View Poll Results: Could you accept no government recognized marriages as a compromise?

Voters
79. You may not vote on this poll
  • I oppose SSM but could accept no government recognized marriage as a compromise.

    6 7.59%
  • I support SSM but could accept no government reconized marriage as a compromise

    24 30.38%
  • I oppose SSM It's a function of government to recognize legitimate marriages. No compromise.

    7 8.86%
  • I support SSM. It's a function of government to recognize legitimate marriages. No compromise.

    42 53.16%
Page 6 of 51 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 503

Thread: Same sex marriage compromise

  1. #51
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,105

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    there are a lot of legal issues that go along with marriage, such as property, end of life decisions, custody of children, litigation of divorce, etc. i don't see a way to remove government recognition.

    accept that as a compromise? no. i think it's more of a cop out. if heterosexuals can marry, homosexuals are guaranteed that right under the equal protection clause. if that's not socially acceptable, amending the clause is the solution, and it's a solution that i don't support.

    historically, this plays out like interracial marriage. let's hope the court recognizes this and doesn't punt.

  2. #52
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,574

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    The US Supreme Court is presently considering a ruling that could lift opposite gender requirements for marriage in the US. Most people have firm opinions on this matter but I'm curious could our positions on the subject leave room for a compromise all could accept. If your perspective on same sex marriage is not constitutionally validated, could you accept government not recognizing any marriage as a compromise, assuming of course this wouldn't necessarily be your preferred option?
    Why, in a fight, would someone possibly compromise with an opponent who is on the ropes and about to fall over dead? The gay haters are on the ropes. No one will be compromising with them. The time for that is over. Now is time to keep swinging and go for the gold. Equal rights for all citizens.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  3. #53
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,923

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    Why not? Keeping in mind, polyamory and polygamy are different.

    But then again, who says you have a right to tell them they can't have their rights because you have a problem with it? This is the point. You're simply setting a different bar for the same discrimination.



    I wouldn't deny them that ability. I would simply separate it from their relationship status.



    My point is that people should get a choice whether or not they want to do that. To make it part and parcel with the only way to easily get a non-family medical proxy, or childcare rights, is bribery.

    Having right A should not be contingent on whether you give up right B.



    If you want the same set of legal rights that a current marriage can give you, you can have that.

    I'm not proposing preventing anyone from doing that.
    I used polygamy because we are discussing marriage. Polyamory, I have no opinion. They might as well be single people living together. There is nothing for the government to say about people in a relationship without benefit of marriage.

    I guess I'm not in a position to hand out rights, but as a polygamy costs society, I might have some standing. More to the point, I didn't want it to be assumed I would support polygamy.

    You have not explained what it is that you cannot now have. I'm really confused about what it is that you want to separate from a person's relationship status.

    A person does have a choice not to give rights to their 401k. Don't marry. But the person who would put their partner through school or take a lesser paying position in order to support their spouse without marriage to protect their rights, is a fool. You haven't recognized that either. Doesn't the lesser earning spouse in a marriage deserve their portion?

    If you want the same set of legal rights that a current marriage can give you, you can have that.
    Ok, then. Again, what ability is it that you don't have that you want?

  4. #54
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    Although it is often brought up in debates, there is no way that government will get out of the marriage business. Heteros will never give up the ability to be legally married.
    It's the same really for anything the government does. Once they start doing something some one starts to feel a benefit and they will never agree to let it go.

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post
    Why, in a fight, would someone possibly compromise with an opponent who is on the ropes and about to fall over dead? The gay haters are on the ropes. No one will be compromising with them. The time for that is over. Now is time to keep swinging and go for the gold. Equal rights for all citizens.
    Wouldn't this do it faster though? Instead of just gays being allowed and everyone else still denied marriage this would allow anyone to be able to practice their right to marry whoever they want.

  6. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Gina View Post
    A person does have a choice not to give rights to their 401k. Don't marry. But the person who would put their partner through school or take a lesser paying position in order to support their spouse without marriage to protect their rights, is a fool. You haven't recognized that either. Doesn't the lesser earning spouse in a marriage deserve their portion?
    People make all sorts of choices on what they will do for those they love. Why do you need protected from your choices?

  7. #57
    Engineer

    RabidAlpaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    American in Europe
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    14,574

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Wouldn't this do it faster though? Instead of just gays being allowed and everyone else still denied marriage this would allow anyone to be able to practice their right to marry whoever they want.
    I don't think the government should have any role whatsoever in marriage. However, I oppose the reason for this compromise. No one in their right mind compromises with the losing party, they take their win and everything they can with it.

    If marriage really were to be decoupled from the state, yeah maybe, but it never will, and therefore **** compromise, it's time for equal rights.
    Quote Originally Posted by LowDown View Post
    I've got to say that it is shadenfreudalicious to see the rich and famous fucquewads on the coast suffering from the fires.

  8. #58
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    The US Supreme Court is presently considering a ruling that could lift opposite gender requirements for marriage in the US. Most people have firm opinions on this matter but I'm curious could our positions on the subject leave room for a compromise all could accept. If your perspective on same sex marriage is not constitutionally validated, could you accept government not recognizing any marriage as a compromise, assuming of course this wouldn't necessarily be your preferred option?
    This has always been my preferred solution to the issue of gay marriage. Separate the ceremonial/religious and legal aspects of marriage. Call the legal benefits a domestic partnership and give it to any adult couple who wants the benefits. Let churches define the spiritual side of marriage however they want. People can still get married if they want or if their religion demands it or whatever, but it will carry no legal weight.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  9. #59
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:13 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    31,923

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    That is not really the states concern. For example, there is no real need for the state to worry about changing the deed until such point the owners request it. At such point they handle it like any other deed transfer. Until such point its up to the people to decide and the state to wait. If however, they can't do such a thing then the state simply considers the property owned by both. It doesn't really make any sort of difference for the state in any real way.



    How? The claims would be the same and the conditions in front of them would be the same. What exactly makes it easier in this case?
    It is most certainly the state's concern because if the couple cannot dissolve the union amicably, they head to court. It is in the state's best interest to provide a contract to adjudicate the dissolution. One has to spend a great deal of time and money, as well as court time, in establishing what a marriage contract makes defacto.

    Establishment of paternity, and rights of each parent. I have two family members in this position. They are in relationships now, but having visited lawyers, if there is a fuss from the other parent, it becomes messy. Contracts exist to make disputes more easily settled.

  10. #60
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,199

    Re: Same sex marriage compromise

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    But it's still a deal where you don't get freedom about which rights go where, and you are required to give up certain rights in order to get others, for no readily apparent reason.

    And I am also just opposed to the general idea of government being able to issue romantic relationship officiators. You can argue a romantic relationship isn't strictly required, but there's no denying that's what it exists for.
    Sure...it's to deal with the reality that a vast majority of individuals decide to pair up and live a substantial amount of time together. There's no doubt about that. I personally just see it as the government reaction to what people tend to do. I have no problem with expanding those benefits to allow for different situation.

    There are just a lot of realities of what a "spouse" is in the law. It's not just someone making decisions but it's the whole idea that those two individuals are forming a life partnership. From financial to personel issues.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

Page 6 of 51 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •