I said it that way because I read about it years ago and thus don't have a citation handy for it. I also can't find it right now via various google searches. The problem is that in cases like hospital visitation there are facilities with a history of stonewalling non-relatives, paperwork or not, unless they were rendered 'a relative' by marriage. Now, I know this opens the hospital up for lawsuits, but which would you rather have - visiting your dying loved one, or a lawsuit for being denied said visitation?
Ergo, $500/hour lawyer or not, in some ways the marriage certificate was more powerful than the contracts. Easier certainly, you just need to haul 1 sheet of paper, not dozens. The problem with filling out the free forms is that they're more likely to be challenged than ones drawn up or at least reviewed by a competent lawyer.
Hospitals have a long history of violating the wishes of their patients gay and straight, that's a hospital problem not one relevant to this discussion.
As for 'talking points from the DNC', that's outright unfair, as I have nothing to do with them. I've come to my own beliefs by myself, thank you very much. Get onto some different topics and I'm right with you guys.
So you decided that anyone who opposes gay marriage is just a homo-hating neo-Bull Connor all by yourself? I actually respect that less than if you were just parroting the talking points. I also note who eager you are to central plan the economy, as long as it's being done your way.
As for everybody being treated 'equally', I'm going to go right back to racism. Because I see your argument as the same whether you say 'opposite sex' or 'different race'. Equal protection, right? But is it equal protection when Susie can marry John but not Wanda, but John can marry Wanda?
There is no difference between people of different colors. There is a difference between men and women. Either you're the racist and think skin color is a valid difference, or you have some weird views on biology
Close relatives marrying - a sticky widget indeed, especially if the 'couple' is an obviously non-reproductive one so you can't argue 'health of the children!'.
Why is that a problem for you? They're consenting adults, who are you to judge who they choose to have sex with? Get out oft heir bedroom! Stop being just like a racist!
I understand that many people think that homosexuality is wrong based on their religious documents. I'll respond that our interpretation of them alters over time. Most Catholics use birth control at some point in their lives despite mandates of their church. The Bible has been used to both condone and condemn slavery. The Koran to variously sentence rapists to death or to stone the woman who was raped.
You don't like religion, check. I suppose that's an insight into why you view "slightly different paperwork" as a horrific affront to basic human rights, but "squashes religious liberty" as not worth considering.
I'm not arguing that churches be forced to conduct gay marriages.
That's why they call them "unintended" consequences.
But you should already know that there are various sects of various major religions that are perfectly willing to recognize the marriages, and THAT turns opposing gay marriage into a religious fight. One could say supporting it as well, but how many gays want to get married for the mostly non-religious 'married' part, to include benefits and tax advantages compared with people who oppose it for non-religious purposes?
This is a jumbled cluster of nonsense that's not worth responding to.
For the record I support SSM but also support the ability of religions and small businesses* to not support it.
Oh, and my commander is not only gay, but gay married. His spouse enjoys an increasing number of benefits that an opposite sex spouse has traditionally received for decades, but he fulfills the same 'duties'**, so doesn't he deserve the same benefits?
*I handle large corporations different than small family owned businesses with the viewpoint that you can avoid the latter, but the former is much more difficult.
**Key spouse membership, various functions, political stuff.
You'll get the first, but not the second.
