Same-Sex Marriage: Canada, Europe and the United States

[Adalbertus]

Re: Same-Sex Marriage: Canada, Europe and the United States

A marriage not only of same sex but also of three (Canada, Europe and US)??

[KrazyHorse]

I'm proud of our courts...

Kicked the legislators in the ass. I hope they use Svend's bill (the one he's submitted every Valentine's Day for the last decade)...

[St Leo]

Important to note the decision in Canada was a LEGAL decision not a political one (ie it doesn't matter what the poll numbers say...).

It is also a political one. If the Liberals thought that polls opposed marriage for everyone, then they would have appealed the court's decision.

Instead, they saw the way the wind is blowing and decided to embrace the idea fully.

I am proud of Chretien. His last year in office is magnificent.

[mrmitchell]

I don't have time to skim the article, but whut's the issue? Who out there really seriously has an issue with gay marriage? I mean, aside from deranged lunatics.

[St Leo]

MrM, you'd be surprised at the number of deranged lunatics out there. After all, 90% of everyone is crud, 90% of crud is cruddy curd, 90% of cruddy crud is cruddy cruddy crud...:P

[Wezil]

"And despite what you might think, anyone who says gays should not be allowed to marry is being insulting, is acting somehow superior and giving gays less rights than straight couples get." - Asher

You prove my point. It is "insulting" if your point of view is not shared.

[mindseye]

Interesting that the article's author failed to mention another major impact Canadian gay marriage will have on the US psyche: when gay Candians get married and Canadian society fails to collapse, it will demonstrate pretty clearly that much of the "our society will be doomed" arguments are mere twaddle.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
You prove my point. It is "insulting" if your point of view is not shared.

It's not insulting that they don't share my point of view, it's insulting that they want to put me on a level below them for my sexuality.

[mindseye]

Wezil: What is the reaction in the gay community when THEIR point of view is not accepted (...)?

Evil Knevil: The gay rights movement musn't overplay its hand or appear shrill.

You wouldn't be outraged if someone told you that you couldn't get married - ever - because they didn't approve of the person you fell in love with??? Really? You wouldn’t be upset about being denied the right to marry???

A lot of straight people are amazingly cavalier on this point. They consider their wedding day to be one of - if not the single most - important event of their life, yet admonish gay people not to be "shrill" in demanding equal access to one of the most fundamental human social institutions.


yavoon asks:

u demand the tax benefits that badly?.

Is there some place in the US where there is a tax incentive to get married? Then what's with the arguments for getting rid of the "marriage penalty"? Besides, to frame the argument over gay marriage in terms of taxes is to utterly miss the point.


I can't believe no one has yet trotted out the tired old argument that gay marriage will open the door to polygamy, much the same way that giving the vote to women and blacks opened the door to multiple-voting. Oops, that didn’t happen.

[mrmitchell]

Are there any serious reasons against gay marriage? The only two I've ever been told is the "society will collapse" twaddle (see above) and the "God said no" twaddle (note: we never elected God as president.)

[mindseye]

Are there any serious reasons against gay marriage? The only two I've ever been told is the "society will collapse" twaddle (see above) and the "God said no" twaddle (note: we never elected God as president.)

Let's not forget these hoary chestnuts:

- Marriage should not be changed because it is an inalterable tradition, and has always been just exactly the way it was in the USA circa 1953.

- Marriage is about procreation (except for sterile or elderly straight couples), and gay people cannot make babies (raising them doesn't matter, only siring them)

- Straight people will be forced to support innumerable benefits for gay spouses (just like those gay people who have no choice in supporting the benefits of our spouses and offspring)

- Gay people shouldn't be allowed to get married because they are promiscuous, always having sex outside of marriage.

- It would encourage young people to decide to change their sexual orientation.

- Granting gay people the right to marry will open the door to polygamy, just like giving the vote to women and blacks will inevitably lead to multiple-voting.

- Gay people don't want equal rights, they want special rights, like being able to get married to a guy.

- I, personally, could never fall in love with a person of the same gender, so we should not, as a society, condone it.

- Allowing gay people to get married will in some indefinable manner cheapen my own marriage.

- Gay people are incapable of forming permanent relationships. They won't respect marriage the way we straights with our 50% divorce rate do.

- It would send the the wrong message, that gay people are just as good as the rest of us.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by mindseye
[q]

yavoon asks:

u demand the tax benefits that badly?.

Is there some place in the US where there is a tax incentive to get married? Then what's with the arguments for getting rid of the "marriage penalty"? Besides, to frame the argument over gay marriage in terms of taxes is to utterly miss the point.

there are lots of tax and healthcare benefits to getting married. I don't know exactly where u r from. but this is hardly a brand new idea or notion.

[mindseye]

there are lots of tax (...) benefits to getting married. I don't know exactly where u r from. but this is hardly a brand new idea or notion.

Tell that to the "marriage penalty" folks, not me! (Hint: do an internet search on "marriage penalty" and "tax" for further information. I found 173 sites using Vivisimo).

I edited out "and healthcare" from your post because your earlier comments were about taxes, not healthcare.

Hey, I'll be the first to agree that there are many, many benefits to getting married - healthcare, legal, and otherwise (how about visiting your spouse in hospital emergency room?). I guess the point where we disagree is that I don't think these rights should be unequally distributed on the basis of your spouse's gender.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by mindseye

there are lots of tax and healthcare benefits to getting married. I don't know exactly where u r from. but this is hardly a brand new idea or notion.

Tell that to the "marriage penalty" folks, not me! (Hint: do an internet search on "marriage penalty" and "tax" for further information. I found 173 sites using Vivisimo).

Hey, I'll be the first to agree that there are many, many benefits to getting married, healthcare, legal, and otherwise (how about visiting your spouse in hospital emergency room?). I guess the point where we disagree is that I don't think these rights should be unequally distributed on the basis of the gender of your spouse.

well first they aren't rights. they're tax benefits. and while congress can distribute them to gay couples, they don't have to. It is also worth noting that the reason that society encourages people to get and stay married. so that children can grow up w/ both a mother and a father. doesn't translate at all, or nearly as efficiently to gay couples.

[mindseye]

well first they aren't rights.

If you re-read my post, you'll see I was not simply referring to taxes (quote: "there are many, many benefits to getting married, healthcare, legal, and otherwise "). These benefits include such rights as hospital emergency room visitation rights, control over funerals, etc.

they're tax benefits. and while congress can distribute them to gay couples, they don't have to.

Agreed! My point is that I think they should distribute any such benefits to gay couples. I argue that such benefits should be distributed equally, without discrimination. Perhaps I'm not clear on the point you are trying to make. Are you saying that they should or should not be granted to gay couples?

It is also worth noting that the reason that society encourages people to get and stay married. so that children can grow up w/ both a mother and a father.

If that is true, then where do you think society should be focusing that concern: on families where children are raised by two loving parents of the same gender, or families with one heterosexual parent? The latter seems to me to be a far, far larger problem, at least in in terms of sheer numbers. What you are talking about is more of an issue of heterosexual divorce rates, not gay marriage.

The point being that, given the enormous number of single parent families, it does not strike me that two-parent same-sex families in any way adds to the problem. In fact, studies to date of the thousands of gay couples successfully raising children have found such concerns to be ill-founded.