The primary issue here, is essentially health care and death benifits - both systems being horribly broken with convoluted laws. We expect our employers to provide us with health benifits, and we expect insurance companies to pay survivors with death benifits. Everything else can be arranged with a power of attorny (special or general) including decisions regarding living wills or other emergancy decisions, the ability to have a joint bank account, utilities, guardianship of children, etc.
It doesn't quite work that way. Power of attorney can be challenged by family members, doctors, and a few others depending on the state in court if for no reason other than to get revenge on the 'sinners'... it can be months or years along with a boatload of cash before it's finally over. Wills can be contested... Contracts? That's actually a nice thought, but out of all the possible communities to understand how binding a 'contract' can be, I would think that it would be one where people frequently are signing 'contracts' that they know would be thrown out by just about any court as unconstitutional more often than not... But even still, you are right, we should assume that certain biggots won't try to stop them by spreading their hate with laws that have sections like oh...
An Act to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 20-45.3, relating to the Affirmation of Marriage Act for the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Approved April 21, 2004
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
1. That the Code of Virginia is amended by adding a section numbered 20-45.3 as follows:
§ 20-45.3. Civil unions between persons of same sex.
A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage is prohibited. Any such civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby shall be void and unenforceable.
want more than just things fresh in memory from more than the last couple months? And you people dare to question why same sex couples are unhappy with trying to cut through the hostility and discrimination? Don't take my word for it though... do some google-fu on your own and follow the links... come back and tell me I'm wrong.
Look up Sharon Kowalski and come tell me that it was deserved for her perversion of nature.
It's not like religious nutballs like Pat Robertson haven't issued what amounts to public requests for murder. When Muslim clerics call for the death of those that they don't like people call them savages that need to modernize or die off... "good Christians" do it and those very same people give a smile... a nod... and often consider the argument.
"We ask for miracles in regard to the Supreme Court. ... One justice is 83 years old, another has cancer and another has a heart condition. Would it not be possible for God to put it in their minds that the time has come to retire?"
And then we have things like DOMA... Defense of Marriage Act... it defines marrige as a legal union between a man and a woman, should a state legalize samesex marriage then DOMA 'kindly' exempts other states from a few lines in a certain constitution where other states are required to recognize it. But hey, lets not call it Defense of Mean-spiritited Bigots Act... after all, that would be naming it with it's true purpose.
Even in this very thread, people cry about "activist judges" forcing others to be burdened with "their views". Happily oblivious to the fact that those "activist judges" were doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing... interpreting the laws as they are written. That whole checks and balances thing goes out the window when it comes to a biggot being denied a chance to, well... be a biggot.
We have people sobbing about how freedom of association should not apply... after all, a document that quite clearly spells out that whole seperation of church and state, should obviously only only apply that freedom of association bit when that association is approved of by a certain two thousand year old book of myths.
We even have a complaint about how the whole fight for same sex marriage might just be about allowing gay/lesbian couples to indulge in the shock factor of being able to call each other husband and wife with a nice little "think of the children" whine attached... We all know that it's easier to explain things like "life partner" "mate" "signifigant other" and other fun terms than it is to explain things like oh... "husband" or "wife".
I'm sure that just as we heard about all those other things, we will hear about how the fight for same sex marriage is infringing on the rights of a certain religion, how it's simply intolerance towards christian values and an attempt to erradicate them, or even how it's little more than yet one more way of trying to destroy or kill their God. Maybe we will even have someone drag out tired quotes from a certain book that talks about reasons why you should slay the people next door or what should happen when a child is aborted accidentally during a fight between two men... but every single person who uses one of those arguments is wiping their ass with that whole seperation of church and state line when it gets employed. Add to that, the complete lack of understanding what the meaning of tolerance is, a sad and pathetic thought given how central it is to a certain book that talks about not judging others. I tolerate your right to worship how you choose in your home. I tolerate your right to worship on a street corner, at the entrance to a store, even on television should you choose. I tolerate your right to worship nothing at all, your right to worship a person, a rock, or anything else you choose to worship or not worship. I tolerate your right to handle snakes in your religious cerimonies, your right to dance in church, your right to speak in tongues. I tolerate the right of your religion to marry or not marry as you choose in your churches... And even if I don't, that whole seperation of church and state line makes damn sure that I must. Every single one of these examples is tolerated because it does not impinge on MY rights, liberties, and freedoms.
Nobody is asking those "good christians" to do anything other than be tolerant and accept that those rights and freedoms that they keep preaching about themselves, to apply equally... to everyone. They ask that those rights apply equally to everyone regardless of if they agree with them or not, if for no reason other than the simple fact that everyone else tolerates certain things they do.