Tentacruel Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 As you know, gay marriage is a hot topic here in the US. People are going crazy arguing on whether it should be legal or illegal. My opinion? Neither. This also applies to straight marriage. You can get "married" if you want, but the government has no hand in it. You can, however, register as a "union," for legal purposes if you wish. The point of this is compromise. Stuff gets done and everyone wins. I am being serious by the way, but keep in mind this is just for the purpose of a friendly discussion, there are probably tons of problems with this idea. Discuss my crazy idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Starrk Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 This isn't a crazy Idea. I'm pretty sure many people do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 Does a "unionized" couple get the status of a "married" couple? I understand that the benefits all fully transfer, but you are missing the inherent point that homosexual couples are not treated as equals to heterosexuals couples when they [i]are, in fact, equal[/i]. A better solution is to make "marriage" completely controlled by the government, benefits and status, but make marriage [i]ceremonies[/i] completely controlled by religion. It's the only fair balance I see, and the government has no right to stop priests from being ignorant bigots who discriminate against homosexuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted August 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 Eww, no. Why intertwine religion and government at all? Besides, with my random plan, heterosexuals would also be stuck with being "unionized" as well. Marriage ceremonies would be, non-canon, so-to-speak, in legal terms. People who still wanted to have them could do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 Again, you are missing the point. Most priests of most religions are inherently biased towards heterosexual couples, meaning the title of "marriage" will only be granted to heterosexual couples... pretty much devolving your entire plan into exactly what it is right now - homosexuals being allowed civil unions with the same benefits as heterosexuals, but missing out on the status of marriage. With my plan, the point is that homosexuals and heterosexuals are completely and entirely equal in every way possible. They both are allowed to have the benefits imposed by being a "unionized" or "married" couple, and they are both allowed to have the title of a "married couple", which holds a different connotation in society than a "unionized couple", obviously. The difference is that priests, people who are biased and the government can't force to not be biased, have no say in anything regarding the benefits of marriage or the actual marriage process. The way I see it, marriage is just signing a piece of paper just like a civil union, although the former implies a "married" status rather than a "unionized" status. Priests have no say in the entire process, making it completely unbiased and completely fair. What priests do have complete control over, however, is a marriage ceremony. I'd dare to say that a lot of homosexuals probably aren't too religious anyways (considering their religion indirectly states they are going to hell), so many of them don't care if they aren't allowed to have a ceremony - and to be fair, priests can reject [i]anyone[/i] the right to a ceremony, they [i]are[/i] the ones providing the service. This keeps things at a balance - religion is allowed to influence an insignificant and useless portion of "marriage", while government fairly distributes the rest. Secularism at its finest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted August 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 I'm sure there are plenty of priests who would be willing to do ceremonies for homosexual couples. Besides, with my new system, marriage is just a concept anyway. Who says you need a priest at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 Okay, so you haven't explained your system too well. Who is in charge of whether someone gets "married" or not? The government is obviously in charge of so-called "unionization", so someone needs to be deciding marriage. And if it isn't a priest... who has that right? If the government does, why not just bundle civil unions and marriage together? Keep the status of a "married" couple and have the rights of a unionized one. If no one is in charge of marriage... what's the point? Marriage at that point devolves into a useless institution because anybody can get married without a priest - meaning that anyone can bear the "married" status, and unions are open to everyone which provide the current rights of a "married" couple. Bundling the "married" status and the rights of a civil union into one governmental package is the most logical way to go, and priests can deal with the formalities of ceremonies by themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine Jesse Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 I do not believe marriage should be encouraged by the government, therefore there should be no bonuses to it at least imo this includes civil unions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vough Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 [quote name='Nightmare Zarkus' timestamp='1314341879' post='5469870'] I do not believe marriage should be encouraged by the government, therefore there should be no bonuses to it at least imo this includes civil unions [/quote] Marriage has bonuses for actual reasons, you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 [i]I do not believe marriage should be encouraged by the government, therefore there should be no bonuses to it[/i] Uh... so someone's spouse [i]shouldn't[/i] get land entitlements should their partner die, and they [i]shouldn't[/i] get automatic custody of an adopted kid should their partner die? http://people.howstuffworks.com/marriage1.htm Are you saying that couples should not get any of those benefits whatsoever, neither when in a marriage nor in a civil union? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted August 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 Yeesh, I was also about to suggest doing away with benefits, but that would be a bad idea obviously. Anyway, "marriage" would be useless, except for religious purposes. That's the point. No one would have any reason to complain anymore. (People would complain anyway, but you get the idea.) I never said my idea was perfect, it was just to generate some discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 [i]except for religious purposes[/i] So again, who is in charge of the institution of marriage? If I want to get married, where do I go to do such a thing? I obviously go to the government to get a piece of paper to sign and - bam! - I'm in a civil union. But where do I go and what do I do for a marriage in your plan? I can't say anything about your plan [i]unless and until[/i] you specify those two things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted August 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 Hmm... >__> I see your point. In ideal circumstances, I suppose simply declaring you're married to a person would suffice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 [quote name='Tentacruel' timestamp='1314374557' post='5470327'] Hmm... >__> I see your point. In ideal circumstances, I suppose simply declaring you're married to a person would suffice. [/quote] ... Then marriage is not religious at all. So we might as well get rid of civil unions entirely, make marriage the new civil union in terms of married status and union benefits, and make everything regulated by the government and fair to both homosexual and heterosexual couples. And then we can leave optional ceremonies up to priests. [i]Which is what I have been saying all along.[/i] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunshine Jesse Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 [quote name='Dark' timestamp='1314368324' post='5470197'] [i]I do not believe marriage should be encouraged by the government, therefore there should be no bonuses to it[/i] Uh... so someone's spouse [i]shouldn't[/i] get land entitlements should their partner die, and they [i]shouldn't[/i] get automatic custody of an adopted kid should their partner die? [url="http://people.howstuffworks.com/marriage1.htm"]http://people.howstu...m/marriage1.htm[/url] Are you saying that couples should not get any of those benefits whatsoever, neither when in a marriage nor in a civil union? [/quote] Could just be settled in court but with how unsuccessful marriages tend to be, I don't think there should be any reason to marry other than love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tentacruel Posted August 26, 2011 Author Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 [quote name='Dark' timestamp='1314376132' post='5470374'] ... Then marriage is not religious at all. So we might as well get rid of civil unions entirely, make marriage the new civil union in terms of married status and union benefits, and make everything regulated by the government and fair to both homosexual and heterosexual couples. And then we can leave optional ceremonies up to priests. [i]Which is what I have been saying all along.[/i] [/quote] Oh, I think I get it now. That's quite a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Revan of the Sith Posted August 26, 2011 Report Share Posted August 26, 2011 I got an idea... Lets abolish Marriage forever... I hate it, my GF hates it, and I find it pointless and stupid... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 [quote name='Anthony Hatsune' timestamp='1314396172' post='5471012'] I got an idea... Lets abolish Marriage forever... I hate it, my GF hates it, and I find it pointless and stupid... [/quote] I got an idea... let's prevent you from posting ever again. I hate your posts, my girlfriend hates your posts, and I find them pointless and illogical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tourmaline Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 [quote name='Dark' timestamp='1314409856' post='5471493'] I got an idea... let's prevent you from posting ever again. I hate your posts, my girlfriend hates your posts, and I find them pointless and illogical. [/quote] No need be offensive using a satirical direction. I believe a wedding between a couple of any sexual orientation should not be discriminated against by the government. Though, to myself, the government should be as equalitarian as possible. A more libertarian (specifically left) view would please me more than any discrimination. The marriage itself, I think, should be allowed to all, according to the government. A priest, for example, should only have control over explicitly religious aspects of a marriage. Said aspects include the ceremony, as Dark has stated. It really is simple, as he's already done enough elaboration. Moreso because I agree with him for the most part, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ieyasu Tokugawa Posted August 27, 2011 Report Share Posted August 27, 2011 [quote name='Dark' timestamp='1314409856' post='5471493'] I got an idea... let's prevent you from posting ever again. I hate your posts, my girlfriend hates your posts, and I find them pointless and illogical. [/quote] Holy sh*t! You have a girlfriend!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.