Gay Marriage (touchy subject, keep it nice)

Yes, but not at gays. In fact, my company routinely sets up employee benefit plans for small businesses that INCLUDE domestic partner coverage for same-sex couples as well as heterosexual couples who refuse to participate in government control of marriage. They simply sign Affidavits of Domestic Partnership and they can be covered just like any "spouses".

My anger is at the government. I am tired of intrusive government that should not be meddling in citizen private lives. I don't even feel there should BE any tax advantages for married couples. Why should my wife and I get tax breaks that are not available to my daughter and her 4-year committed ralationship? The Big Brother intrusion in out lives threatens basic freedom. Get government OUT of the "marriage" business!

 

It would be difficult to keep government completely out of the marriage business, when you consider issues like insurance benefits, inheritance and estate issues, medical consent, decisions affecting a child, spousal privilege (as in cannot be forced to testify), many, many other circumstances in which the union has ramifications beyond the walls of the household.

From the perspective of law and government, marriage is a special type of contract that is specialized for the benefit of those who are so joined. You might object to the government managing these considerations, but the fact is that married couples have demanded these rights and protections.

 

I will repost my question that was overlooked and I believe relevant to this discussion.

Terry

 

Other than the idea of letting one marry a person of the same sex, I think there really should be no other changes to the rules, or limitations.

For example:

Gay or Str8, I don’t think you should be able to marry:

1) Your brother or sister, or even first cousin.

2) Someone below the established lower legal age limit.

3) Someone just to get them citizenship status.

4) Someone for false pretenses of any kind.*

5) Someone not of legal capacity to understand the choice they are making.


*many young people in the military get married under false pretenses because of the significant difference in standard of living between married couples and single service men and women. During my time at AIT, I knew no less than three couples who were snagged doing this and who were subsequently charged with fraud.

 

The restriction I would place is that both parties must enter into it with informed consent. They must therefore both be fully sentient, which at least in our present reality means both are human.

I realize that informed consent can get a bit tricky in cases of those who are mentally impaired, so that needs to be considered on a case by case basis. But a child cannot give informed consent (again, it gets fuzzy defining when a child is no longer a child), nor nayy an animak, nor may someone who is chemically impaired.

Incestuous marriages are a sticky matter. There are plenty of good reasons not to permit it, but whether they are really compelling enough to forbid it in all cases? I honestly don't know. I would like to be able to prohibit it under those circumstances, but I do feel the case for forbidding it is somewhat weak, despite my personal reactions. Obviously, having children (in the usual sense of blended genes from both parents) in such a marriage would be extremely ill-advised.

As for the number of persons entering into a marriage, I think that for now at least, I would limit it to two. The legal ramifications of polygamy have so far proven unmanageable, which is the principal reason polygamy is not allowed under the law.

 

If gay people wants to marry then let them, it's their own private thing, nothing the entire world has to have a meaning in.
As a bisexual person, it pisses me off that this is even an issue in the 21st century.

It doesn't matter who you love, it's that you love that matters.

 

I think this discussion has run its course now. Arguments and comments are beginning to repeat themselves, and that's usually the point to call it a day.

I'm heartily impressed that this remained civil, and managed to survive without deteriorating into a flame war. Be proud, Writingforums

*click*