Where exactly do I stand on gay marriage?
Oct. 6th, 2014 05:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
justalurkrOnce I explained the history of my stance on gay marriage, people I work with found my glee odder/less appropriate. :D
First: I don't actually believe marriage is a particularly good idea for anyone. Getting into it and out of it can both be very expensive and at the same time, all too easy for me to put any stock in matrimonial "sanctity." For people who cannot possibly exist another moment without entangling themselves with another human being in this manner, what difference does gender really make?
Second: Since (a) Canada approved it to hold a rich lesbian fiscally responsible for her all but indigent ex who would no questions asked have been her responsibility under common law and (b) a good friend got screwed out of about $20k on a house because his name wasn't on the deed and he couldn't legally wed, then divorce, his ex, I've felt pretty strongly about the responsibilities associated with marriage as much as the rights and don't see why a segment of the population should be able to ditch them.
Third: Back in the days when I didn't think I'd live long enough to (a) see anyone in the White House who wasn't a rich old White dude or (b) anyone taking the idea of gay marriage seriously, I told a net-pal that the best way to handle this, given that we're a nation with a separation of Church and State, was to take the State out of the business of marriage for anyone, and just allow it to issue civil togetherness licenses or something, thus leaving marriage to religious institutions who were, frankly, there first.
"No," she replied. "It's got to be marriage."
"But," says I, "no governing body of the United States will ever be able to force a religious institution to officiate."
"Doesn't matter," says she. "Marriage or nothin."
So, while I was never that invested in legalizing something called gay or same-sex marriage, I've been all about sharing the legal rights and responsibilities around evenly since at least the early 90s. I can understand why some religiously (and otherwise) conservative people have a problem with marriage and was will to meet them half way with a name change, which is why I feel a little guilty at all the schadenfreude I'm experiencing over States that banned it being pretty much the first ones that must perform it.
There went more of my liberal cred, eh?
First: I don't actually believe marriage is a particularly good idea for anyone. Getting into it and out of it can both be very expensive and at the same time, all too easy for me to put any stock in matrimonial "sanctity." For people who cannot possibly exist another moment without entangling themselves with another human being in this manner, what difference does gender really make?
Second: Since (a) Canada approved it to hold a rich lesbian fiscally responsible for her all but indigent ex who would no questions asked have been her responsibility under common law and (b) a good friend got screwed out of about $20k on a house because his name wasn't on the deed and he couldn't legally wed, then divorce, his ex, I've felt pretty strongly about the responsibilities associated with marriage as much as the rights and don't see why a segment of the population should be able to ditch them.
Third: Back in the days when I didn't think I'd live long enough to (a) see anyone in the White House who wasn't a rich old White dude or (b) anyone taking the idea of gay marriage seriously, I told a net-pal that the best way to handle this, given that we're a nation with a separation of Church and State, was to take the State out of the business of marriage for anyone, and just allow it to issue civil togetherness licenses or something, thus leaving marriage to religious institutions who were, frankly, there first.
"No," she replied. "It's got to be marriage."
"But," says I, "no governing body of the United States will ever be able to force a religious institution to officiate."
"Doesn't matter," says she. "Marriage or nothin."
So, while I was never that invested in legalizing something called gay or same-sex marriage, I've been all about sharing the legal rights and responsibilities around evenly since at least the early 90s. I can understand why some religiously (and otherwise) conservative people have a problem with marriage and was will to meet them half way with a name change, which is why I feel a little guilty at all the schadenfreude I'm experiencing over States that banned it being pretty much the first ones that must perform it.
There went more of my liberal cred, eh?
