Sounds good to me. It’s not as though Prop 8 is going to stand up much longer if it keeps getting put up for a vote anyway.
They just don’t get it do they? They couldn’t get gay marriage so now they want to get rid of marriage as we know it. That is not as much an idea as seemingly a desire to be defeated even by greater numbers at the polls.
Way overdue. Government has no business defining/regulating/licensing personal relationships between adults or religious practices of adults. Dump the “civil unions” too. It’s none of government’s business. People can have contracts covering their personal relationships if they want to, and the contracts can say what the FREE CITIZENS who enter into them, want them to say.
This proves the lie that they aren’t trying to change other people’s marriages. Give liberals enough time and they continually prove they live in a world of lies and deceit.
Sounds like an excellent plan. Honest people on both sides should want to de-escalate this conflict. Marriage should not depend upon government recognition to sanctify it. All government should do is enforce civil contracts involving voluntary living relationships (wills, trusts, financial arrangements, etc.).
Then gays who wish to get "married" can do so in a church of their choosing which accommodates such marriages. In their eyes they are married, and they can simply ignore anyone who disagrees. Conversely, people who object to gay marriage can deny that the gay couple is truly married and simply ignore such claims of marriage. Each side goes its own way, and ignores the other side. Live and let live.
Of course that won't satisfy the radicals on either end of the spectrum. Those who see the gay marriage issue as an organizational tool for legitimatizing homosexuality will not be happy with the reduction in polarization. Those who see homosexuality as the Devil's tool for promoting sin and damnation and the destruction of civilization will despise a "live and let live" approach.
But the rest of us will welcome an end to this battle.
Just privatize marriages & divorces, then, to make them more efficient just like FedEx. [/sarc]
If the homosexuals had proposed abolishing civil marriage 20 years ago, they’d have been tarred and feathered.
Now even a bunch of conservatives on FR think it would be the most reasonable thing to do.
This has ALWAYS been an attack on marriage and the traditional family. Always.
I’m all for taking the government out of the equation, but for very different reasons.
At least this approach is logically consistent, unlike the nutty “I have a right to special government privileges” argument.
Governmental licensing of marriage being abolished is acceptable. Replacing it with some ‘domestic partnership’ law, however, is just putting lipstick on the cow - might be good for one date, but you can only milk that so long...
For all intents and purposes, the singular objective would be to circumvent through creative reasoning a constitutional amendment passed by the citizens of the state. The problem is not marriage - it never was the problem, the problem are those who try to impose their beliefs on the rest of us (IE: gay activists.)
Legislating acceptance won’t really make people accept them, and these contortions to reach ever further has done nothing but backfire on these same activists.
If an honest proposition was placed before the voters, to no longer have the state recognize /any/ form of marriage, I’d be fine with that.
“So you won’t let me play with your toys? Here I’ll show you!”
*crash* *snap*
“There. Now nobody gets to play!
Grow up folks.
I wish Abortion was given the same rights as gay marriage. States could decide whether to have abortion legal or not. Now 50 states are forced to have abortion facilities available. State should have the right to vote to get rid of abortion like they do gay marriage (We currently only have 3 states that legalized gay marriage and 50 states that are baby killers. Stupid Supreme Court. lol.
bookmark
They're free to move to those other countries. :^
Seriously, this article illustrates the problem of basing the marriage issue on religion or even tradition. The issue is really a matter of biology, common sense, logic, and reality: The purpose of marriage law is and always has been about procreation/human reproduction. The purpose is to encourage biological family units to remain intact. Society benefits when biological family units tend to remain intact (with some exceptions).
Marriage law also is not based on an emotion, like "love", either. Emotion cannot be legislated.
Marriage isn't even about "rights". It's about responsibilities. It's purely an agreement between a man and a woman that they will unite in this legal agreement, that they will have responsibilities for each other, and that children produced by their union will be entitled to inheritance, etc.
As a small “l” libertarian I don’t have a big problem with this. But as an American who values traditions, I do have a problem with it.