Marriage by Any Other Name

[torasama.livejournal.com]

While a rose may be a rose by any other name, the same does not hold true of marriage. Marriage is marriage. Civil unions are not equal to marriage, both in society's eyes and the law's - couples joined under a civil union do not have the same rights as a married couple. Denoting long-term, committed same-sex relations as 'lesser' opens a legal Pandora's box and provides a venue for continued discrimination, by applying a different set of rights to opposite-sex and same-sex couples.

To deny a civil marriage to a same-sex couple is blatant discrimination per the 14th Amendment. Just as the anti-interracial marriage arguement that all races had the "same right" to marry others of their own race didn't work in Loving vs. Virginia, the arguement that homosexuals have the "same right" to marry people of the opposite sex doesn't work, either.

Comments

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

It is in Traditional Islam and Traditional Judaism, as well as with Hinduism. But aside from those three cultures (and with Islam and Hinduism that's a very big "aside").....not really.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

True, and in the case of Judaism, it's considered very important....to Traditional (that is to say, Orthodox) Jews. In more liberals sects its importance depends on the sect and individual (Reform Judaism effectively dropping Kashrut, Masorti somewhat keeping it, Reconstructionist dropping it also....)

[torasama.livejournal.com]

I know. Different sects of a religion are bound to view issues inherent in the religion differently. Not all Jewish people keep the eating restrictions, not all don't.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Yeah. It's one of those things that at first glance looks clear-cut....then gets more and more complicated the more you delve into it.

[torasama.livejournal.com]

Well, I was refering specifically to Judaism, since that's where the conversation had gone. I know not all religions are as, erm, religious about their food as Abrahamic religions.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Hinduism, the largest non-Abrahamic religion is very specific on the kind of meat you can eat (specifically, no beef, and vegetarianism is preferred). So....there isn't really that major of a difference....

[torasama.livejournal.com]

I was just trying to say some religions have eating restrictions, others don't. That's it.

(Also, a Hindi friend of mine wrote a book once, and I learned all about that :) Personally I find that belief beautiful.)

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I find Hinduism unappealing in some ways, it's very much a Pagan religion in that it's limited to a specific place and culture. If I were interested in Dharmic thought, I would have converted to Buddhism, as Buddhism is all-purposes, whereas Hinduism is the Nomezein Theos of the Indian peoples.