hanimmal
Well-Known Member
Thing like family insurance and hospital visiting rights do not have to be enforced. Also Adoption rights, they can deny rights to gay couples, and a large amount of other issues all crop up with Gay rights.They can vote, they cannot be discriminated against in the workplace, etc etc. They have civil unions... it is an issue of making special exception with regards to something that does not apply to them. It is like me insisting on maternity leave. It is not sexist, it is non-applicable.
Those are the issues in place. As I think Marriage is pretty much a joke, I could care less about what it is called, but to deny people the same rights that others have is a discrimination issue, and not special rights.
Agreed, I also love when people say that it needs to be protected for procreational reasons. Because it is fun to point out that anyone infertile should then not be allowed to marry, and that would include almost every woman over the age of 60. And a big portion of men with low sperm counts.The "benefits" of marriage are justified because of the product of fruitful union... and again... I think they need to pull their noses out all together.
For the record, as marriage laws exist, I am for gay marriage on principal, but not because of gays. It is exclusionary of hermaphrodites to incorporate "man and woman" specific language. I am honestly surprised that nobody has used this argument. EQUAL protection. Hermaphrodites cannot marry anyone... and while it sounds laughable, it is a minority which is discriminated against by using sex specific language.
Marriage should go back to the church, and the REST of society should get civil unions granting authority for medical decisions etc.
my .02