4 ms·

you say that as if you can't imagine that there are any or something. so silly. um, okay: government has no business in marriage. abortion is arbitrarily decidi

by nesicus 12y ago

you say that as if you can't imagine that there are any or something. so silly. um, okay: government has no business in marriage. abortion is arbitrarily deciding you have autonomy over the life of another possibly intelligent being for political reasons. I'm in favor of self-ownership and property rights--I don't know about you. none of these things have anything to do with religion. (hint: I am not religious.)

unprepare 12y ago
>government has no business in marriage I see this rhetoric a lot and would love an actual explanation. Do you propose that tax benefits for couples should be abolished? How do you propose to handle Estate planning? Health and other insurance benefits? Managing the custody of children of divorce? How exactly do you imagine the government not being involved in marriage? Because as it stands today, the government is inextricably a part of the concept of marriage; the government must recognize a marriage in order for the benefits of marriage to work.
- maratd 12y ago
  > Do you propose that tax benefits for couples should be abolished? Yes. (I am married) > How do you propose to handle Estate planning? Contract law. Before you get married, sign a contract that outlines everything. > Health and other insurance benefits? Nothing to do with government or at least, should have nothing to do with government. The insurance companies can structure it however they want. > Managing the custody of children of divorce? Contract law. See above. Marriage at its heart is a business arrangement. You share resources and work for a common purpose. It's almost like you're starting a company with a partner. Would you start a business without signing a contract that didn't outline not only how the arrangement would function, but what would happen if it were to come to an end? Of course you wouldn't. > How exactly do you imagine the government not being involved in marriage? It can be involved in marriage through contract law. The same way it's involved in any business arrangement where a contract was signed. In other words, if need be, one party can take another to court over the breach of a contract. The issue today is that the government defines that contract. It specifies who the contract can be between (a man and a woman), specifies what happens when that contract ends, what benefits accrue, it essentially controls everything about that contract ... why not let the people choose what form they want their marriage to take? Why force everyone into the same universal contract that in the end doesn't really fit anyone properly because it's so unbelievably general? > Because as it stands today, the government is inextricably a part of the concept of marriage Unfortunately. > the government must recognize a marriage in order for the benefits of marriage to work. Resource sharing is by far the greatest benefit and it has nothing to do with the government. Yes, tax benefits and such stem directly from the government ... but that's about it.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > Would you start a business without signing a contract that didn't outline not only how the arrangement would function, but what would happen if it were to come to an end? Lots of people do without a lot of specific detail on that, because they take advantage of government-created standard business forms that, in addition to providing special advantages not available through contract alone, also provide well-tested default handling of common situations, including dissolution. Much like marriage. > It can be involved in marriage through contract law. The same way it's involved in any business arrangement where a contract was signed. But, if you want to compare marriage to a business arrangement, you should also be aware that government doesn't just manage business arrangements through general contract law, it defines a whole bunch of special standard forms for business entities which people form (various classes of corporations, LPs, LLPs, LLLPs, LLCs, heck, even general partnerships have a separate body of law from general contract law.) So, the only way marriage is different is that government hasn't provided a whole bunch of different special forms for couples with different priorities and goals.
discardorama 12y ago
> um, okay: government has no business in marriage. That's not argument against same-sex marriage; it's against all government-recognized marriage, even opposite-sex marriage. It's funny how people come out against "marriage" only when teh gays become interested in it.

by nesicus 12y ago

unprepare 12y ago

>government has no business in marriage I see this rhetoric a lot and would love an actual explanation. Do you propose that tax benefits for couples should be abolished? How do you propose to handle Estate planning? Health and other insurance benefits? Managing the custody of children of divorce? How exactly do you imagine the government not being involved in marriage? Because as it stands today, the government is inextricably a part of the concept of marriage; the government must recognize a marriage in order for the benefits of marriage to work.

maratd 12y ago
> Do you propose that tax benefits for couples should be abolished? Yes. (I am married) > How do you propose to handle Estate planning? Contract law. Before you get married, sign a contract that outlines everything. > Health and other insurance benefits? Nothing to do with government or at least, should have nothing to do with government. The insurance companies can structure it however they want. > Managing the custody of children of divorce? Contract law. See above. Marriage at its heart is a business arrangement. You share resources and work for a common purpose. It's almost like you're starting a company with a partner. Would you start a business without signing a contract that didn't outline not only how the arrangement would function, but what would happen if it were to come to an end? Of course you wouldn't. > How exactly do you imagine the government not being involved in marriage? It can be involved in marriage through contract law. The same way it's involved in any business arrangement where a contract was signed. In other words, if need be, one party can take another to court over the breach of a contract. The issue today is that the government defines that contract. It specifies who the contract can be between (a man and a woman), specifies what happens when that contract ends, what benefits accrue, it essentially controls everything about that contract ... why not let the people choose what form they want their marriage to take? Why force everyone into the same universal contract that in the end doesn't really fit anyone properly because it's so unbelievably general? > Because as it stands today, the government is inextricably a part of the concept of marriage Unfortunately. > the government must recognize a marriage in order for the benefits of marriage to work. Resource sharing is by far the greatest benefit and it has nothing to do with the government. Yes, tax benefits and such stem directly from the government ... but that's about it.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Would you start a business without signing a contract that didn't outline not only how the arrangement would function, but what would happen if it were to come to an end? Lots of people do without a lot of specific detail on that, because they take advantage of government-created standard business forms that, in addition to providing special advantages not available through contract alone, also provide well-tested default handling of common situations, including dissolution. Much like marriage. > It can be involved in marriage through contract law. The same way it's involved in any business arrangement where a contract was signed. But, if you want to compare marriage to a business arrangement, you should also be aware that government doesn't just manage business arrangements through general contract law, it defines a whole bunch of special standard forms for business entities which people form (various classes of corporations, LPs, LLPs, LLLPs, LLCs, heck, even general partnerships have a separate body of law from general contract law.) So, the only way marriage is different is that government hasn't provided a whole bunch of different special forms for couples with different priorities and goals.

discardorama 12y ago

> um, okay: government has no business in marriage. That's not argument against same-sex marriage; it's against all government-recognized marriage, even opposite-sex marriage. It's funny how people come out against "marriage" only when teh gays become interested in it.