Who wants to get married?

[Super]

Then it wouldn't be marriage.

What if they wanted it to be marriage?

[Doodle]

Then it wouldn't be marriage.

Says you.

[Kayo]

Maybe they should just not call it marriage anymore. It's nothing like it ever used to be, so we should have up a new word for it even. And that's not just homosexual "marriage" or what have you, I'm talking about all "marriage".

I dunno lol

[Friendly Hostile]

Maybe they should just not call it marriage anymore. It's nothing like it ever used to be, so we should have up a new word for it even. And that's not just homosexual "marriage" or what have you, I'm talking about all "marriage".

I dunno lol

Because again, marriage in addition to any religious traditions it's tied to, is a legal concept that's been around for centuries and provides and easy way of simplifying a lot of legal issues that arises between couples.


And the idea of marriage lasting for life in a nice notion and all, but it fails to account for the fact that people change during their lives.  The person you married at 25 isn't going to be that same person necessarily when they're 55.  People grow and change during their lives.  It's part of being human.  And sometimes, a couple changes and stays together because they still love each other and the differences between them don't impact that.  But sometimes that isn't the case.

[Kayo]

Because again, marriage in addition to any religious traditions it's tied to, is a legal concept that's been around for centuries and provides and easy way of simplifying a lot of legal issues that arises between couples.


And the idea of marriage lasting for life in a nice notion and all, but it fails to account for the fact that people change during their lives.  The person you married at 25 isn't going to be that same person necessarily when they're 55.  People grow and change during their lives.  It's part of being human.  And sometimes, a couple changes and stays together because they still love each other and the differences between them don't impact that.  But sometimes that isn't the case.

Yeah but, I'm pretty sure the divorce rate is much higher now. Don't quote me on that, but I'm almost positive that's the case. Marriage always used to seen more permanent...but now we have marriages that only last a few years. Or LESS.

[PsychoYoshi]

I go with A, and no I'm not implying you're homophobic.


However, using marital status for those things is the more efficient way than relying on various agreements, legal documents etc. of determining what happens when a spouse dies, when a couple divorces, when a couple wants to adopt, etc.  Even if the state is no longer providing actual benefits like joint tax filing and what not, marital status is much easier to use for dealing with those issues when a legal issue arises.  The state isn't consenting to the contract or giving permission for it to exist, they're acknowledging its existence and using it to simplify and expedite various legal dilemmas that would otherwise take a considerably larger number of contracts, legal agreements and lawyers to deal with.  The state getting out of the marriage business doesn't make those issues go away, because people will still fight over who gets stuff when they divorce, over what happens when your spouse dies, over whether or not they are entitle to adopt children, or who is legally the parents of the child when it is a child from a previous marriage, or who gets visitation rights in hospitals. 

Instead of having to rewrite laws, wordings and definitions of various legal practices and create a whole new system of having to deal with these things, it's much simpler and more reasonable to simply expand what couples are acknowledged as married.  Everyone still get's to follow their religious and personal beliefs, legal battles are simpler and more easily dealt with, and no one ends up worse off by doing so.  This is an instance where the government makes things simpler and better, and is not interfering, but providing the option to an easier route in the legal realm for couples if they wish to seek it.

I'm fine with the creation of an option to marry, but judging by this op-ed, it looks like the bill is an all-or-nothing type deal. I'm not in total agreement with this writer, either, because she's still arguing from the "marriage/civil union/partnership=special entitlements" perspective, but I do share her skepticism regarding the wording

There's also a difference between a law with wording from a negative liberty-based perspective (you, as a person or institution, may not deny gays the right to marry if they so desire) versus a law with wording from a positive liberty-based approach (we, the state, grant you resources in the form of a marriage certificate, legal perks, visitation rights, et. al. to elevate you to what we think is the same socioeconomic status as straight couples). I don't have an issue with the wording of the first law, but I do have a major problem with the second one, and I'll bet any amount of shekels that the law's wording/rationale more closely mirrors the latter. If I'm correct about the wording, New York is doing a lot more than simply acknowledging the union between a couple.

If there is one consolation, however, I am glad that this legislation was constitutional (passed at the state level through a legislature, not through some activist judge legislating through the bench, and provides places of worship with option to refuse marriages from taking place on their own property).

Yeah but, I'm pretty sure the divorce rate is much higher now. Don't quote me on that, but I'm almost positive that's the case. Marriage always used to seen more permanent...but now we have marriages that only last a few years. Or LESS.

1) Fewer religious overtones to the marital process, hence less "if I divorce, I'm a terrible sinner" mentality.
2) Media culture that promotes promiscuity, hedonism, and instant gratification, which affects marriages in multiple ways. One, people enter into serious relationships as soon as they feel that 'falling in love' butterflies feeling instead of spending a few months/years to get to know the other person better, because the love-at-first-sight phenomenon always works in romantic comedies. Two, the behavior of cheating is portrayed as normal. Three, people don't understand that they're not going to agree with their partner on every issue, and there's going to be some fighting in relationships. Oftentimes people panic whenever they have heated words and assume that their relationship is failing instead of cooling down for a couple hours, apologizing, and moving on.

[…]

Is it for sure that marriage existed before religion, because hasn't religion in one form or another been around since practically the beginning of man?

[Super]

Courtship is pretty common in mammals. Humans simply took it a step further.

[Kayo]

Certain animals--I think beavers may be one--typically mate for life. That's more or less what marriage is was supposed to be. It's debatable whether it was made more significant for religious or for legal reasons.

[Rayquarian]

[Custom]

sure is goopy in here

[Kayo]

ew

[Custom]

ew

yeah i know right so gorss

[Kayo]

yeah i know right so gorss

I guess I better go return this ring then :(