Gay marriage to be allowed in NJ

[IamJohnGalt]

You don't follow things very well. Go back and read my other posts I don't want to repeat myself. Marriage "rights" (loot) are provided by the State.(I get that...no argument here). Government should not be in the marriage business.(but it is, I get that...no argument here) If gays or straights want to marry...fine. Leave my money out of it.

No. That's your price for living here.

Agreed. But that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion that it would be better otherwise.

[Ainin]

Huzzah! Progress marches forward, leaving bigotry in the dust.

Some people like being backwards, Geni.

That's vey intolerant of you.

Why does that argument always come up in same-sex marriage threads? There's a difference between intolerance and the truth.

[Orcoa]

I'm pretty sure marriage licenses are not free, and most married couples pay taxes, so it is unlikely a single dime of your own cash goes to them, even if you're single.

Try being a little less myopic.

You know, why don't you come out with it and stop pussyfooting around come and say it.

You don't like gay folks.

Its ok, take your time. We can wait for you.

[Threlizdun]

Inheritance, joint custody of children, hospital visitations, medical decisions, spousal privilege... want me to go on?

State, State, State, nothing inherent to one person commitment to another.

You can have a commitment to someone else without a marriage. You cannot have all the rights granted by marriage without it though.

[Dumb Ideologies]

I'm pretty sure marriage licenses are not free, and most married couples pay taxes, so it is unlikely a single dime of your own cash goes to them, even if you're single.

Try being a little less myopic.

My glasses prescription makes Atlas Shrugged read like bullshit, John.

[Liriena]

I'm pretty sure marriage licenses are not free, and most married couples pay taxes, so it is unlikely a single dime of your own cash goes to them, even if you're single.

Try being a little less myopic.

Myopic? Oh, you want me to see the bigger picture? I can do that!

Let's see the big picture... oh, yeah, have I mentioned how the legal rights that come with civil marriage simplify family-building and monogamy, and on top of that they have long term positive effects on public health and the economy?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

If the government is not involved in marriage then it literally will offer no benefits anymore.

CORRECT!

Okay, great.

So the government shouldn't be involved in marriage. I don't know why you had to take the long way around in order to get to a premise that has literally been stated every single time we have had a thread on this topic, but then again, I thought that Galt's speech didn't have to go on for dozens of pages.

But, see, that isn't the topic. The topic is more "So long as we have this institution called marriage that does confer specific privileges upon those who enter into it, should gay and lesbian couples have equal access to said institution?"

More fun to use the subject as a jumping off point for an utterly irrelevant rant, though, isn't it?

[IamJohnGalt]

Those are allowed or not allowed by the State having nothing inherently to do with one persons individual commitment to another

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that those benefits are granted.

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that the loot is granted.

[Yankeesse]

Utility isn't everything.

Utility is most often the thing we (should) use to decide what changes and what stays the same

Besides, there are certain benefits that married couples receive, that gay couples do not, if they are not allowed to marry.

Such as?

[Threlizdun]

No. That's your price for living here.

Agreed. But that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion that it would be better otherwise.

What possible benefit could we have by abolishing marriage as a government institution?

[Orcoa]

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that those benefits are granted.

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that the loot is granted.

Oh god

You are serious?

[Neo Rome Republic]

So says the Fascist.

I Tolerate many things.

But even when i don't at least im not a hypocrite about it.

As i don't consider Tolerance as a good thing in itself, if fact it can often be a bad thing depending on what is being tolerated.

How? Backwards isn't an insult. It's just a synonym of reactionary, which carries no negative connotations.

Unless you dislike people noticing your reactionary beliefs.

It can be meant as an insult, but the point is your implying i hold some view which is no longer relevent or valid, i.e. a wrong beleif and you do this because it runs contrary to your own and this is your way of legitmizing your own position by dismissing my views as "backwards".

Reactionary as a term is relative though and i personally do not mind being called one in relation to certain issues.

I really don't see how same sex marriage progresses anything or betters society or that it's anything other than hihacking a union of and foundation of a new family for the purpose of a Ceremony to what? Recognize a relationship between two gay individuals?

What does this do to benefit anyone? Other than people latching on to some pointless social issue in order to feel all warm inside and pretend their making "social progress".

If it were just about the traditional family and ''baby making'', then sterile couples wouldn't be able to marry. Why can't gays have a family, they can adopt. Besides marraige is a business and involves things like wedding, which cost money. More people spending money on marriage and weddings, is good for the economy. I'm really not seeing any downsides except ''but Gawd an' uh tradititon'', two things I find irrelevant.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that those benefits are granted.

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that the loot is granted.

I don't hold much hope that you'll respond to this post, since you haven't responded to any of my previous ones, but I'll give it a shot: Describe this loot. What form does it take?

[Liriena]

If the government is not involved in marriage then it literally will offer no benefits anymore.

CORRECT!

In other words, the world's legal system will fall apart as billions of married couples automatically lose countless rights and only those few who are resourceful and educated enough to get those individual rights privately will be able to save themselves from the socioeconomic clusterfuck, and in the meantime lawyers will take advantage of said unregulated socioeconomic clusterfuck and swindle the unwary and penniless couples of the world into atrocious alternatives to marriage licenses?

Delightful. Totally looking forward to it.

[Blasveck]

Utility isn't everything.

Utility is most often the thing we (should) use to decide what changes and what stays the same

Besides, there are certain benefits that married couples receive, that gay couples do not, if they are not allowed to marry.

Such as?

Hospital visitation rights, burial rights, and about 999 other benefits granted to marred couples, IIRC.

[Liriena]

Let me correct Mr. Herrebrugh here;

FABULOUS!

Perfect.

[Dumb Ideologies]

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that those benefits are granted.

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that the loot is granted.

Call it booty. At least then there's a palpable sexual frisson.

[Liriena]

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that those benefits are granted.

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that the loot is granted.

What loot?

[Dumb Ideologies]

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that the loot is granted.

What loot?

50 gold and a bottle of rum.

[IamJohnGalt]

Try being a little less myopic.

Myopic? Oh, you want me to see the bigger picture? I can do that!

Let's see the big picture... oh, yeah, have I mentioned how the legal rights that come with civil marriage simplify family-building and monogamy, and on top of that they have long term positive effects on public health and the economy?

Very good. "Legal" rights as opposed to a natural rights (life, liberty, property).

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Civil marriage is the government's way of recognizing that commitment and ensuring that the loot is granted.

Call it booty. At least then there's a palpable sexual frisson.

Booty to be plundered!

[Yankeesse]

Utility is most often the thing we (should) use to decide what changes and what stays the same

Such as?

Hospital visitation rights, burial rights, and about 999 other benefits granted to marred couples, IIRC.

Fine give them those benefits in a civil union then.

[Liriena]

What loot?

50 gold and a bottle of rum.

What? No wenches? I am disappoint.

[Threlizdun]

If the government is not involved in marriage then it literally will offer no benefits anymore.

CORRECT!

Enjoy being prevented from seeing your dying loved one in the hospital, having no joint adoption rights, not being able to see your children being born, and not knowing if any tragedy befalls them until you see them in the obituaries.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Hospital visitation rights, burial rights, and about 999 other benefits granted to marred couples, IIRC.

Fine give them those benefits in a civil union then.

..and the let churches who want to marry them, do so.