Homosexuality and Marriage

Post Reply New Topic

The state has no interest in promoting a couple's loving and committed relationship. Why is it in the state's interest to promote that?

Because it is a built in support system. That isn't obvious?

Support for what? Why do two people who love each other need a marriage license?

Hunny, I'm a girl and I couldn't imagine living with 3 other women!! .... and for the most part, I'm not kidding.
I watched an episode at the very end of last season, wanting to get a better understanding. I'd envisioned child brides and stepfather's marrying their stepdaughters and all sorts of debauchery. I was so intrigued with their family I went back and watched the whole season (like 7 episodes) and couldn't wait to see what happened next. I usually hate reality television, but really, they seem like a loving, caring family. Kody's little signature phrase at the beginning is 'Love should be multiplied, not divided." And some how, he manages to do just that.

The thing I find fascinating is that they are a family of multiple families living under the same roof. Each wife (except Robin who he just married at the end of last season) has their own apartment and live there with their children and Kody rotates daily from one 'household' to the next (not to say he doesn't interact with the other wives or children on their off days) . The children (and wives) are free to visit and come and go pretty much as they please and the wives pretty much run their own household. The kids only call their mother mom, but also have special bonds with the other wives... The women admit to occasional jealousies, but for the most part it all seems to work really well.(at least on screen) And they seem genuine when they say they are best friends.

I don't know that this exact situation would work well in a polyandry situation... The father would always be a question.. unless you rotated on a monthly basis. You wouldn't have the multiple family scenario.... You would have to come up with a totally different arrangement. But since seeing their show, I'm way more open minded. If they can work out a system that truly works for them, and they are all happy, willing participants... Hell, go for it.

Without proper recognition by the government, the family could forbid the significant other from visiting his/her loved on in the hospital if the family is disapproving of the relationship. In many cases, healthcare and insurance policies don't recognize same sex relationships. If a person dies, it would be the next of blood kin who would be informed, rather than the spouse, if their is no legal marriage. Then there's the simple matter of inheritance when one spouse dies - without a marriage contract, or at least a civil union, inheritance may be all the harder for the surviving spouse to collect; again in particular if the family disapproves of the spouse.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I've also been opening my mind to the idea of polygamy. There can really be a lot of benefits. I only watched one or two episodes of Sister Wives, but they seem to make it work quite nicely. Who am I to tell them the way they live is wrong? They are all consenting adults. There have been more than a few days where I've thought that having a couple of sister wives around to help out would be pretty awesome.

Anyway, gay marriage? Yes, absolutely.

Ekk.. I suppose that was the original question Huh? LOL
I think it's absurd that someone would feel they have the right to tell any two (or more ) consenting adults who love each other, that they don't have the right to join together in ceremony and declare to each other, and the world that they are committed to each other.

Some examples:

When one married partner is sick, it is the obligation of the other to care for them to at least some degree. Cost saved: nursing care.

When one married partner loses a job, it is the obligation of the other to provide for the unit to at least some degree. Cost saved: welfare and food stamps.

On the flip are the benefits the other poster mentioned, the clear legal trail on inheritance and authority to make decisions.

Overall, marriage saves society money. That is why society favors it.

There certainly are valid questions as to if that economic reliance is appropriate, and if some of the issues are better addressed in a different way, but I believe the institution was born from a need to keep clear the lines of social responsibility, ie who takes care of whom.

Yeah because deception *never* occurs within marriage once you never suspected before the wedding, right?

None of these things require the government to enforce it. It is just that "love" thing. When a guy does not love his partner, he won't do those things and he won't save the government money. And since the contract is of civil nature, the only one that can do something about that is the partner. Not the government.

All the savings you mentioned would happen with or without marriage.

Hey, I am trying to think positively about this. Do you know how many people I have seen change after the proposal? It's like that succubus on South Park. I am still against divorce regardless of that. If you are suspicious you should get a private eye to check things out. I never said you had to BELIEVE everything your partner tells you, you have to find these things yourself sometimes.

Determining legal treatment DOES require some sort of legal document. Either a marriage certificate or a DNR, POLST, living will, or an Advanced Directive.

Families squabble enough as it is when it comes to life saving measures... It doesn't matter if you've been in a "common law" type marriage for 20 years... If the patient's mom shows up and says "he wouldn't want any extreme live saving measures" but the SO says that I certainly would... They're going to listen to the mom. It's a real issue.. I've seen it in the ER.. True, this can be avoided with a legal document, IF someone remembers to bring it to the hospital.. And, if you think that you family and loved ones would always stay true to your wishes, think again. People aren't very rational when someone they love is injured or sick and dying.

United States Constitution
Amendment XIV, Section 1

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


As far as polygamy, I have no problem with it in THEORY.

However, people being "free to choose what they what" in a society with an unequal cultural power dynamic will result in certain practices becoming bastions of those inequalities-
such as why "polygamy" connotatively is associated so closely with patriarchal religious cults.

I also wonder, no matter what type of ideology or messages are PURPOSEFULLY taught to children,
the impact it has on them based on what we know of their emulation of the gender roles they see in the home.

For instance, a family of one man being married to several women, all of whom are faithful to him,
is going to impact the way their male and female children view gender roles and the value of men versus women, regardless of what they're taught.

Not to mention, there's going to be a deficit of women for many men if a few hog most females for themselves.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

lol I also think polygamy is ridiculous but I support the right to that too.

I lean much further towards nurture than nature when it comes to masculinity and femininity and both have been scientifically proven to have a basis in nature (though there is a part of it that is socially constructed which either blow natural characteristics outta proportion or have a basis in nothing more than cultural paradigms). Equality to me is about equal rights and nothing more. Social engineering is what the government needs to stay out of since for the most part it is nothing but a precedent for inequality.

I am looking at this conversation, but I still cannot convince myself that polygamy should even be accepted in society. There has to be some clear cut line somewhere since I am thinking about marriages already set up and other cultural things. Listening to Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins talking about the Mormons has not made me a big fan of legalizing polygamy because I am not sure of what the exact situations would be for others. I completely agree that there should be no interventions for gay marriages or heterosexual marriages, but polygamy? Meh...