A thot on same sex marriage.

Munchmausen said:
What is it about the gender makeup of these relationships that makes a difference?

That's the 50 million dollar question. No conservatives seem to be interested in answering, it's just somehow vaguely bad because it's ewwy.
 
The more I think about the movement to establish a legal basis for gay marriages, the more I become convinced that it is motivated by financial considerations.

An informal marriage can take care of most situations other than health insurance benefits, adoption of unrelated children, and social security benefits. I have a committed relationship with a girl friend. We have notarized living wills and power of attorney documents which allow one of us to make health care and financial decisions in the event that the other is too ill to make such decisions. Each of us has a will leaving our money and property to the other.

The major advantages to be gained via legalizing gay marriages are social security and health insurance benefits. The health insurance benefits are quite valuable.

As mentioned in a previous post, if gay marriages are legalized, why not extend health insurance and social security benefits to other very close relationships? A single person working for a company that provides health insurance should be able to cover somebody like a parent, sibling, adult child.

BTW: Many years ago, I had some gay friends and attended several informal wedding ceremonies. There is nothing preventing gay people from making a public commitment to each other. Aside from the finacial benefits and the difficulties if there is a divorce, an informal commitment is much the same as a legal marriage. It so happens that I feel far more committed to my girl friend of 25 years than I ever felt to my wife. We do not need the approval of legal or religious authorities to make us feel better about our relationship or more committed to each other.
 
Back
Top