 09:52 AM
 
Location: San Antonio Texas
11,431 posts, read 18,997,649 times
Reputation: 5224
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
A marriage contract for homosexuals is a nullity... except where socialist benefits are involved.

A marriage is a legal joining of two property rights into one for the benefit of progeny. Since homosexual couples are not currently capable of gene splicing progeny, a contract for marriage has no purpose under the common law.

They would be better served with a domestic partnership contract, and wills to endow the survivor.
then, why do non-child bearing hetro couples, older hetro couples, convicts receive marriage benefits then? Drawing up a contract costs $$$. it's much simpler to get a marriage contract that costs $15 instead. Marriage is recognized by employers, fellow citizens and governments alike. you may call the benefits that are offered "socialist", but nonetheless they are a vital part of the american social safety net. that is especially important in these times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2009, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,064,636 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
A marriage contract for homosexuals is a nullity... except where socialist benefits are involved.

A marriage is a legal joining of two property rights into one for the benefit of progeny. Since homosexual couples are not currently capable of gene splicing progeny, a contract for marriage has no purpose under the common law.

They would be better served with a domestic partnership contract, and wills to endow the survivor.
I know quite a few gay couples with children, both biological and adopted.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2009, 10:43 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,922 posts, read 8,064,636 times
Reputation: 954
Washington DC will have gay marriage by the end of the year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2009, 11:43 AM
 
26,680 posts, read 28,665,061 times
Reputation: 7943
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
A marriage is a legal joining of two property rights into one for the benefit of progeny.
That sounds like an opinion to me. I wonder if any state laws actually say that; I doubt it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2009, 05:36 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,020 posts, read 14,198,297 times
Reputation: 16747
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnUnidentifiedMale View Post
That sounds like an opinion to me. I wonder if any state laws actually say that; I doubt it.
Look up pre-1933 court decisions and statutes.

Or, better yet, look up the definition of an illegitimate child versus a legitimate child.

The sole legal difference is that the legitimate child has a claim upon the father's property.

There was no other legal 'benefit'.
That's why a common law marriage (absent license) was perfectly legal - for those heady days when free men and women could enter into a union without Big Brother's permission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2009, 05:41 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,020 posts, read 14,198,297 times
Reputation: 16747
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
I know quite a few gay couples with children, both biological and adopted.
And does the non-biological parent have a duty to support the children?

Better yet, if two homosexuals, each have biological children, which child has a superior claim when one of the partners is deceased?
The biological child or the other?

Or even more "fun", what if both partners have children from PREVIOUS marriages, and then one passes away. Does the non-biological child have a claim upon the estate of the deceased - which includes property from the 'other spouse'? What about the blood kin of the 'other spouse'?

This kind of 'fun' is one of the reasons why monogamy was encouraged and polygamy / polygyny was discouraged.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2009, 10:19 PM
 
155 posts, read 733,591 times
Reputation: 120
I've always wondered why anti-divorce laws aren't being pushed by all the folks who rally against gay marriage in order to "preserve the sactity of marriage"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2009, 10:21 PM
 
Location: just here
1,773 posts, read 1,266,016 times
Reputation: 438
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tdallas View Post
I've always wondered why anti-divorce laws aren't being pushed by all the folks who rally against gay marriage in order to "preserve the sactity of marriage"
Good point. I suspect they'd say "But that would be government intrusion on my private life!!!!" Funny, hey?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-23-2009, 10:23 PM
 
2,352 posts, read 2,278,820 times
Reputation: 538
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
A marriage is a legal joining of two property rights into one for the benefit of progeny.
Oh really? So those who get married only do so to have kids? Funny, I know plenty of folks that are married and chose not to have children.

So in your view their marriage isn't valid?

Surely you jest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:01 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top