Is this an important issue? I dunno, I suppose I could ask my nephew what happened. They went to a JoP for their marriage.<quoted text>
Or..... is this a veggie burger or a hamburger? Soooooo....in states where SSM is legal, what pronouncement does the state make? "Husband and husband", "wife and wife", "spouses for life", "I prounounce you married",etc?
The above sums it up for missus sheesh and myself. Except the children part. Money is sort of involved because I didn't want my brother's meddling wives to try a grab ass on anything I've accumulated. Both are doing just that with my mother's stuff. And she's still alive!<quoted text>
Uhhhhh....they want to. For love, companionship, create and raise children, money, etc. DOes it matter to anyone but the two people involved as long as they're consenting adults? No state, as far as I know, requires a statment of orientation prior to issuance of a marriage license. Perhaps it should so as to prevent people marrying outside their orientation.
Do we have statistics on this? Scratch that, found this Huffington Post article via google.<quoted text>
More than likely. Gay men don't seem to marry at the same rates as lesbians though.
Apparently, women in general are more up for marriage than men are. The article offers several potential contributing factors.
Yer welcome.<quoted text>>
Actually so she could, I was born here.....that's silly we both were but thanks for asking.
Looks to be romantic love is the major driving force.<quoted text>
What kind of love? Romantic? Platonic? Friendship? etc. Suppose a couple were only marrying for the sake of "like" would the state still issue a marriage license?
I'm not the one bringing incest into the equation. I suspect the number of siblings wanting to get hitched is surprisingly minute.<quoted text>
Laws can and do change, sometimes by court order. Please explain how barring an opposite sex pair of siblings from marrying based on the possiblity of sexual reproduction, should be applied to same sex siblings when no such possibility exists?
Perhaps the state would like to see less congestion in the courts due to battles from families not wanting their deceased gay son's lover to get anything. Perhaps gaining access to marriage would make them more accepted in general, thus reducing some of the stupidity that occurs when rednecks see two men holding hands.<quoted text>
Thanks for the honesty, appreciated it. However, there is no compelling state interest. Society can function without men marrying men/women marrying women, and has throughout the history of the republic. If marriage is nothing more than a means by which two people, or more live thier intimate personal sexual lives with government recognition and benefits, then there's no reason to deny "marriage" to a variety of consenting adult relationships.
Yet, according to the article, couples would rather marry than enter into a civil union. By the article it appears we can expect SSM divorce rates to be similar to hetero couples.<quoted text>
Marriage is a legal, cultural, historical, traditional, conjugal, and/or relgious, union of husband and wife, recognized in all fifty states, and by the federal government, and around the world. It's creation dates back thousands of years, and is evident in some form, as a male female relationship, in virutally all human societies throughout history. A Civil union is a modern western legal relationship structure created to accomodate same sex pairings/couples. Yes, I know the difference.