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's fine to deny queers their rights because even the blacks hate us. But if blacks were incapable of marrying other blacks the streets would burn. Nothing galls me more than when some idiot that would have been lynched for his sheer impunity as recently as 50 years ago stands up and tells gays "Ya'll wait now, ya hear?"

One Martin Luther King Junior said why keeping people in a second-class status waiting is not workable. And then this black guy comes along and says it to gays.

And people wonder why I loathe the Dems as much as I do the "Party of Christ" (so-called).

[pantsu.livejournal.com]

I don't think marriage should exist period. Look at what we do with it.

[hunterkirk.livejournal.com]

My position is that government in general should not be involved in marriage at all. If the government is to use the term Civil Union then that term should not relate to a sexual relationship but to a relationship in which shared property occurs. Thus under "Civil Union" A father and son could have such a union and have nothing sexual at all going on, just sharing ownership of common property...

As for the whole "poor homosexuals" movement, I ask again why only two, why not anything consentual?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Civil unions are not equal to marriage, both in society's eyes and the law's

Depends where you are. In California, they are explicitly defined to be equal under the law. The only problem comes because of Federal law, the same as it is with medical marijuana.

As for them being equal in society's eyes, there is nothing the law can do about that.

Instead of complaining that some people aren't able to marry who they want (same gender person, dog, apple pie, whatever), the correct answer is to get government to not license any marriages, it can only create civil unions between any two persons. Then we can go through and explicitly determine which "marriage benefits" actually apply generally and keep those that we want and get rid of the rest.

[blindgeoff.livejournal.com]

WORD!

To my fellow hetero-people...

STOP TRYING TO PROTECT MY MARRIAGE!

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

I think it depends on the legal jurisdiction and the intent of the law. In many parts of the world simply living together in a committed (sexual) relationship over a period of time places the relationship in the common-law-marriage catagory, with equal or near-equal status as those who have gone through the hoops and ceremony of proper marriage. So I'm not so sure that civil-union would not be equal to marriage in all instances. I think there is intent for civil unions to not be made entirely equal.

Marriage has traditionally been under the authority of one's religion to bless a union/commitment. At some point in history the government(s) took over this role, blessing this union/commitments with legal contracts and obligations. The breaking of this contract has legal repercussions instead of just the guilt of conscious.

I believe the governments should not be in the business of judging our relationships. I don't understand the intent. A married person does not warrant a different tax bracket then a single person, or any other government service for that matter. The married man and single man ought to be equals under the law under all circumstances. The single person is considered lesser of the two equals, only because they're not married.

If the intent is for care of children, then the child benefit should be administered to the child directly, or in care of the parent or guardian.

If the intent is simply contract law, where there are consequences for breaking contract, then it has always done a piss-poor job. To love and cherish, honour and obey... all things under this contract, are far too difficult to be held accountable to.

Marriage is a lifetime commitment socially and a lifetime obligation legally. Both run counter to nature, which sees homo-sapiens (regardless of sexuality) in serial monogamy. Society has lived up to nature, only by the breaking marriage contracts through divorce and other means.

It's the other means that is usually most bothersome. The breaking of any contract is a relatively costly endevour, thus forcing those who want out of a contract to sometimes/often find other not-so-legal means. A husband who quite simply walks away from his marriage finds himself legally obligated to this contract of marriage some 20 years after the fact where I would expect it should be null and void after the relationship has dissolved.

Civil Union, as defined being unequal to marriage, is still contract law. I suspect such a contract is equal to marriage in it's obligations to the two partners entering the contract. Where it differs is (and what most take objection to) is with the third partner, the entity who is administrating the contract. Not allowed to adopt kids, not allowed spousal support, etc. I would think it's possible to redefine these parameters at anytime as public support backs such initiatives.

Let's argue the semantics

[verytwistedmind.livejournal.com]

Personally I want to see the gay community answer some important questions before I support their gay-married.

Who takes who's last name?
Who is walked down the isle?
Do both guys attend the batchlore party?
Do both women attend the batchlorette party?
Do we call the married couple Mr and Mr? Mrs and Mrs? T