Second, in order for the government to get out of marriage they would also have to get out of recognizing any family relationships and give no benefits or rights to people just for being blood related. This is even less likely to happen than getting the government out of marriage, so lets just keep marriage and at the same time work towards ensuring that it is fairly available for everyone without causing more problems.
I really don't understand why more people don't advocate removing government from marriage altogether. From a government stand point it is an antiquated practice. Since people have kids out of wedlock these days like it's nothing what's the point of a marriage license? To keep people from marrying their cousin? Why? they can screw anyway and make babies.
The other problem I have is people that will scream separation of church and state to justify not outlawing SS marriages BUT have no problem with most marriages being performed by a member of clergy and accepted by the state. Hello....
I find your compromise just a way to expand the government. No thanks.
That is not to say I'm not for equality, but giving more people special benefits is not how that is done. All you doing is expanding the problem.
You most likely won't have a choice in this. I'm willing to bet that the SC will have the final say and they will eventually take anti-ssm laws down for the principles that I addressed.
Marriage is the only current way to make someone who is not closely enough related to you a legal relative when they are an adult.
And it does so in a way that makes the chosen person the closest legal relative, which comes with its own rights and responsibilities.
You are just simply not going to get the government out of marriage or family relationships any time soon. I see this as a plus. We have to have a way that doesn't require a lot of legal paperwork (which would mean a lot of wasted money to lawyers and/or notaries) to make a chosen person more important when it comes to legal/medical/end of life decisions we can't make on our own than blood relationships, which are basically you get what you get.
I don't know why I am surprized, but seeing Navy's bigotry and racism in the same post is still disturbing.Government will never be out of marriage.........They have a stake in it...That is to have a man and woman married for the sake of any children that may come from it...........In black society 3 ot of 5 children are born out of wedlock...Chidren born out of wedlock don't have that father to influence them.......That is why crime is so hig in the black neighborhood.
How does that even address anything I said? I don't care.
That is not even important.
So what? Why does this even matter?
I still don't see a problem. You are basically just asking the government to bail you out because of troubles you don't want to go through. Government is not there for such purposes. That is where you come in. Sorry, but your bull**** is extremely thick.
I really don't understand why more people don't advocate removing government from marriage altogether. From a government stand point it is an antiquated practice. Since people have kids out of wedlock these days like it's nothing what's the point of a marriage license? To keep people from marrying their cousin? Why? they can screw anyway and make babies.
The other problem I have is people that will scream separation of church and state to justify not outlawing SS marriages BUT have no problem with most marriages being performed by a member of clergy and accepted by the state. Hello....
Marriage gives special rights to a couple under State and Federal law, that's why it is regulated by Govt.. Are you in favor of everyone giving up those rights?
Get rid of "age of consent", too. Preteens and teens are perfectly capable of making up their own minds.The only way to create equality in marriage is to eliminate government from marriage and stop fighting over who gets special benefits for being in a relationship.
And yes get rid of the legal drink age law. No one follows it so all it does is make people feel good that want to feel like they support something that people should follow. They can do that by supporting it and it not being a law all the same.
The government is already involved with marriage and families.
There is no asking the government for anything here because they already realize that it is important to make people happy and recognizing family legally, with having certain rights and responsibilities, benefits both the people and the government
It means less lawsuits and litigation by the truck loads in trying to decide who has what responsibility and who gets to make what decisions for whom.
It means less the government has to take responsibility for when it comes to medical/end-of-life decisions for people, including the financial responsibility for any of those decisions.
It also means that the government is able to hold people responsible for at least some financial responsibility for other people.
You don't think the government really wants to go through the trouble of figuring out what to do with someone who has died and without legal family or someone who is willing to take responsibility, particularly financial responsibility, it is left up to the government to deal with those situations.
Government will never be out of marriage.........They have a stake in it...That is to have a man and woman married for the sake of any children that may come from it...........In black society 3 ot of 5 children are born out of wedlock...Chidren born out of wedlock don't have that father to influence them.......That is why crime is so hig in the black neighborhood.
Those are private decisions and if people that people are supposed to handle like grown ass adults. There should be no legal recourse if people can't manage this on their own and there is no good reason for their to be.
The government doesn't have responsibility in those fields to begin with and getting the government out of relationship includes this entire area.. You are doing nothing but framing the question around your belief system here. Its called a fallacy and you are in one right now.
So people and government are gaining power here to strip other people of their rights. Or are you saying that people are naturally responsible for other people in a fallacy called the social contract and there is no sort of right violation at all happening because of this power?
They don't need to figure anything out and getting rid of the governments power in such matters is part of getting them out of relationships. That is where personal responsibility come in. If people can't handle this world for what it is they better grow up.
None. We are equal I am allowed to marry person that I want of another gender as so are they.
I really don't understand why more people don't advocate removing government from marriage altogether.
None. We are equal I am allowed to marry person that I want of another gender as so are they.
Because federally banning gay marriage is really not any different than a state banning gay marriage. And NO, a person shouldn't have to move to another state simply because a bigoted majority doesn't like same sex marriage.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?