There's a lot of ridiculous arguments here, but I'll focus on just one of them...
Legolas Send a noteboard - 11/08/2010 03:38:05 PM
Exactly. Given all the financial and legal benefits to such arrangements, it opens the door for massive amounts of fraud to cost people and the public. At least with such marriages for different sexes, there is a long-standing tradition backing up marriage that would curtail the freedom of such persons to participate in a normal relationship. With same-sex marriage, a piece of paper that creates a legal fiction of a partnership between two such people, there is no traditional or cultural impediment to each of them carrying on with the partner of his or her choice, and meanwhile transferring funds to avoid taxes, protecting coversations and transactions from testimony, gaining otherwise unauthorized residential or employment benefits and so on.
Considering that such an abuse of marriage is not a serious problem now (except perhaps in matters of immigration), it's rather unclear why it would become a problem in the future. After all, as you pointed out, everyone's allowed to get married as it is, including gay people, as long as it's to the opposite sex. So anyone who wants to get married for fraudulous purposes while carrying on with the partner of his or her choice, can do so as it is. And considering the relative rarity of homosexuality, and the amount of people who still have a problem with homosexuality, a fraudulous same-sex marriage would have the distinct disadvantage, compared to a fraudulous heterosexual marriage, of drawing attention. I'll give you points for originality, though, as I don't believe anyone's ever used the "but a mobster boss could marry his right-hand man so he can avoid having him witness against him!" argument to oppose same-sex marriage before...
And then there's the part where you mentioned "couples that will be deprived of the traditional benefits of marriage because the costs of extending them to same-sex "marriages" has forced them to be withdrawn". You do realize what kind of numbers we are talking about, yes? Gay people make up 5 to 10% of the population, and so far in the places where it's legal, gay couples are not getting married at a higher rate than straight couples or anything like that. As such, the increase in marriages and in people who are married and claim marriage benefits will be quite modest, certainly not of a kind to cause financial difficulties to those providing benefits to married couples.
Let's ban all Christian Marriage.
- 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM
1852 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me.
- 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM
1229 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people.
- 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM
1485 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there!
- 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM
1349 Views
Who else should make those decisions?
- 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM
1260 Views
I'd totally...
- 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM
1163 Views
I'd totally...
- 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM
1324 Views
I used to think Joel was the biggest rambler on this site. I am seriously reconsidering.
- 08/08/2010 05:24:56 AM
1261 Views
And my assessment of one poster as the most content-poor, non-contributing slug is unchanged
- 08/08/2010 07:17:02 PM
1167 Views
*Shakes Head*
- 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM
1136 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM*
- 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM
623 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense.
- 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM
1251 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense.
- 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM
1187 Views
Re: *Shakes Head*
- 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM
1184 Views
I still do not see how you think marriage is a "pointless" institution
- 08/08/2010 08:05:45 PM
1348 Views
No, I was referring to same-sex marriage. Real marriage hardly counts as a novelty. *NM*
- 11/08/2010 02:28:43 PM
530 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about.
- 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM
1138 Views
You cannot be that stupid.
- 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM
1398 Views
There's a lot of ridiculous arguments here, but I'll focus on just one of them...
- 11/08/2010 03:38:05 PM
1340 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
- 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM
1191 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad.
- 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM
1211 Views
Is that assumption valid?
- 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM
1152 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid?
- 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM
1122 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid?
- 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM
1236 Views
Not really
- 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM
1094 Views
Re: Not really
- 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM
1214 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives.
- 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM
1291 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
- 09/08/2010 11:25:39 AM
1162 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
- 09/08/2010 11:51:50 AM
1127 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
- 09/08/2010 01:18:35 PM
1225 Views
Re: A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too
- 09/08/2010 02:54:19 PM
1248 Views
It should be noted again...
- 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM
1246 Views
and how is it not a right?
- 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM
1159 Views
My definition of rights...
- 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM
1244 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right.
- 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM
1013 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example
- 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM
1110 Views
- 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM
1110 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis...
- 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM
1269 Views
If we need a more specific resolution...
- 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM
1450 Views
No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context
- 10/08/2010 05:25:57 AM
1146 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context
- 10/08/2010 03:04:39 PM
1450 Views
That's really a ridiculous stance, you do realize.
- 10/08/2010 03:23:02 PM
1047 Views
The point is that marriage IS a right, one which cannot be denied based upon sexual orientation *NM*
- 10/08/2010 07:04:16 PM
833 Views
Re: No, the choice of 'Men and Women' is too specific in the context
- 10/08/2010 03:46:56 PM
1307 Views
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though.
- 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM
1121 Views
I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point.
- 10/08/2010 06:09:32 PM
1100 Views
Re: I know, and that's been brought up before. But that's not my point.
- 10/08/2010 06:33:56 PM
1041 Views
It's mentioned as a right in some SC decision quoted in that Walker opinion. *NM*
- 10/08/2010 06:51:13 PM
553 Views
To clarify for you
- 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM
1111 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body...
- 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM
1508 Views
I'm not sure that I would call the Security Council the 'Enforcement Body'
- 10/08/2010 08:43:02 PM
1124 Views
The fact that it is capable of authorizing the use of military force makes it an enforcement body
- 10/08/2010 10:33:59 PM
1389 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless....
- 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM
1074 Views
Why don't YOU back up your assertion that the right to marry exists? *NM*
- 11/08/2010 03:16:02 PM
587 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right.
- 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM
1231 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction...
- 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM
1289 Views
Note it all you want...
- 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM
1005 Views
No, they seek to expand the terms of the partnership. Homosexuals can & do get married normally *NM*
- 11/08/2010 03:14:25 PM
632 Views
The best one yet.
- 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM
1245 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
- 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM
1118 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
- 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM
1208 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
- 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM
1124 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane
- 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM
1259 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel
- 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM
1230 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel
- 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM
1176 Views
