Legal marriage is in no way necessary to anyone. It didn't even exist in America until about 150 years ago... when the government decided it needed some way to deny black people the right to marry.
And here we get to the problem.
Attached to legal marriage are a host of basic things, including the ability to see your own partner, your ability to raise your children, and your ability to assign your own property and rights as you wish.
Because all of these fundamental things are attached to legal marriage, legal marriage becomes a rights issue.
However, I find it abominable that we have allowed the government to have this degree of control over our love lives. I believe that legal marriage needs to be either completely abandoned (returning marriage to its social/community roots), or it is needs to have all legal contingencies stripped away from it and be purely a title designation for official purposes. There is no reason other non-contingent legal arrangements cannot be used to decide court cases, as they are in other family relationships, and in common-law married cases (i.e., not married, but living as a family unit for a long time). Alternatively, there is no reason people can't assign their own legal rights as they please.
The government implemented legal marriage with the sole intention of being able to destroy the families of oppressed people. And it is still doing it to this day. It has no right to exist.
Last edited by SmokeAndMirrors; 05-02-15 at 03:10 PM.
In the US the right to vote is not in your constitution?
In Canada before the Charter there was no explicit right to vote- after the Charter it was guaranteed.
Section Three of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a section that constitutionally guarantees all Canadian citizens the democratic right to vote in a general federal or provincial election and the right to be eligible for membership in the House of Commons or of a provincial legislative assembly.
Section 3 is one of the provisions in the Charter that cannot be overridden by Parliament or a legislative assembly under Section 33 of the Charter, the notwithstanding clause. Section 3's exemption from Section 33 provides extra legal protection to the right to vote and it may prevent Parliament or the provincial governments from disenfranchising any Canadian citizen for ideological or political purposes, among others. Nevertheless, the right to vote and to run in an election is subject to other reasonable limits prescribed by law under Section 1 of the Charter.
voting in constitutional law was placed in the hands of the states, and a person must meet the qualifications the state sets.
however when a state grants privileges [vote] it must grant them to all the people equally.....but this as not always been so.
I am the President see me smile
Equality under the law is a human right, so indirectly, yes.
If the govenment sanctions two adults being 'married' with all the benefits it entails, they have no right to determine what the gender of those two people are, in my opinion.
I am the President see me smile