Go to I Don't Know Much
- Add a comment
- Go to Imperfect Unions
Re: Mordent
The point is that traditional married couples get state subsidies, in the form of tax breaks and assumption of next-of-kin status so they don't have to get lawyers to fill out forms for them, and those things cost gay couples money. Churches can define marriage any way they want, but is it right for a government to claim the same privilege without any evidence that their policy does good, or even does no one harm?
You're right about the attitudes of people, though. They will change slowly or not at all. But gay marriage is much more accepted by the young, so in a generation, my guess is such battles will be over.
posted by
mousehop
on October 4, 2008 at 12:07 PM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Thanks for the comment, Lady. It is something to consider.
posted by
mousehop
on October 4, 2008 at 12:03 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: BC-A
Thank you.
posted by
mousehop
on October 4, 2008 at 12:02 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: My question is whether or not heterosexual couples should be allowed
Excellent points. Should marriage as a state institution be banished, and all government rights or privileges be granted only to individuals? Or make marriage licenses dependent on successful completion of a rigorous training course. But ten thousand years of history is hard to overcome.
posted by
mousehop
on October 4, 2008 at 12:01 PM
| link to this | reply
I've always thought and stated that gays should just go ahead and say they're married. I think most states will give them the technical advantages of marriage.
However many people will never view gays as getting married as legitimate for a number of different reasons. It doesn't matter what laws are passed or not. Technical rights are one thing but remember now we're getting into going before a priest and the bible and all that homo-condemning stuff.
Good points though.
posted by
mordent
on October 4, 2008 at 11:24 AM
| link to this | reply
I agree with Pat B - since when did heterosexuals have such a good track record!!!!
posted by
ladychardonnay
on October 4, 2008 at 8:46 AM
| link to this | reply
Good luck to those who speak up bravely on the issue*** w/TLC, BCA, Bill’s Wave*** Blog on!
posted by
BC-A
on October 4, 2008 at 8:33 AM
| link to this | reply
My question is whether or not heterosexual couples should be allowed
to marry. Most first marriages stem from superficial attraction. We're drawn to good looks, charm, peer status, and driven by hormone-driven passion. We're not thinking of joining families or being one, we're honeymooning. When reality hits and the bills pile up, when nobody really knows how to clean or cook or manage a budget, when we find out our freedom is every bit as restricted as it was under mom's roof, it hits the fan.
There should be training in economics, credit management, history, citizenship. Middle and high schools should offer useful, full-disclosure sex education classes so youth (who naturally have sex on the brain) can make safe decisions. Nobody thinks their marriage will be anything like the ones they've been involved in -- their parents' or their grandparents. Duh!
posted by
Pat_B
on October 4, 2008 at 7:13 AM
| link to this | reply