I oppose SSM but could accept no government recognized marriage as a compromise.
I support SSM but could accept no government reconized marriage as a compromise
I oppose SSM It's a function of government to recognize legitimate marriages. No compromise.
I support SSM. It's a function of government to recognize legitimate marriages. No compromise.
2.) because there have been cases where marriage rights have been overturned by family when it came to property, money, kids etc etc that marriage is more successful against
3.) no, i want equality and history proves there is no such thing as equal but different LMAO
2. It's easier to dissolve than co-habitating.
3. What? No they don't in messy divorces. In order for a judge to properly dispense a settlement, they have to know when a relationship was established in order to determine the fair share each litigant is entitled. As in the example I was gave that you responded to. If spouse A agreed to put Spouse B through school with the understanding they would then share in the increased earning power of Spouse B and then is offered a settlement much less, it goes to court. If they aren't married, then A will have one whopper of a time establishing claim to those shared assets to the court (state).
4. No. The court will be forced to review the paper. I can't believe you are being this obtuse. Have you never had to or know someone who had to provide proof of ownership or share in property? The judge doesn't take your word for it. A marriage certificate cuts to the chase.
5. Marriage confers government benefits, in and of itself? Like the marriage penalty tax? Is that what you mean?
2.) its happened in many places whether you believe it or not I dont care because your biased is obvious.
Cant remember if it has specifically happened in Cali but again that is meaningless also. if its nationally not equal, its not equal.
BUT i promise when im less busy and i actually care about proving facts to you ill post the links, they are already here in multiple places including at lease two of my equal rights threads i started
3.) an argument that your opinion of inequality exists elsewhere is meaningless to the debate LMAO
also if they are different they are not equal LMAO