The government shouldn't even be involved in marriage

You might just want to do a little more research...

Marriage is a way for a couple to legally combine their finances and estates because they'd rather deal with them together than separately. Marriage has been a legal institution for a long time and it's there for a very valid, very definite reason. Hence why you can get married outside of churches. Since it's a legal act, the government has to see to some sort of control.

there shouldn't be a contract ffs or a goddamn license to get married. much less should they change the MEANING OF MARRIAGE. if people want to be together and call it marriage that's fine. but don't force me to accept it.weedfacekilla

Perhaps it shouldn't. But since it is then the same rights should be extended to all citizens.

The government should not recognize any marriage and instead make all couples undergo civil unions for government benefits and tax breaks.

Because it's not marriage that the LGBT community really wants. It's the government benefits and tax breaks that come with it. No where does it say that government benefits and tax breaks should be between a man and a woman.

Of course government should be involved in marriage. There are tax implications, insurance impacts, default choice for power of attorney, etc. Legal standards need to be defined.

There are many legal implications that are necessary when two people live with eachother such as insurance and the likes.

No where does it say that government benefits and tax breaks should be between a man and a woman.

Blue-Sky

Actually, there is such a document.

We call this Devilspawn abortion: The Defense of Marriage Act; Ergo Only married 1/1 man/woman can receive the benefits of marriage. So unless they want to drop DOMA, then Marriage will be pushed onwards as the solution. Seeing as it directly prevents Civil unions from ever obtaining similar rights.

Of course government should be involved in marriage. There are tax implications, insurance impacts, default choice for power of attorney, etc. Legal standards need to be defined.

Oleg_Huzwog

So government should be involved in marriage purely for economical reasons and not moral/religious ones?

I love how Obama's stance on same sex marriage "doesn't really matter" to most people here in OT, but it's caused a huge surge in topics about subject in the last couple of days.

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

Of course government should be involved in marriage. There are tax implications, insurance impacts, default choice for power of attorney, etc. Legal standards need to be defined.

Blue-Sky

So government should be involved in marriage purely for economical reasons and not moral/religious ones?

Economical and legal, yes.

Marriage is a way for a couple to legally combine their finances and estates because they'd rather deal with them together than separately. Marriage has been a legal institution for a long time and it's there for a very valid, very definite reason. Hence why you can get married outside of churches. Since it's a legal act, the government has to see to some sort of control.

calvinsora

+1

Just wondering, is it possible for same-sex couples to get a Civil Partnership in the USA?

I love how Obama's stance on same sex marriage "doesn't really matter" to most people here in OT, but it's caused a huge surge in topics about subject in the last couple of days.

Serraph105

Just wondering, is it possible for same-sex couples to get a Civil Partnership in the USA?

Postmortem123

Just wondering, is it possible for same-sex couples to get a Civil Partnership in the USA?

Postmortem123

Some states (including mine, Illinois) have civil unions, but they don't grant all the same benefits as legal marriage does.

Just wondering, is it possible for same-sex couples to get a Civil Partnership in the USA?

Postmortem123

There has been moments in the past when I have agreed with this. However, as I consider marriage to be a contract and covenant between two people, I do believe it important for the government to acknowledge this covenant relationship.mindstorm

[QUOTE="Serraph105"]

I love how Obama's stance on same sex marriage "doesn't really matter" to most people here in OT, but it's caused a huge surge in topics about subject in the last couple of days.

The-Apostle

Because he's black or you think he's muslim?

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

Of course government should be involved in marriage. There are tax implications, insurance impacts, default choice for power of attorney, etc. Legal standards need to be defined.

Blue-Sky

So government should be involved in marriage purely for economical reasons and not moral/religious ones?

[QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

[QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

Of course government should be involved in marriage. There are tax implications, insurance impacts, default choice for power of attorney, etc. Legal standards need to be defined.

pie-junior

So government should be involved in marriage purely for economical reasons and not moral/religious ones?

So why is it an issue for same sex then? If it's purely for economical and legal reasons.

[QUOTE="pie-junior"][QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

So government should be involved in marriage purely for economical reasons and not moral/religious ones?

Blue-Sky

So why is it an issue for same sex then? If it's purely for economical and legal reasons.

Marriage is a personal relationship. We should not allow the government to define what personal relationships are. If one thinks that having the government sanction a personal relationship is important then their priorities are backwards.DaBrainz

Marriage is a personal relationship. We should not allow the government to define what personal relationships are. If one thinks that having the government sanction a personal relationship is important then their priorities are backwards.DaBrainz

So then you believe that no marriages, hetero or homosexual, should be recognized by any governmental authority, and that no legal benefits should be bestowed upon anyone via marriage?

Really guys?

We had, I dunno, a 900+ post thread and we still have to have more threads?

Seriously?

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Marriage is a personal relationship. We should not allow the government to define what personal relationships are. If one thinks that having the government sanction a personal relationship is important then their priorities are backwards.worlock77

So then you believe that no marriages, hetero or homosexual, should be recognized by any governmental authority, and that no legal benefits should be bestowed upon anyone via marriage?

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Marriage is a personal relationship. We should not allow the government to define what personal relationships are. If one thinks that having the government sanction a personal relationship is important then their priorities are backwards.DaBrainz

So then you believe that no marriages, hetero or homosexual, should be recognized by any governmental authority, and that no legal benefits should be bestowed upon anyone via marriage?

I can respect that.

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Marriage is a personal relationship. We should not allow the government to define what personal relationships are. If one thinks that having the government sanction a personal relationship is important then their priorities are backwards.pie-junior

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]Marriage is a personal relationship. We should not allow the government to define what personal relationships are. If one thinks that having the government sanction a personal relationship is important then their priorities are backwards.DaBrainz

So then you believe that no marriages, hetero or homosexual, should be recognized by any governmental authority, and that no legal benefits should be bestowed upon anyone via marriage?

[QUOTE="The-Apostle"][QUOTE="Serraph105"]

I love how Obama's stance on same sex marriage "doesn't really matter" to most people here in OT, but it's caused a huge surge in topics about subject in the last couple of days.

Blue-Sky

Because he's black or you think he's muslim?

Because he's an idiot. And a Democrat. Or rather, an idiot Democrat.The-Apostle

Ultimately it will come down for the states to decide. People are talking about Gay Marriage so much now since Obama supports it (for politcal reasons no doubt, just trying to distract people with a wedge issue so they won't talk about the economy or wars ect...you know the REAL issues). Nothing much is going to change from this, a couple states might allow it but the vast majoirty won't.

And we do need some marriage laws, we just can't let someone marry whoever they want. There are quite a few muslim and mormon groups out there that want to practice polygamy, their arguments are the same as the homosexual argument for gay marriage. I don't see anyone cheering for the polygamists and their "struggle for equal rights" (yes a polygamist group actually said that).

Personally I want gay couples to have all the same rights as us straight couples do. I would prefer them to have all those rights through civil unions because I do believe in the definition of marriage, however if they did get married it wouldn't be the end of the world. It's not going to really affect anything in my life. I just would choose to not go to a gay wedding.

But it's really not that big of an issue like people think. Only thing I hate is how biased the media is acting over this. Not just corporate news but TV sitcoms as well.

We need to get rid of the idea of marriage itself.ghoklebutter

And we do need some marriage laws, we just can't let someone marry whoever they want. There are quite a few muslim and mormon groups out there that want to practice polygamy, their arguments are the same as the homosexual argument for gay marriage. I don't see anyone cheering for the polygamists and their "struggle for equal rights" (yes a polygamist group actually said that).ShadowMoses900

I'm fine with polygamy. Consenting adults can enter into any kind of relatonship they wish.

I'm fine with polygamy. Consenting adults can enter into any kind of relatonship they wish.

worlock77

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]And we do need some marriage laws, we just can't let someone marry whoever they want. There are quite a few muslim and mormon groups out there that want to practice polygamy, their arguments are the same as the homosexual argument for gay marriage. I don't see anyone cheering for the polygamists and their "struggle for equal rights" (yes a polygamist group actually said that).worlock77

I'm fine with polygamy. Consenting adults can enter into any kind of relatonship they wish.

No, too many tax problems go with that. A polygamist man has children with all of his wives, if he has 3 or 4 that adds up to a lot of welfare money. Even if he only has 2, he will have several kids with them. And a lot of the muslims and mormon groups don't believe in birth control so you can see the problem. Kids are expensive, there is no way a guy can support them all. The state would raise your taxes to pay for their welfare.

I don't care too much if it's just a partnership between two people, either straight or gay but the line has to be drawn somewhere.

As long as its victimless we shouldn't care if people want to marry a sofa or a bottle of vaseline.DaBrainz

[...] there is no way a guy can support them all. [...] ShadowMoses900

[QUOTE="DaBrainz"]As long as its victimless we shouldn't care if people want to marry a sofa or a bottle of vaseline.Zeviander