Do you think it is unfair that they won't let you have a leagal bondage at least. if your lover you lived with was terminally ill, wouldn't you be pissed if you couldn't see them in the hospital? I am mad at the choices the United States have made in the past 4 years. Arn't you all?
2006-10-30 09:23:40 · 12 answers · asked by My dad ate my homework 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
Yes, to all your points (you didn't really need to ask).
I love 'leagal bondage' though.
2006-10-30 09:32:29 · answer #1 · answered by JBoy Wonder 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I find it offensive. I'm not even gay, but as an American, I find it offensive to not see freedom and justice for all, as stated in our pledge of allegiance. I totally agree with you. Gay couples should be afforded the same exact rights as all other couples. I don't understand why anyone would think they should not. I can understand why someone wouldn't want them to, but cannot understand where in the law they think it is legal to give some citizens certain rights while denying others those same rights based on gender and sexual orientation. Unbelievable! I thought we were a progressive nation, but this example just shows how backwards we still are and really is an embarrassment to the United States.
I do think things are changing. NJ seems to get the idea!
2006-10-30 17:27:56 · answer #2 · answered by Stephanie S 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is completely unfair that to get the same kind of rights as a "normal" married couple would have you have to do mounds of paper work, file for power of attorney (in case any medical issues arise), and make up wills so your partner is able to LEGALLY recieve what you would want them to.
Unfortunantly we have a president that still thinks the Crusades are going on and feels that the church still has precident over law. You would think Bush would want America OUT of the dark ages right?
2006-10-30 17:41:26 · answer #3 · answered by IceyFlame 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
South Park had the right idea, and dont hate me for saying it.. ok, do if you must.. Mayor suggested this:
"You'd all have the same rights as a married couple, but you'd be butt-buddies:" ok, he needs to work on a better name.. but if marrage by name is different than a life contract.. would that make enough happy to allow people of non-acknowledged lifestyles join together to for what they desire in a life they choose?
I am pissed I can't hold my friends daughter when I'm the only one in the city able to be there for her!! The law stipulates, and I could have lied and said I was her brother.. what a tangled mess.
2006-10-30 18:49:39 · answer #4 · answered by Shelli_k18 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Marriage is an institution created by government so that partners have legal rights and responsibilities.
Folks who are married less than 2 minutes (think Las Vegas weddings) have more legal rights than a gay/lesbian couple who've been together for more than 15 years.
The fact that we cannot be married denies us, and our families, to over 1,138 federal rights, protections and responsibilities automatically granted upon marriage. A few of these are:
- The right to make decisions on a partner's behalf in a medical emergency. Specifically, the states generally provide that spouses automatically assume this right in an emergency. If an individual is unmarried, the legal "next of kin" automatically assumes this right. This means, for example, that a gay man with a life partner of many years may be forced to accept the financial and medical decisions of a sibling or parent with whom he may have a distant or even hostile relationship.
- The right to take up to 12 weeks of leave from work to care for a seriously ill partner or parent of a partner. The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 permits individuals to take such leave to care for ill spouses, children and parents but not a partner or a partner's parents.
- The right to petition for same-sex partners to immigrate.
- The right to assume parenting rights and responsibilities when children are brought into a family through birth, adoption, surrogacy or other means. For example, in most states, there is no law providing a noncustodial, nonbiological or nonadoptive parent's right to visit a child - or responsibility to provide financial support for that child - in the event of a breakup.
- The right to share equitably all jointly held property and debt in the event of a breakup, since there are no laws that cover the dissolution of domestic partnerships.
- Family-related Social security benefits, income and estate tax benefits, disability benefits, family-related military and veterans benefits and other important benefits.
- The right to inherit property from a partner in the absence of a will.
- The right to purchase continued health coverage for a domestic partner after the loss of a job.
And there are many more! A dear friend of mine lost his partner after 15 years. My friend was the primary breadwinner and paid for his partner's life insurance and some income property. When his partner died, and he inherited it, he had to pay taxes, whereas a married couple would not. Why?
The argument that marriage is for procreation is hogwash. One does not need to be married to have children. If that argument is held up, then why allow folks past child-bearing age to marry? Or those who are impotent or sterile?
The majority of hippocrites claim that gay marriage would erode the "institution of marriage." Unlike those marriages that last about a week and are disolved.
If that was their true belief, then why not outlaw divorce? Because they want, and need, an out.
Whether or not you want to be married is your choice. But do not deny me a choice -- with rights, responsibilities and benefits -- because my family does not resemble yours.
If you don't want a gay marriage, don't have one.
2006-10-30 17:36:07 · answer #5 · answered by yetanothergwm 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sad about the choices America has made, I'm disappointed... this is supposed to be the land of the free... but those who qualify for "free" are white, middle-aged men...
2006-10-30 20:18:33 · answer #6 · answered by Phedre D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
While I am upset my husband and I long ago established wills, powers of attorneys, living wills and medical powers of attorney's...we are covered on all bases and it only cost about 700.00 in ILL.
Along with that both of our families are 100% accepting of our life.
2006-10-30 17:26:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, but it's been 6 years!
2006-10-30 17:25:40 · answer #8 · answered by pocket68rocket 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes indeed, but just another week and we neuter Bush!
2006-10-30 17:44:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dont have this problem in Canada. Move here.
2006-10-30 17:37:56 · answer #10 · answered by psycho_chic_in_training 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋