"Legitimize" as in "no longer living in sin", "shacking up", "make honest men and women...uh men and men, and, women and women, out of each other?<quoted text>
1.) Same-gender couples do not want to legitimize their relationships through legal marriage to boost their self esteem.
Yes I do.As you very well know, there are many protections and benefits that come along with marriage. Many of these benefits and protections have nothing to do with children. Do you agree?
Why should siblings be excluded from marriage? If FCM (first cousin marriage) is legal, and SSM is legal in the same state, why ban same sex siblings from the benefits and protections of marriage? No risk of sexual reproduction there. There's no rational reason to argue a woman can marry her female first cousin, but not her sister.2.) Regarding marriage between certain relatives... I didn't think that I had to spell it out for you. I am obviously talking about a marriage between siblings or a marriage between parent and child or between a grandparent and grandchild. You know exactly what I mean when I say "unrelated".
That's just it...the difference is not as great as you think it is. Same sex first cousins....same sex siblings......I don't know that I need to explain why it is that same-gender marriage is completely different than incestuous marriage.
Expain the difference, between same sex first cousin marriage and sibling marriage. Is there really that much of a significant difference to the state?If you seriously do not understand that there is a vast difference between a someone developing an emotional/physical relationship with a non-relative and someone developing an emotional/physical relationship with a relative, then I don't know that I can help you.
What are we discussing here, in its simplest form. How marriage is legally defined. If its an exclusive monogamous union of husband and wife, then there's not alot of deviation there. However if its, "Spouses for life"........room for discussion, and definition.Suffice it to say that we are not here to discuss incestuous marriages. Any attempts to lead this discussion away from the primary topic--i.e.: same-gender marriage--is nothing more than a distraction.
You won't entertain? Oh the humanity! Turn in your Bravo channel membership.....easy there Big V, just kidding.I won't entertain it.
Let's go wtih not close blood relatives, after all first cousins are related. As to the second, marriage is a legal contract that deals with a specific relationship, husband and wife, and yes it references their sexual union. Thus words like "consumation", "marital relations", and let's not forget the concept, "prersumption of paternity" which presumes the husband is the father of any children born within the marital relationship, unless there is evidence to the contrary I beleive.3.) A marriage is a contract between two consenting, adult, unrelated people. It is not a contract between two people and their offspring. That is why there aren't two separate definitions set aside for people who intend to have children and those who do not intend to have children.
Waitaminit here VeeVee...I believe you're the one who pointed out in a previous post the new institutions and social that exist today, that didn't exist even a few decades ago. Different times, different situations, different solution.And with regards to term "civil union"; there are no other identical contracts that provides identical protections and benefits but have different names.