Gay marriage, your thoughts?

Here Lily, catch...

http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding ... rriage.htm

The Difference Between Marriage and Civil Unions
From Kathy Belge,
Your Guide to Lesbian Life.

What's the Difference between Civil Unions and and Gay Marriage?
The Difference between Gay Marriage and Civil Unions

by Kathy Belge

You hear the politicians saying it all the time. “I support Civil Unions, but not gay marriage.” What exactly does this mean? Some even say they support equal rights for gays and lesbians, but not gay marriage. Is this possible? And why do gays and lesbians want marriage so badly when they can have civil unions?

First of all, What is Marriage? When people marry, they tend to do so for reasons of love and commitment. But marriage is also a legal status, which comes with rights and responsibilities. Marriage establishes a legal kinship between you and your spouse. It is a relationship that is recognized across cultures, countries and religions.

What is a Civil Union? Civil Unions exist in only one place: Vermont. In 2005 California created a domestic partnership law that offers many of the same rights as civil unions. Vermont civil unions were created in 2000 to provide legal protections to gays and lesbians in relationships in that state because gay marriage is not an option. The protections do not extend beyond the border of Vermont and no federal protections are included with a Civil Union. Civil Unions offer some of the same rights and responsibilities as marriage, but only on a state level.

What about Domestic partnership? Some states and municipalities have domestic partnership registries, but no domestic partnership law is the same. Some, like the recently passed California domestic partnership law comes with many rights and responsibilities. Others, like the one in Multnomah County, Oregon, offer little or no benefit to the couple.

What are some of the differences between Civil Unions and Gay Marriage?

Recognition in other states: Even though each state has its own laws around marriage, if someone is married in one state and moves to another, their marriage is legally recognized. For example, Oregon marriage law applies to people 17 and over. In Washington state, the couple must be 18 to wed. However, Washington will recognize the marriage of two 17 year olds from Oregon who move there. This is not the case with Civil Unions. If someone has a Civil Union in Vermont, that union is not recognized in any other state. As a matter of fact, two states, Connecticut and Georgia, have ruled that they do not have to recognize civil unions performed in Vermont, because their states have no such legal category. As gay marriages become legal in other states, this status may change.

Dissolving a Civil Union v. Divorce:

Vermont has no residency requirement for Civil Unions. That means two people from any other state or country can come there and have a civil union ceremony. If the couple breaks up and wishes to dissolve the union, one of them must be a resident of Vermont for one year before the Civil Union can be dissolved in family court. Married couples can divorce in any state they reside, no matter where they were married.

Immigration:

A United States citizen who is married can sponsor his or her non-American spouse for immigration into this country. Those with Civil Unions have no such privilege.

Taxes:

Civil Unions are not recognized by the federal government, so couples would not be able to file joint-tax returns or be eligible for tax breaks or protections the government affords to married couples.

Benefits:

The General Accounting Office in 1997 released a list of 1,049 benefits and protections available to heterosexual married couples. These benefits range from federal benefits, such as survivor benefits through Social Security, sick leave to care for ailing partner, tax breaks, veterans benefits and insurance breaks. They also include things like family discounts, obtaining family insurance through your employer, visiting your spouse in the hospital and making medical decisions if your partner is unable to. Civil Unions protect some of these rights, but not all of them.

But can’t a lawyer set all this up for gay and lesbian couples?

No. A lawyer can set up some things like durable power of attorney, wills and medical power of attorney. There are several problems with this, however.

1. It costs thousands of dollars in legal fees. A simple marriage license, which usually costs under $100 would cover all the same rights and benefits.

2. Any of these can be challenged in court. As a matter of fact, more wills are challenged than not. In the case of wills, legal spouses always have more legal power than any other family member.

3. Marriage laws are universal. If someone’s husband or wife is injured in an accident, all you need to do is show up and say you’re his or her spouse. You will not be questioned. If you show up at the hospital with your legal paperwork, the employees may not know what to do with you. If you simply say, "He's my husband," you will immediately be taken to your spouse's side.

Even with lesbian and gay marriages being performed and recognized in some states, the Federal Defense of Marriage Law prohibits the federal government from recognizing gay and lesbian relationships. This puts gay and lesbian couples who are married in a legal limbo. How do they file their tax returns? Do they have to pay the tax on their partner’s health insurance? How do they fill out legal and other forms, single or married?

Creating Civil Unions creates a separate and unequal status for some of America’s citizens. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial court ruled that creating a separate class for gay and lesbian citizens is not permissible and that is why they have voted that only marriage equals marriage.
Sponsored Links

Gay Marriage Law
Common Law Relationship Settling Serving British Columbia
www.bcfamilylaw.ca

The United States Constitution guarantees equality for all. As you can see, marriage and civil unions are not the same. Creating equal access to marriage is the only fair way to ensure equality for gay and straight couples alike.

Yep, looks my argument completely destroys that articles thesis.

If gay marriage should be legal because, "who should dictate what is love between consenting adults?"

Then polygamy should be legal in whatever form it may take. One man and six women. One woman and six men. Six men. Six women. Whatever.

Sisters and brothers should be allowed to marry especially since the aversion to incest is a Biblical idea that differentiated the Israelites from the Egyptians.

Parents should be able to marry consenting adult children.

Grossed out yet? Am I mocking marriage enough?

Then you get my point.

There is no way for the government to know about that Johnny, so it isn't a problem.

How come noone can make an argument against it with mentioning poligamy or marring your goat? They are not asking for that, and I don't think theres enough goat lovers to go to the gov asking for goat-human marriages, as a matter of fact, I haven't seen anyone actually asking yet, can someone provide some sort of link for people wanting to marry their pets and not just hearsay?

And the article listed all that was denied gays because they are not married. The interesting point was at the end when she mentioned creating more different classes in a society where people scream for equality.

To state that its unnatural is rediculous when all the creatures in nature are doing it as well. And if the only reason we have sex is for procreation then you should put more effort into banning condoms, the pills, and coat hangers (old way of doing abortion for you who don't know).

As for the poligamist, it is illegal in almost every country yet people still do it, mostly in the name of god. Its kinda hard to stop whole towns from doing it, and yes there is still underage marriages occuring everywhere on the globe, so it would seem that laws will not provent that either. A good example is america, where some of the most drug laws are made, yet, they have very a high amount of drug users (no pun int.). These people are not asking for open wackadoo marriages, just the legalalities that are afforded those who are married. Its not so much about sexuality as it is the right to be by your loved one when their six, are you saying that 2 people who love each other for years don't have the right to be together when one is ill, regardless of their sexual orientaion? Because that is one of the main things they are fighting for, and as you can see by the article that is not given nor many other things because of this one piece of paper. How sad of a society you would want where people cannot love each other fully and be there for each other because of one legal document. The alternative of continued persecucion and denial of basic right of human beings is just sad and I don't know why anyone would want to live in a world like that. You must have real control issues to want to deny someone who you don't even know their basic rights of personal happiness that badly. I don't think your argument is so much for or against the issue as it is (switch to bewitched, looking out the curtian at your niehbors) "what are they doing over there, should they be doing that? If you don't really care, then let them do as they please. Are they TRULY harming you, beating on your door for homosexual lovin, demanding that your marriage be annulled? What if lyou live in a world that was in reverse and it was you that was denied. How would you feel then?