>> But really, any two people who wish to be
>> committed to each other should have the right to be recognized as
>> united without approval from the government.
So I can marry my sister, then?
How about my father?
-Ryan, trying and failing to stay out of this discussion.
--- In DMCForum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Lauren" <LPLand@xxxx> wrote:
>
> Frankly, I think the concept of civilly sanctioned unions is the
> problem here. That gays want the same rights as straights is a
> noble wish, but what I think is wrong is that there has to be some
> governmental approval of one's decision to *couple.* It sucks that
> benefits offered to (legally) married couples are denied couples that
> are not licensed like contractors or dentists or hairdressers. I can
> understand that gay coupling is newly out in the open, so it is taking
> a conservative approach to acceptance, and for that reason I am
> fully supportive. But really, any two people who wish to be
> committed to each other should have the right to be recognized as
> united without approval from the government.
>
> I was legally married only once. We decided mutually to divorce ,
> with absolutely no malice, actually as friends with a bond. But
> convincing the judge to grant us a decree of divorce was one of the
> most absurd charades I've ever been a part of. We knew we
> wanted the divorce, we knew we'd always be friends and raise our
> child as parents in common. We had already divided our property to
> our mutual satisfaction. But the judge gave us so much shit just
> because he could! Never, never again will I put myself in that
> position. It's a pity that gays, the homeless, or any two people who
> want to be life partners have to be subject to governmental
> sanction.
>
> ...................LP
>
>
>
>
> > It's not only about gay rights! I was reading the paper last week
> > about Civil Union and it happens that most of the couples that took
> > advantage of the Union in NY were heterosexual couples, only 30% were
> > same-sex couples. These were homeless people who paid a $36 fee and
> > after the domestic partnership was granted, as they were people that
> > need city shelter, instead of being placed in dorms, they can get an
> > apartment with private bathrooms, much better, huh? Yeah, maybe it is
> > taking advantage of the system, but what the heck? What's the matter
> > with gays and non-gay couples having similar rights? I already have my
> > rights, let the gays fight for theirs!
> >
Back to the Home of PROJECT VIXEN