Wed Rock (feat. Rollins, Mould, Bernhardt, etc.)

-edit-

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
I was arguing against Chimbley's argument to do away with the institution of marriage.

I would like to see gays and lesbians have the same rights to get married and get the same benefits from marriage that I do.

I hear ya. Isn't it good to know that you have a defender in Markie?

Well it's always good to have anybody on my side, but especially nice to have Markie.

That didn't sound too gay, did it?

Originally posted by Bags:

Originally posted by Rhett Miller:
I was arguing against Chimbley's argument to do away with the institution of marriage.

I would like to see gays and lesbians have the same rights to get married and get the same benefits from marriage that I do.

I hear ya. Isn't it good to know that you have a defender in Markie?

OK at the risk of being chastised (however the hell you spell that) this is my take on the issue. Some may recognize ir from a few months ago…

The problem is NOT that any given segment of society is/is not allowed to marry. The real issue is that certain priviliges in society are attached to marriage when they should not be. For example, in hospitals here when you are in ICU etc you can only have your spouse visit you. Thats totally stupid. I understand the need to keep it to one visitor but the patient should be able to choose anyone at all. Thats is just one of many issues that are attached the same way. What we need to do is separate the things that should not be attached to marriage and assign them where they should be. Not do a band aid fix and change marriage.

While I am not one of those ultra right wing religous freaks (hell I am quite the opposite in fact), but I do think that marriage in and of itself should be maintained M/F. This is my belief, it isnt right or wrong but it is mine and I will stick to it. I am all for everyone being able to live the life they choose and have no issue with anyone living and sleeping with whom they choose. I fell that everyone should be given a fair shake at life. I do though think we need to get rid of these laws that proport to protect groups. All we need is one simple lasw that says (I'll leave it to the klawyers to word it right) in any action you cant make decisions based of issued not relevant. BINGO! Done! No one gets left behind and no one gets special.

OK I'm done… NEXT. :)

Originally posted by RatBastard:
What we need to do is separate the things that should not be attached to marriage and assign them where they should be. Not do a band aid fix and change marriage.

Those sounds like contradictory statements to me. You think it's better to individually change every policy, law and benefit, rather than make one change that would level the playing field and make things completely fair and equal for everyone. To me that sounds like thousands of band-aids without actually fixing the real issue.

Unless you're talking about all-encompassing civil-unions or partner registries with all the benefits and responsibilites of marriage. But then you're essentially dealing with semantics. They'd basically be in a marriage-style relationship, without having the word "marriage" associated with it. And we all know how well "separate-but-equal" policies work out.

And it doesn't deal with the fact that many gay people are in love and actually want to be married. They're not just searching to close legal loopholes. They want to be a family.

actually its not (IMHO). Liek I said in my example, the choice of who can visit you when you are a patient in ICU should not be attached to marriage. It should be any one person you choose. Thats a small example of what I was getting at. Things like health care should be fixed as well. It is absurd to make a 'family' policy mean employee, spouse, and offspring. That is not always a family in this country. Kind of hard for me to explain it other than that but hey its cool to have different opinions. Life would suck if everyone was always happy happy joy joy! :)

Originally posted by RatBastard:
It is absurd to make a 'family' policy mean employee, spouse, and offspring. That is not always a family in this country.

What else should "family policy" mean? Outside of a single parent household, what on earth should it pertain to? Should my grandparents or parents or brother be on my health insurance?

No matter what, over half of the marriages in the U.S. (mind you, this isn't the world) end in divorce. You hear that all over the news, in the newspaper, research…everywhere. (And the hell with you conspiracy theorists that say that is just the media talking, and not the truth). So why not let someone else give it a whirl? What would be so wrong about gays marrying? Do people honestly think it would cause eternal world damnation? Do people think it is going to make other countries hate us even more (than they do already for occupying a country we had no right to)? And I think this argument is about much more than rights, considering taxes, health insurance, etc., etc. I think that is offensive. Maybe it's most fundamental…like to people loving each other and making into a legally recognized union called marriage.