Quote:
|
What I'd really like to get at here, though, is the legalities. If all of the protections afforded (straight) married couples were provided to homosexual couples, would you be okay with calling it a "civil union" (or some other term) rather than calling it "marriage?"
|
Sure. I'm fine with it being a Civil Union. Sure, I'd probably still say I'm married, but I'm ok as long as I have the same rights andd benefits.
Quote:
That's a big list Jerr, but says little of meaning. They are allowed to:
1.Live together
2.Have sexual relations
3.Grow together in a committed life relationship.
That is the definition of marriage in my book, and the definition Jesus used. All you've posted is a meaningless list of beaurocratic processes. Those do not make a marriage.
Oh, and everyone has the right to change their name via deed poll. Your list is bogus in any case. Same with inheriting property. It's called a WILL. Without a will, even a "legal spouse" may not inherit all that was intended.
|
Like Illumina pointed out, it's not bogus.
Like I pointed out, I cited the list from another site. There is an even bigger list (With over a 1000 benefits listed) but I couldn't find it.
As Timber pointed out, "Yorick, I note that the benefits inured to wedded couples contain financially-significant and respect-significant (sorry for the loose terminology -- it's late) benefits that are material to people of any sexuality."
And these following benefits don't matter?:
Consent to post-mortem examination
Criminal injuries compensation
Eligibility for housing opportunity allowance program of the Housing, Finance and Development Corporation
And I'm sure a few others on that list can't be easily solved as well.