Let ‘em get all the benefits ... like gay-alimony and gay-child support and ...
Will the term “discrimination” ever quit being abused in this country??? No — not if the lawyers, and the liberal courts, have anything to say about it.
MY FINAL OBSERVATION IS THIS: Lawyers, legislators, judges and policy analysts cope continuously with complexity. If they take a step back and look at the requirements to marry and to remain married, they see that the law and structure of marriage is so minimal, so simple. It is an example of what mathematicians call elegance — like Einstein’s equation E = mc2:
One man — one woman — indivisible.
As the poet Keats wrote in his “Ode on a Grecian Urn”: “Beauty is truth, truth beauty.”
Very interesting article.
A "marriage" in what sense? To what degree does the state have ANY interest in marriage? Its authority is strictly secular, so any recognition of the relationship between two people would be limited to purely practical, legal matters. No discrimination exists between two people -- of whatever combination of genders -- who want to form a legal relationship -- the concern of the state. So the state has reached it boundary in the matter.
Marriage also has (and is arguably defined by) its religious/spiritual dimension. That is beyond the scope of state power. If two queers can find some worthless "church" that will "marry" them, fine. But just as the state has no power to regulate religion on homos, so homos have no right to regulate religion. The state cannot enforce recognition of homosexual "bonds" as marriage, except in the secular, purely practical sense.
This article pretty thoughtfully articulates what I’ve always professed: talk of gay marriage comes with statements of fairness and equality, but it’s not fair and it’s not equal to everyone. If two men live together and share resources and in fact care for each other, but are only friends, why is a romantic/sexual context the differentiating factor here? Because I don’t really believe that the motivation is or ever was fairness.
The gay rights movement does not focus on rational arguments. Emotional persuasion serves their purpose much better. Large numbers of young people are convinced by the “love” argument, for example. Gay rights proponents are interested in winning by any means necessary and will shift tactics and arguments in order to advance their agenda.