Gay marriage legal in NY

[Fitz66]

Mongo seems to be interested in my married life.  I'll gladly post a pic of me and my wife if he'd would like to compare and share his own.

Nice suggestion.  Maybe you two can be holding W-2's in the pic as well.

I'd almost forgotten about that.  Unlike Mongo, who likes to propose ideas to challenge someone and then puss out once they accept, I'll actually follow through. 

[ufojoe]

Would those be the same "various social reasons" straight couples get married for?

Couples (straight and gay) get married for a myriad of reasons including but not limited to...

Social pressures of fitting in. "Why haven't you two tied the knot after all these years?" Or, if they have kids,  "Isn't that a bad example for your children?"
Financial. Although I'm not sure it's that great of a benefit any more on the tax return.
Various benefits that we've discussed here plenty of times.
For the hell of it. I live in Vegas, the "for the hell of it" capital of the world.
To express their feelings for their partner in a public ceremony. To make it "official."
To make their spouse happy. "I'm fine with living in sin but if you want to get married, I'll do it for you."
Business agreement or arranged marriage.
To get the health insurance that their spouse has through their job. I'm sure straight and gay couples do this all the time.

I married my wife (three months after meeting her) for the benefits. Especially the green card that I knew she would get if we stayed together. Nine years later, we're still together and she doesn't have to worry about getting deported. I'm not one who needs to be married to prove my commitment to somebody and my wife is the same way. Neither of us wear rings. But for us,
it fit our needs at the time. So we did it.

[Morgan]

Health insurance and medical benefits as well as social security benefits as well.

Good post.

[dbucfan]

Pensions, estates, life insurance, buy one get one free... could do the same thing with a different name.... like the saying goes, when someone says it isn't about the money, it is about the money...

[ufojoe]

Pensions, estates, life insurance, buy one get one free... could do the same thing with a different name.... like the saying goes, when someone says it isn't about the money, it is about the money...

Yep. Maybe we should ban heterosexual marriage since, many times, they wed for the money.

[dbucfan]

Pensions, estates, life insurance, buy one get one free... could do the same thing with a different name.... like the saying goes, when someone says it isn't about the money, it is about the money...

Yep. Maybe we should ban heterosexual marriage since, many times, they wed for the money.

That can happen.  But point is marriage shouldn't be the basis of the determination.  A different term - that works for the "legal"/money issues would have resolved the differences without creating the constant conflict. 

[ufojoe]

Pensions, estates, life insurance, buy one get one free... could do the same thing with a different name.... like the saying goes, when someone says it isn't about the money, it is about the money...

Yep. Maybe we should ban heterosexual marriage since, many times, they wed for the money.

That can happen.  But point is marriage shouldn't be the basis of the determination.  A different term - that works for the "legal"/money issues would have resolved the differences without creating the constant conflict.

If the government is going to be in the marriage business,. then call it marriage for heterosexual and same sex unions. You don't call it something different just because one group of people
have a problem with it.

Five other states have had same sex marriage for some time now. Last I checked, no anarchy.

[dbucfan]

did you leave out some words joe, or am I having a comprehension issue -

1.  Get the government out of marriage
2.  Marriage would seem to be a religious ceremony, or at least it was until government found a way to make money off of it
3.  Having two different names for two different 'arrangements' is not an issue.
4.  Get the feds out of marriage - eliminate income tax differential.

Just thoughts that ran through a clouded mind.

[ufojoe]

did you leave out some words joe, or am I having a comprehension issue -

1.  Get the government out of marriage

I'm good with that but I don't think it's happening any time soon. So, all of my points assume that the government is going to be in the marriage biz for the foreseeable future.

2.  Marriage would seem to be a religious ceremony, or at least it was until government found a way to make money off of it

For a lot of people it IS a religious ceremony. For me, my marriage was courthouse all the way.

3.  Having two different names for two different 'arrangements' is not an issue.

Yeah but since we currently don't have two different arrangements, it's all called marriage whether it's done in a church or a courthouse. Like I said, if people want to
change that, I'm good with it. As long as the different name isn't based on whether or not it's a bride/groom, groom/groom or bride/bride.

Clearer?

[dbucfan]

Why is this an issue "As long as the different name isn't based on whether or not it's a bride/groom, groom/groom or bride/bride."

[CBWx2]

Why is this an issue "As long as the different name isn't based on whether or not it's a bride/groom, groom/groom or bride/bride."

Exactly. The toilets flushed the same in those "colored's only" bathrooms as they did in the "whites only" ones.

[dbucfan]

There are also Mens - Ladies - Family

[ufojoe]

Why is this an issue "As long as the different name isn't based on whether or not it's a bride/groom, groom/groom or bride/bride."

Exactly. The toilets flushed the same in those "colored's only" bathrooms as they did in the "whites only" ones.

Yep. That's why in the states that allow gay marriage, it's called marriage and not something else. So what if a few religious folks don't like it? Too bad. They'll have to learn to deal with it.

[John Galt?]

did you leave out some words joe, or am I having a comprehension issue -

1.  Get the government out of marriage

This should be in bold and all caps. I'm saying scream it from the roof tops.

2.  Marriage would seem to be a religious ceremony, or at least it was until government found a way to make money off of it

It absolutely was a religious ceremony for XX thousand years. But since the govt. found a way to make money off of it, they quickly forgot all about that pesky "separation of church and state".

3.  Having two different names for two different 'arrangements' is not an issue.

If the "arraignments" are different, then they should have different names to avoid confusion. Any two people entering into a domestic agreement in which they will have joint ownership, power of atty, shared custodial arrangements, shared benefits, etc. should have one name, if the agreement has different stipulations, then a different name. But the gender of the 2 parties should be irrelevant, just as it is in a LLC, or a partnership agreement, or a corporation, or an LLP, or any agreement involving the sharing of assets and power of atty.

4.  Get the feds out of marriage - eliminate income tax differential.

Again, all caps and bolded.

Just thoughts that ran through a clouded mind.

Good thoughts at that.
[/quote]

[dbucfan]

arigato...