🚀 go-pugleaf

>
>>From: jbfb2@aol.com  (Jbfb2)
>
>>I have a controversial question for us to discuss if anyone's interested.
>>
>>Should the US recognize, as legal, gay marriages performed and deemed legal
>>in
>>Canada?

>
(RavenRainGoddess)
>  Absolutely.  To me it is ridiculous that we don't already recognize the
>marriages performed in the US as legal. Let me give an example.  Suppose
>there
>is a gay couple (men) who adopted a child together.  One of them stays home
>and
>takes care of the baby, the other works outside the home.  They are quite
>happy
>with this, but there ARE several problems.  The one that comes to mind is
>health insurance.  The "stay at home" parent isn't covered, because he isn't
>considered legally a spouse.  Also, if the "working" parent were to die
>suddenly, the "stay at home" parent most likely wouldn't be eligible for
>whatever pension benefits the company gives to a spouse.  I could probably
>give
>more reasons if I sat down and thought about it, but these are just what came
>to mind.


I have mixed feelings about it. I fully understand your argument. From a purely
practical stand point it makes sense.

Three things bother me, though.

1. If we start making special laws for people who are outside the mainstream,
where does it end? Gays and Lesbians are allowed to marry under our law, they
just aren't allowed  to marry the same sex. So a law passed to recognize that
would be making special dispensation for sexual preferences. If we make one
exception, who's to say it won't be challenged by other's with truly weird
tastes? Where do you draw the line?

2. I strongly believe that marriage and family have been the foundation of
every civilized society since the beginning of human kind. For our very
survival nature demands that we live as male and female, and this union must
procreate. To recognize, as legal, the union of same sex marriage is to not
only undermine the importance of marriage in our society, it fails to recognize
the importance of male and a female roles in raising children.

3. Statistically, gays and lesbians have far more partners in their lives than
married heterosexuals. Their unions do not usually last as long as traditional
couples'.
If we recognize their marriages, we have to deal with the divorces, too. I can
see this as an eventual nightmare for the already beleaguered family courts.

From an emotional (PF would be disappointed) view point, I see nothing wrong
with same sex marriages. From a legal, societal and practical stance, I see it
as bad overall.

What I think may be a better idea than recognizing gay marriages as equal to
heterosexual marriage, would be to allow same sex partners to share insurance
benefits, especially if they are raising children. Recognizing partners as
legal "next of kin" in emergency situations, or when one of them is sick would
be reasonable and fair.

Just my .2 worth. :)

From an emotional (now I sound like PF) view point, I see nothing wrong with
same sex marriages. From a legal, societal and practical stance, I see it as
bad overall.

What I think may be a better idea than recognizing gay marriages as equal to
heterosexual marriage, would be to allow same sex partners to share insurance
benefits, especially if they are raising children. Recognizing partners as
legal "next of kin" in emergency situations, or when one of them is sick would
be reasonable and fair.