Posted on 08/06/2005 6:30:19 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
Bill Dalrymple, 56, and best friend Bryan Pinn, 65, have decided to take the plunge and try out the new same-sex marriage legislation with a twist -- they're straight men.
"I think it's a hoot," Pinn said.
The proposal came last Monday on the patio of a Toronto bar amid shock and laughter from their friends. But the two -- both of whom were previously married and both of whom are still looking for a good woman to love -- insist that after the humour subsided, a real issue lies at the heart of it all.
"There are significant tax implications that we don't think the government has thought through," Pinn said.
Dalrymple has been to see a lawyer already and there are no laws in marriage that define sexual preference.
"We heteros haven't done a great job with marriage as it is," Pinn said.
They want to shed light on the widespread financial implications of the new legislation and are willing to take it all the way.
There are obvious tax benefits to marriage, they said, but insisted they don't want their nuptials to insult gays and lesbians.
"I disagree with the government getting involved with what people should and shouldn't do," Dalrymple said. "Stay out of the bedrooms."
Words of warning came from Toronto lawyer Bruce Walker, a gay and lesbian rights activist.
"Generally speaking, marriage should be for love," he said. "People who don't marry for love will find themselves in trouble."
Since the introduction of Bill C-38, Walker considers himself retired in the fight for same-sex recognition.
Walker isn't personally insulted by the planned Pinn-Dalrymple union because he believes in personal freedoms and rights.
"If someone wants to do something foolish, let them do it," he said.
As for wedding plan, Pinn and Dalrymple haven't set a date.
Everybody in Vermont should do this.
bttt
They only wanted the special treatment.
This is making a mockery of the institution of homosexual marriage.
"People who don't marry for love will find themselves in trouble."
So who's going to define that Mr Walker?
I've been eyein' this cute rhododendron ...If I can get tax breaks? who knows....
"Generally speaking, marriage should be for love," he said.
Don't you dare talk to me about your old-fashioned, out of date values!
My wife and I have some friends we could marry in holy moneymony. Between the 4 or 6 of us we could probably make a killing on tax incentives and bank loans.
Interesting
As soon as it becomes legal I plan to marry everyone in my immediate family.
I have been eyeing my cats and thinking, "Hey if I can get a tax break, why not". I could then carry them on my insurance plan at work, too.
Well if this catches on the government will learn and lets see how fast the government tries to reverse its postion.....so go for it guys!
Yes, perfect example of highlighting the absurd by being absurd.
"Generally speaking, marriage should be for love," he said. "People who don't marry for love will find themselves in trouble."
Hey you wanted the law changed .. now you deal with it
In Vermont and everywhere else. If two people can marry (regardless of sex), why shouldn't four--or eight--or...? And let's throw out the laws against incestuous marriage. I could provide a great deal of money to my children's inheritance if they became my legal "spouses". In fact, I think I'll marry my entire extended family.
Wow...non-sodomite marriage...might catch on.
And if the government tries to call them on it, all the guys have to do is say they were kidding about being hetrosexual out of fear of being shunned by friends and family.
Who'll know?
This is just toooooo precious!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.