• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

**BREAKING** U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Rule on Gay Marriage

Deuce said:
Not impossible. Harder, lengthier, more expensive, and not as bulletproof in court. Nobody said impossible. Why did you bring up impossible?

edit: But hey, you want something impossible? Sure. Spousal privilege in a criminal trial.
Click to expand...
I suggest you go back and read the posts I was responding to.
 
Deuce said:
National defense doesn't "need" to be done by the government either. But government is better at it than you are.
Click to expand...
So government is better at everything, is that your argument? That government may be better at X does not make it better at Y. Your argument is completely fallacious. It was government that has prohibited gay men and women from obtaining its created marriage license. Let's not forget that.
 
WorldWatcher said:
I'm asking what other documents establish a legal next of kin relationship with the same scope currently existing for a $35.00 marriage license that is recognized and enforceable in all 50 states?
Click to expand...
A simple contract establishing next of kin would suffice. Typically that is a very small part of a larger will.
 
roguenuke said:
All legal kinship recognition comes from the government because the government handles legal matters, which is where such recognition actually occurs. No legal kinship is done through anything but the government.
Click to expand...
Of course the recognition comes from the government. I never argued otherwise, and I even explicitly stated that in my post. Reread what I wrote:

Why does the documentation have to come from the government? Government recognizes and enforces private contracts as well. Legal kinship could easily be recognized through private contracts. Nothing needs to be issued from the government.

My point, which was very clear, is that government recognizes documentation that it does not itself create or issue. Government very easily can recognize legal kinship through a private contract. It does all the time in something called a will.
 
roguenuke said:
Legal kinship requires some sort of government recognized documentation to exist. You need a marriage license to be recognized as someone's legal spouse, just as you need a birth certificate or official adoption record or court order (all from the government) to be recognized as any other legal kin (connections made somewhat like that linking the actors via roles game).
Click to expand...
See post #704. You are responding to a strawman of your creation.
 
Lursa said:
Sorry. It didnt seem relevant to the thread without my pointing it out but I didn't see the previous posts for context.
Click to expand...
No worries. At least in my opinion, it is relevant because a lot of people have this idea that without government issuing marriage licenses we would lose the rights that come with marriage or that private contracts couldn't be good enough. That irks me, because government created the marriage license to discriminate and deny certain couples rights in the first place.

Unfortunately a lot of bigots have jumped onto "there should just be no marriage licenses at all" bandwagon as a cover for their homophobia. I personally favor same-sex marriage because it is the best realistic solution. Idealistically I prefer that government doesn't get into social affairs with licenses and the like at all, but that isn't going to happen as far as I can see.
 
SENSIBLE PATRIO said:
Lets take a vote and see, and no one can see who voted how. You will lose.
Click to expand...

A vote would still only give you an opinion from a single point in time. What happens the day after when people grow old enough to vote or die, so they can no longer cast their vote, and that public opinion changes? In most states, you have to wait at least another year for a new vote to be taken. That is why voting on this type of thing alone is worthless. People change, who can vote, who's alive to vote, and their beliefs/opinions in general.

We live in a constitutional republic, not a direct democracy. In fact, it goes against the US Constitution for the people to vote on a national level for any laws.
 
SENSIBLE PATRIO said:
so by your own admission people can marry anyone or anything they want, as many as they want right, because that is what it sounds like. So incest marriage is ok, and marrying animals is ok, and I can have as many as I want, what about pedophiles, and children can they get married if the child consents.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Marriage is a legal contract, meaning that it still can be limited, when those limits further a legitimate state interest. Animals cannot enter into any legal contract, nor are they ever recognized as legal kin of anyone. Pedophiles can get married, just not to children because children cannot enter into legal contracts. There is a legitimate state interest furthered in preventing children from getting married period, but also in not allowing them to enter into marriages with adults especially. Polygamy requires some adjustment given the laws of marriage but I am for it if these are taken care of. I don't care either way about incest and actually think we need to at least allow first cousins and further out to marry legally in all states.
 
Jack Hays said:
You'll have to back that up. I don't believe it's true. It was so "unprevalent" as to be nonexistent.
Click to expand...

Wrong. It existed in several places, including the Roman Empire, China, Egypt, several native American tribes and others.
 
Jack Hays said:
Technology is only part of the answer.
Click to expand...

Technology and the younger generation seeing the similarities that do exist between the gay rights movement and the civil rights movement of the past, not to mention simply knowing people who are gay. The most influential one though is technology when it comes to the speed of the acceptance. Knowledge is power.
 
Jack Hays said:
There has, as well, been a sea change in attitudes going back to before the tech revolution. I think the critical element was the realization that being gay is not a choice.
Click to expand...

Even if it was a choice, it wouldn't matter. There are plenty of people who still don't recognize it as not being a choice and plenty who would still support it if it was a choice. I personally support it no matter if it is a choice or not because it should be a choice people are allowed to make.
 
Lakryte said:
Of course the recognition comes from the government. I never argued otherwise, and I even explicitly stated that in my post. Reread what I wrote:

Why does the documentation have to come from the government? Government recognizes and enforces private contracts as well. Legal kinship could easily be recognized through private contracts. Nothing needs to be issued from the government.

My point, which was very clear, is that government recognizes documentation that it does not itself create or issue. Government very easily can recognize legal kinship through a private contract. It does all the time in something called a will.
Click to expand...

Because it is cheaper and more efficient for it to come from the government. I do not want to have to pay some lawyer thousands of dollars in fees for paperwork that says the same thing that I can pay the government $30 for, when the government is going to want to see proof of all that paperwork anyway. If they are giving the paperwork to me to fill out, sign and return to them, then they file away and have a record of for a low fee, plus I have my own copy with that same fee (or additional for a bit more), then it is more efficient for everyone. This is the one thing that I can think of when it comes to paperwork that the government does more efficiently than any private contracts could do.

A will is not a declaration of kinship at all. Just because I want my best friend or roommate to have some of my possessions, or all of them, doesn't mean I want them to make certain decisions for me.
 
Jack Hays said:
My point was that Loving cannot stand as a precedent in the gay marriage discussion because Loving was about access to an established social convention and the gay marriage discussion has been about whether a new social convention should be established. That question has been answered in the affirmative. Your points about bigamy, polygamy, etc. are logical. I expect to see those discussions begin after the gay marriage dust has settled.
Click to expand...

Loving was about access to marriage by certain types of couples, the same as same sex marriage cases are.
 
roguenuke said:
Technology and the younger generation seeing the similarities that do exist between the gay rights movement and the civil rights movement of the past, not to mention simply knowing people who are gay. The most influential one though is technology when it comes to the speed of the acceptance. Knowledge is power.
Click to expand...


I think it was more that gays came out.
 
roguenuke said:
Even if it was a choice, it wouldn't matter. There are plenty of people who still don't recognize it as not being a choice and plenty who would still support it if it was a choice. I personally support it no matter if it is a choice or not because it should be a choice people are allowed to make.
Click to expand...

Fine, but beside the point. Realization that it's not a choice, but like race is something you're born with, made it politically potent and enabled the civil rights analogy.
 
roguenuke said:
Because it is cheaper and more efficient for it to come from the government. I do not want to have to pay some lawyer thousands of dollars in fees for paperwork that says the same thing that I can pay the government $30 for, when the government is going to want to see proof of all that paperwork anyway. If they are giving the paperwork to me to fill out, sign and return to them, then they file away and have a record of for a low fee, plus I have my own copy with that same fee (or additional for a bit more), then it is more efficient for everyone. This is the one thing that I can think of when it comes to paperwork that the government does more efficiently than any private contracts could do.

A will is not a declaration of kinship at all. Just because I want my best friend or roommate to have some of my possessions, or all of them, doesn't mean I want them to make certain decisions for me.
Click to expand...
It is not cheaper, nor is it more efficient, for it to come from that government. That is the false assumption you are basing your entire opinion on.

You don't have to pay a lawyer thousands of dollars in fees to create a government recognized contract that establishes next of kin. In some counties here in CA a marriage license costs $100, so your $30 figure isn't even accurate for everyone either. As to your last point, if you don't want your friend to be next of kin, don't assign him as such in your will.

In the UK, you can establish anyone you want to be next of kin. If you don't trust your family, you are not forced to be at their whims and can have a close friend be your next of kin. Here in the U.S. the fact you cannot do that only further proves the point that government is inept. Government restrictions on private contracts making them less efficient is a problem with government, not private contracts.
 
Lakryte said:
You don't have to pay a lawyer thousands of dollars in fees to create a government recognized contract that establishes next of kin. In some counties here in CA a marriage license costs $100, so your $30 figure isn't even accurate for everyone either. As to your last point, if you don't want your friend to be next of kin, don't assign him as such in your will.
Click to expand...

1. Where I live the cost for a Marriage License is in fact $30. (Marriage Licenses)

2. A Will does not create a legal "next of kin" relationship. A "next of kin" relationship establishes a defined legal relationship that exists during life (spouse in the case of marriage, child in the case of adoption) and on into death. A Will only establishes two things: (a) the estates executor, and (b) beneficiaries of estate assets after death. Two different things.



>>>>
 
WorldWatcher said:
1. Where I live the cost for a Marriage License is in fact $30. (Marriage Licenses)
Click to expand...
That's not true everywhere, which was my point. I never denied that somewhere it costs $30, so your point is moot.

2. A Will does not create a legal "next of kin" relationship. A "next of kin" relationship establishes a defined legal relationship that exists during life (spouse in the case of marriage, child in the case of adoption) and on into death. A Will only establishes two things: (a) the estates executor, and (b) beneficiaries of estate assets after death. Two different things.
Click to expand...
A will very much can establish a next of kin relationship. Next of kin relationships also matter after death (for example, the administrator of the estate). Inheritance automatically goes to next of kind, unless the will states otherwise.

For a living next of kin relationship (such as in the event of entering a vegetative state) that would be even easier. Just say "I hereby appoint so-and-so as my next of kin" and have both parties sign. Simple as that. That would encompass any law or policy that requires a next of kin. In the United Kingdom, the process is similar to that.
 
Lakryte said:
A will very much can establish a next of kin relationship. Next of kin relationships also matter after death (for example, the administrator of the estate). Inheritance automatically goes to next of kind, unless the will states otherwise.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't. You are incorrect. A Will establishes beneficiaries, not next of kin. A couple of examples:

1. A spouse is the default next of kin in all states. If the spouse passes that relationship means that under tax code that person inherits the estate with no taxes. On the other hand a beneficiary that is not the spouse may receive the proceeds of the estate but will be subject to Estate Taxes if the value of the estate exceeds certain dollar amounts. The "Will" cannot change that.

2. A single person purchases a house. A married couple purchases a house. After occupying the house for X years the house is sold. The single person can claim a $250,000 exemption on any profit on the sale of the home. The married couple can claim $500,000 (since there are two people) on any profit on the sale of the home. However for the married couple, if one spouse dies and within two years from the date of death the other spouse sells the home, (s)he can still claim the $500,000 exemption on profit from the sale even though (s)he is legally single. The "Will" cannot change that.​


Lakryte said:
For a living next of kin relationship (such as in the event of entering a vegetative state) that would be even easier. Just say "I hereby appoint so-and-so as my next of kin" and have both parties sign. Simple as that. That would encompass any law or policy that requires a next of kin. In the United Kingdom, the process is similar to that.
Click to expand...


1. I don't think you understand what being in a vegetative state means. If there is an accident resulting in a person being in a vegatitive state they are not going to have the capacity to just say "I hereby appoint so-and-so as my next of kin".

2. Now I highly recommend that married couples backup state law with a Medical Power of Attorney/Living Will (as my wife and I have done) so there are no disputes as to who makes the decision in the event of an accident. Each state is going to establish in their Statutes an order of presidency for next of kin in the absence of such for declarations for a variety of purposes such as beneficiary, medical decision making, funeral arrangements, estate disposition, etc. Typically the order follows along the lines of Spouse, Parent, Sibling, Grandparent, Cousin, etc.

3. This isn't the United Kingdom, this is the United States where the laws can vary significantly from State to State.


>>>>
 
roguenuke said:
Loving was about access to marriage by certain types of couples, the same as same sex marriage cases are.
Click to expand...

After the "Loving" case, was there some consensus that now gay marriage was also unquestioned? I missed it. And before "Loving" marriage was only between a man and a woman. After "Loving", it was between... a man... and... a woman. Oh, no change. So that applies to gays how again?

Jeez, what happened? I'll tell you what happened. "Loving" did not change marriage at all. It just enforced the Constitution and amendments that forbid racial discrimination. You know what it said about gays? Nothing.

So, why don't we just make this gay marriage thing ironclad? Why isn't there even the slightest push for a Constitutional amendment? I would support it 100% if that was done. So, why not? Why beat around the bush with all these court cases and votes? I'd really like to hear an answer on that one.
 
WorldWatcher said:
No it doesn't. You are incorrect. A Will establishes beneficiaries, not next of kin. A couple of examples:
1. A spouse is the default next of kin in all states. If the spouse passes that relationship means that under tax code that person inherits the estate with no taxes. On the other hand a beneficiary that is not the spouse may receive the proceeds of the estate but will be subject to Estate Taxes if the value of the estate exceeds certain dollar amounts. The "Will" cannot change that.

2. A single person purchases a house. A married couple purchases a house. After occupying the house for X years the house is sold. The single person can claim a $250,000 exemption on any profit on the sale of the home. The married couple can claim $500,000 (since there are two people) on any profit on the sale of the home. However for the married couple, if one spouse dies and within two years from the date of death the other spouse sells the home, (s)he can still claim the $500,000 exemption on profit from the sale even though (s)he is legally single. The "Will" cannot change that.​
Click to expand...
You are incorrect. A will can establish next of kin, insofar as next of kin is relevant to post-death decisions and legalities. A will does not merely say who gets what. Your two points are totally irrelevant to the point I am making, suggesting you do not understand it.



1. I don't think you understand what being in a vegetative state means. If there is an accident resulting in a person being in a vegatitive state they are not going to have the capacity to just say "I hereby appoint so-and-so as my next of kin".[/quote]
No sh*t you can't do that in a vegetative state. That's why you establish the next of kin agreement before something like that happens. The above argument is as idiotic as saying "you can't write a will if you are dead, therefore wills are useless."

2. Now I highly recommend that married couples backup state law with a Medical Power of Attorney/Living Will (as my wife and I have done) so there are no disputes as to who makes the decision in the event of an accident. Each state is going to establish in their Statutes an order of presidency for next of kin in the absence of such for declarations for a variety of purposes such as beneficiary, medical decision making, funeral arrangements, estate disposition, etc. Typically the order follows along the lines of Spouse, Parent, Sibling, Grandparent, Cousin, etc.
Click to expand...
Again, you state the obvious, which in no way refutes what I wrote.

3. This isn't the United Kingdom, this is the United States where the laws can vary significantly from State to State.
Click to expand...
When talking about the best policy, saying "well, it varies by state" is not a refutation of the policy. Remember what my argument is: a marriage license is not required to establish a next of kin relationship, nor is it the best way of doing so. A simple contract can do just that. Just say "I hereby appoint so-and-so as my next of kin" and have both parties sign. Done.

I brought up the UK as an example of a country that has a policy with aspects I find superior to the U.S. Perhaps you think we should ignore policies that work in other countries because 'Murka, but I do not find such arrogance rational.
 
Jack Hays said:
Not buying it.
Click to expand...

Who cares if you "buy" it or not. It is part of history. Just because you don't want to believe people doesn't mean it didn't happen. Is it possible that it didn't? Sure. But there are reports of same sex marriage so it is no less believable than many other things that we have reports of happening in the past, including stand in marriages (someone else taking one of the spouses' places for the wedding/marriage for whatever reason, agreeing in their place and taking on their responsibilities as a spouse for as long as needed) or a woman with multiple husbands (only reported in maybe one culture in history).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom