Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

Marriage, Gays and the Government

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by 73k5blazer, Oct 26, 2006.

  1. 73k5blazer

    73k5blazer Unplug the matrix cable from the back of your head Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Posts:
    4,987
    Likes Received:
    38
    Location:
    The Rustbelt
    So I've an idea about how the government should treat this whole "issue".

    It's been my stance for a long time, even before the issue of should we allow gays to marry. Government should not be doing anything according to your marital status. If you remove all wording and references to marriage in government documents, IRS code, etc, the whole issue of having to define what a marriage is, goes away. There should be no more or less benefits, taxes, programs, etc, if your married or single.
    I know it would be a huge undertaking to wipe the laws clean of any reference to marriage, but I think it would be worth it. You should not need a license to get married, you shouldn't get a different tax rate because your married. Marriage is a sacred thing between you and your partner, a declaration of your faith, devotion and love to your partner, whoever that is. Your should only need the approval of the god you worship, if any, the church you profess your faith to, if any, and your conscience, and that's it. Government should not be invovled in marriage, period.

    I remember the first time I did my taxes in 1983, I asked my Dad why there was seperate tax rates for married and single people. The answer, "That's just the way it is", or more like, he didn't know. I still don't know, I've read and listened to certain explainations, but none of them make any sense. Mabey they did in the 1700's, but certainly not now.
     
  2. chevyfumes

    chevyfumes Court jester

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2000
    Posts:
    38,584
    Likes Received:
    266
    Location:
    Watch for the muzzleflash!
    This should be good...
     
  3. BurbLover

    BurbLover 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2001
    Posts:
    3,060
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SW Missouri
    I probably should get a good front row seat and some popcorn. What the hell, I don't have anything else to do...
     
  4. TSGB

    TSGB 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Posts:
    12,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Centralia, Washington
    So what happens when I want to marry my 11 year old sister?
     
  5. 73k5blazer

    73k5blazer Unplug the matrix cable from the back of your head Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Posts:
    4,987
    Likes Received:
    38
    Location:
    The Rustbelt
    Go ahead. Who would you be declaring that to though?

    We still have laws against incest and having sex with minors though.
     
  6. TSGB

    TSGB 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Posts:
    12,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Centralia, Washington
    ...









    Does anal count?
     
  7. gjk5

    gjk5 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2004
    Posts:
    5,312
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Grand Junction, CO
    :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:
     
  8. BurbLover

    BurbLover 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2001
    Posts:
    3,060
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SW Missouri
    If you're saying that you are an a$$, then I'll think I speak for most of CK5 when I say we agree :grin:
     
  9. TSGB

    TSGB 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Posts:
    12,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Centralia, Washington
    No, I'm saying that's all I see when I look at you. A fine, sweet, sweet ass.
     
  10. 73k5blazer

    73k5blazer Unplug the matrix cable from the back of your head Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Posts:
    4,987
    Likes Received:
    38
    Location:
    The Rustbelt
    Ok, look, the whole point is to bring back the real meaning of marriage. Today marriage means a piece of paper filed in your state's capitol city, and that your entitled to half their sh*t in 6 months when you decide you don't like them anymore.
    The fact that we have to get Government approval to get married, is just plain idiotic and flys in the face of 'freedom'. I'm not trying to advocate gay rights here, but , really, if two guys want to want to profess their love to each other, who give's a crap. It's an issue today, because now they get benefits, tax rates, and privlidges and a whole host of other things that apply to 'married' people. If your remove all the bs from marriage, it is then restored to nothing more than a profession of your commitment to that person and to those around you..
     
  11. newyorkin

    newyorkin 1 ton status

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Posts:
    16,555
    Likes Received:
    157
    Location:
    Los Estados Unitos
    Well what's the point of marriage at all? If it's just two people swearing they love each other, why can't they just say "I love you and I won't leave any time soon" to each other and call it a night?
    :dunno: :thinking: :thinking: :dunno:
     
  12. 73k5blazer

    73k5blazer Unplug the matrix cable from the back of your head Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Posts:
    4,987
    Likes Received:
    38
    Location:
    The Rustbelt
    What's the point? To declare your love,commitment and devotion to one another, and to those around you. Isnt't that what marriage is supposed to be about?????
    If your Catholic, it's about declaring your commitment to one another and to jesus christ and the almightly.

    Marriage is about your commitment to one another and to what you worship, if anything. Nothing else.

    Think about these hidden societies of people in remote places in the jungle and such, they "get married", they declare their devotion to another, and to the village community, they celebrate the marriage, and they are married.
    Well, sure, alot of them have 8 wives, but hey, that's ok if that's they way they all want to live.
     
  13. shewheeler

    shewheeler 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Posts:
    3,384
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hollister, CA
    oooh boy :doah:
    [​IMG]

    Marriage is for quitters:p:
     
  14. chevyfumes

    chevyfumes Court jester

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2000
    Posts:
    38,584
    Likes Received:
    266
    Location:
    Watch for the muzzleflash!
    Wait I thought this was aboot taxes and anal??? And how you want to stick it to the man instead of the other way around....:D
     
  15. 79k20350

    79k20350 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Posts:
    7,757
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Ct
    Theres a reason you are king:p::bow:
     
  16. newyorkin

    newyorkin 1 ton status

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Posts:
    16,555
    Likes Received:
    157
    Location:
    Los Estados Unitos
    Isn't that what I said? Why do you need a document or a priests nod of approval to tell your mate you're devoted to them? Especially when it's liquid enough not to be legally binding but kinda sorta socially binding as long as I don't change my mind and become a mormon or jehovahs witness...


    I didn't know that about Catholicism, thanks (really, I didn't know that's the catholic view of marriage). But I'm wondering what happens when the catholic guy marries the Jewish girl. Is she declaring her commitment to him in front of Jesus? Or, a catholic girl marries an Atheist, God forbid (if he existed to forbid it)...

    Well, that may be marriage to you. But to some people it's about starting a family, others about settling down, others about joining two families, yet others about kids... To some people it's even just about money, and yet others about citizenship...

    There aren't many hidden society's left on the planet. But you make a great point about how marriage seems to be a universal concept. Interestingly, it seems to be universally between members of opposing sex.
    But to further expand on that, these little hidden societies in the jungle usually have a leadership, or something that could be compared to government. And the leadership recogizes a married couple as a married couple.


    So when the time comes for a bitter divorce, who should regulate it? The church? The temple? CK5? :wink1: :D :D

    Just some food for thought...
     
  17. thezentree

    thezentree 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2003
    Posts:
    7,198
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NC
    Dang. (pad)
     
  18. 73k5blazer

    73k5blazer Unplug the matrix cable from the back of your head Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Posts:
    4,987
    Likes Received:
    38
    Location:
    The Rustbelt
    I don't need a piece of paper, I think that's ridiculous.


    Let the Catholics "marry" the Athiest, because that person,by definition of the Catholic faith, will no longer be a catholic. See,that's the beauty, the idea is self-executing, meaning, it regulates itself by definition of it's own means. Most religions do not allow you to marry outside of that religion, so if you believe in religion, you abide by those rules.

    Having kids is beside the point. You don't need to be married, even under todays laws, to have kids. Yes, religilously speaking, most religions want you (some require) to be married before you have kids. But, in the eyes of the law, it doesn't matter. You, and who you worship, regulate yourself. If your Cathloic, you'll be yelled at (or felt up) by your preist, if you have kids out of wedlock. Having a family goes straight along with commiting yourself. I'm a firm believer that if you have kids, you need to put your kids first, family first, and yourself second. Family, is part of our makeup, like pack animals.

    The hidden societies remain man and woman, because for them, it's a matter of survival. Strict evolution. If you do not make babies, which in their world, the only way to do that is for a man and a woman to have sexual intercourse, you don't survive as a society. When it comes to the rest of us, procreation is a recreation, therfore freeing yourself to bond on all levels with members of your own sex, if that's what you want to do.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2006
  19. newyorkin

    newyorkin 1 ton status

    Joined:
    May 8, 2001
    Posts:
    16,555
    Likes Received:
    157
    Location:
    Los Estados Unitos
    Take this all with a grain of salt, in many ways I'm just playing devil's advocate, not looking to argue.

    So what you're saying is basically that marriage should be the same thing as two kids in the back seat of a sedan at 2am swearing they love each other and will forever. Essentially you're calling marriage this vague feel-good thing people should be able to toss at each other like "hey, 'sup".
    People's opinions change with the wind.

    Actually, most religions allow you to marry outside your faith. Christianity (protestant at least) recommends against it, but doesn't forbid it. Islam doesn't forbid it except for Muslim women (but of course the muslim man is expected to negate the woman's religion anyway). I don't remember Hindu, but I doubt it has any marriage restriction at all. Judaism does not allow it, though.

    So let's take two atheists that want to get married. They don't need a church, since they only need to declare their commitment to one another. They can't have the justice of the peace do it, because marriage is not a legal concept nor endorsed by any body of government. The best they can get is a domestic partnership and named in each others will (but not as a spouse, since marriage is not a legal binding). But they love each other deeply and want to get married. Unfortunately, marriage is only for religious folks. If they get married by a priest, rabbi, cleric, etc, they won't believe in it themselves. Why did they even want to get married in the first place, all they need to do is declare their commitment to each other? They've done that over and over since shortly after they met anyway. I guess they could always open word and print up a nice marriage certificate that is non-legal and non-religious, but commits them to each other for the rest of their lives. :D ;)

    I'm not interested in a religious debate on marriage, I just think your view of marriage is very narrow and short sighted, ignoring complexity of real life and hinging on an idea that people will always do what's right.


    You're a firm believer in so on and so forth. So commitment is no problem for you, it's clear you do not need to be married to have a healthy relationship with your partner, interchange all your possessions in her legal name (different than yours), direct deposit your income in her bank account, etc etc. But there are a lot of people who are parents who have a problem with commitment and don't want to get married because of the commitment. What makes them committed to their offspring? Ahh, deadbeat dad laws. Two people, who are not really that committed to each other, and certainly not married, cranking out kids is not a problem in our nation at all.

    Read some studies about the effects of marriage on child rearing. They would suggest that kids seem to like the idea that their parents are bound together by their own option and a legally recognized certification. Not that they understand the marriage legality young.

    Granted, having kids is beside the point. But it was only one point I made about a persons reason to get married. But if you think all laws regarding kids between unmarried parents are equal to laws for married parents, it's obvious you've never had to deal with daily life of a child between two unmarried people. It's quite a pain in the arse... It gets waaaaaaay worse if the kid has medical issues.

    It's not a matter of survival for them. If they were abstract conceptual beings and not individuals, that might hold a little tiny bit of water, but they're individuals. Shaka-Zulu has no reason to think his own survival depends on reproducing.
    Not to completely shatter your hidden society only has sex with women image, but in some ancient uncivilized cultures, it was not unusual for a tribe leader to have anal sex with the leader of a defeated tribe to shame him and demonstrate supremacy. Even in those wierd-azz deals, the men marry women. And there are many monogamous marriages in those cultures where the woman is barren or the man is sterile, and they're society survives.
    My guess is you're not even clear on what "Strict evolution" means, so you should leave it out of the discussion. You're not even talking about survival of the fittest, I don't know why you'd call a society you're implying is way behind as evolving. Some fathers would even kill their own kids if they know they themselves are about to die.

    These undiscovered hidden societies are gems, and there are probably none left in the world. Once discovered, they're pored over by people looking for answers like we're discussing. There's a lot of information on the web about uncivilized/primitive "tribal" cultures.

    Procreation is recreation for people in all societies, not just ours. Heck, it would probably be a lot of fun if we needed procreation for survival :rotfl:. "Honey, I'm gonna die if you don't gimme some tonight!" :rotfl:
    I really doubt many people are "Freed" by losing their need to procreate. If you look at simple lust and consider it the driving "need" to procreate, then it's present in gay people, too, so it's not actually a need to procreate.
    So then what determines freedom from this need? Population size? A small tribe needs to procreate to keep their society in existence while a large society doesn't need to? For a tribe to be small enough to have that "need" be different than the "need" of a larger society, it would have to be ridiculously small, like "keep the family name alive" small. Populations of all society's age and die, therefore all societies, regardless of size, need to continually reproduce to continue existence.
    So my opinion is that there is no consistent "need to procreate" in an individual, but that individuals across all societies have this need or don't have this need to varying degree's. Some cultures place different emphasis on child-bearing, but as it relates to an individual becoming homosexual, I doubt that has much, if any, relevance.


    Anyway, getting back to the heart of it. It might be nice if Marriage were not a legal issue, but if you struck all marriage laws from the books, you'd have social chaos, and LOTS of problems. Realistically, Marriage is more than just what your opinion of it is. I'm not trying to be insulting or demeaning, but what you're saying marriage should be is very vague and already exists in many strong relationships. For these people to want to go the next step to marriage implies there's more to it, whether they can actually verbalize that or not.

    Would you be willing to erase all the legal documentation of your marriage today, and leave it solely on what's recorded in your church/temple/mosque/friends/family's-minds?

    :thinking: Can you tell I didn't use "Quick reply" :rotfl: :rotfl:
     
  20. 73k5blazer

    73k5blazer Unplug the matrix cable from the back of your head Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2001
    Posts:
    4,987
    Likes Received:
    38
    Location:
    The Rustbelt
    Holy long post Batman. Quick, to the Molson Canadian cave, I need another beer to before finsihing reading! :)
     

Share This Page