6 ms·

Here are three reasons: 1. Rhetorical. They _want_ to be _married_. 2. In many places in the world, a "domestic partnership" is not recognized by everyone and

Here are three reasons: 1. Rhetorical. They _want_ to be _married_. 2. In many places in the world, a "domestic partnership" is not recognized by everyone and requires quite a bit more legal paperwork (and associated fees) than a simple marriage license and filing. (In the US, typically $2000-$20,000+ vs $20). 3. A simple demand for recognition. By being _married_, there is a legal recognition that a "domestic partnership" lacks.

nikolay 3y ago
[flagged]
- beej71 3y ago
  An additional reason for some people is equality. Apply the laws equally. It's like saying, "Two black people can't get married like two white people can; they can become domestic partners, though!" That notion is offensively unjust to a lot of people.
  - jesterson 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - dqv 3y ago
      I am really disappointed that you’re using such a childish argument against gay marriage. Cows (and to pre-empt the other tired argument) and children can’t consent. We’re talking about consenting adults getting married.
      - jesterson 3y ago
        [flagged]
        beej71 3y ago
        My friend, I fear you are a long way from the battlefront. > Following your logic, if 10 “consenting adults” would like to form a “marriage”, we should embrace that as well? You need to say something like "it's legal for 10 straight people to get married, but it's not legal for 10 gay people to get married." Then the extension would hold. But saying that no people can marry 10 people regardless of whether or not they're gay or straight, that's still equal under the law.
    - beej71 3y ago
      "Equality is a myth therefore it's OK to apply laws unevenly." Am I stating the argument correctly?
      - jesterson 3y ago
        [flagged]
        beej71 3y ago
        > You are just making things up. Ok, well, that's why I asked. > By law, marriage is between man and a woman. That’s it. This is not true in the US. My neighbors are the same sex and legally married. I know at least 3 same-sex married couples here and I don't even live in a big city. But if you're OK with that kind of discrimination, then you wouldn't have a problem if the law said only gay people could get married--but don't worry because straight people can get a domestic partnership. Yes? The problem with that is, of course, that we're not treating people equally under the law when we should. Sure, it was the case that that particular kind of discrimination was allowed, but we stopped doing that. We've stopped doing a lot of things that were discriminatory for a lot of reasons over the centuries. In my country, we're all Americans, and we should get the same marriage and domestic partnership rights, gay or straight. That said, I would like to hear how two people of the same sex getting married has personally affected you in a negative way. Is it because you feel the institution is lessened by allowing same-sex marriage, and so indirectly so is your marriage? Or something else?
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      Damn we're on that 1992 homophobia in here today huh.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- josephwegner 3y ago
  > traditional concept of marriage While it is correct that marriage has traditionally been a union of people of two different sexes, I think the root of the issue is that is not how many people perceive the tradition in reality. I, along with many people, view marriage as a union between _two people_ - regardless of gender. The fact that marriage has mostly always been across sexes is a side effect of centuries of homophobia/heteronormativity. So saying that marriage is meant for a man and a woman does not compute for me. Trying to enforce that is _taking away_ from my concept of marriage.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > why do we need to hijack the traditional concept of marriage? Its a legal institution and separate institutions in law are inherently unequal.
- 8note 3y ago
  There's no need for marriage to have any special treatment in the law. The best thing would be to legally annul all marriages and make people apply for domestic partnerships if they want rights similar to what marriages give today like hospital visitation
- jjulius 3y ago
  >... why do we need to hijack the traditional concept of marriage? What is it about such a change that you are opposed to? Why can't we question traditions and be comfortable with redefining them to better-fit shifting social norms as time marches on?
- mcphage 3y ago
  > People want many things that don't make sense. Right. For instance, you don't want gay people to be able to get married, and that doesn't make any sense.

nikolay 3y ago

[flagged]

beej71 3y ago
An additional reason for some people is equality. Apply the laws equally. It's like saying, "Two black people can't get married like two white people can; they can become domestic partners, though!" That notion is offensively unjust to a lot of people.
- jesterson 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - dqv 3y ago
    I am really disappointed that you’re using such a childish argument against gay marriage. Cows (and to pre-empt the other tired argument) and children can’t consent. We’re talking about consenting adults getting married.
    - jesterson 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - beej71 3y ago
        My friend, I fear you are a long way from the battlefront. > Following your logic, if 10 “consenting adults” would like to form a “marriage”, we should embrace that as well? You need to say something like "it's legal for 10 straight people to get married, but it's not legal for 10 gay people to get married." Then the extension would hold. But saying that no people can marry 10 people regardless of whether or not they're gay or straight, that's still equal under the law.
  - beej71 3y ago
    "Equality is a myth therefore it's OK to apply laws unevenly." Am I stating the argument correctly?
    - jesterson 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - beej71 3y ago
        > You are just making things up. Ok, well, that's why I asked. > By law, marriage is between man and a woman. That’s it. This is not true in the US. My neighbors are the same sex and legally married. I know at least 3 same-sex married couples here and I don't even live in a big city. But if you're OK with that kind of discrimination, then you wouldn't have a problem if the law said only gay people could get married--but don't worry because straight people can get a domestic partnership. Yes? The problem with that is, of course, that we're not treating people equally under the law when we should. Sure, it was the case that that particular kind of discrimination was allowed, but we stopped doing that. We've stopped doing a lot of things that were discriminatory for a lot of reasons over the centuries. In my country, we're all Americans, and we should get the same marriage and domestic partnership rights, gay or straight. That said, I would like to hear how two people of the same sex getting married has personally affected you in a negative way. Is it because you feel the institution is lessened by allowing same-sex marriage, and so indirectly so is your marriage? Or something else?
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    Damn we're on that 1992 homophobia in here today huh.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
josephwegner 3y ago
> traditional concept of marriage While it is correct that marriage has traditionally been a union of people of two different sexes, I think the root of the issue is that is not how many people perceive the tradition in reality. I, along with many people, view marriage as a union between _two people_ - regardless of gender. The fact that marriage has mostly always been across sexes is a side effect of centuries of homophobia/heteronormativity. So saying that marriage is meant for a man and a woman does not compute for me. Trying to enforce that is _taking away_ from my concept of marriage.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> why do we need to hijack the traditional concept of marriage? Its a legal institution and separate institutions in law are inherently unequal.
8note 3y ago
There's no need for marriage to have any special treatment in the law. The best thing would be to legally annul all marriages and make people apply for domestic partnerships if they want rights similar to what marriages give today like hospital visitation
jjulius 3y ago
>... why do we need to hijack the traditional concept of marriage? What is it about such a change that you are opposed to? Why can't we question traditions and be comfortable with redefining them to better-fit shifting social norms as time marches on?
mcphage 3y ago
> People want many things that don't make sense. Right. For instance, you don't want gay people to be able to get married, and that doesn't make any sense.