Friday, October 16, 2009

All you need is love?

And to be opposite gendered and the same ethnic background.

Not only are gay couples fighting for the right to get married, but apparently there are still interracial couples who are being denied this right.

I'm at a loss for words with this one...how can you deny a marriage license to two people who, legally, have the right to marry? I honestly don't understand why there needs to be any government involvement in marriage in the first place - other than we've now intertwined marriage with a lot of tax policies.

What does it matter if Joe Shmo wants to marry three different women? Does it affect my life is Sue Somebody wants to marry Jane Doe? Will my children, my friends, my family be mis-treated because Dick and Jane both want to marry Spot? No. No. No.

I suppose it boils down to what legal rights and responsibilities, and tax credits, we give to people who are legally married. First of all, I don't understand why there should be a difference between the taxes paid by two married people and two single people.

The rights and responsibilities, however, those are important. If one is legally bound to another person, then one should have the right to make decisions for him or her when that spouse is unable to respond (but not infringe on any living will that has already been set forth), and the responsibility to care for that person when he or she is in need of it. Why can anyone, gay, strait, with whatever skin pigmentation, be my legal guardian, but when it comes to being a life partner, and making a conscious choice to commit to the responsibility of caring for one another as adults, suddenly, there are now barriers?

Maybe I was being a little far-reaching saying that humans should be able to marry non-human animals. I think that there should be a level of cognitive and communicative ability necessary in both parties in order for them to be married. But this is now opening another can or worms.

No comments: