- Oct 24, 2000
- 29,767
- 33
- 81
Massachusetts gays divorcing
- Thread starter GTaudiophile
- Start date
OMG, gays are ruining the time honored institution of divorce. Don't they know divorce is between a man and a woman?
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Mean MrMustard
Diamond Member
- Jan 5, 2001
- 3,144
- 10
- 81
Are you sure? ...Duh
Question was WHY? Why should we need the gov't to "certify" marriage?
I'll tell you one thing, when I get married, I won't give a flying fvck what the gov't thinks. I question those of you that do.
The state of Vermont has had civil unions for same-sex couples for a few years now. The early data indicate that civil unions between same-sex couples are lasting longer than marriages between heterosexual couples (the comparison is between hetero couples who married at the same time the same-sex couples obtained their "civil union"). This is consistent with the european data, where the rate of divorce among married gay couples is significantly lower than the divorce rate among equivalent (married at the same time) heterosexual couples. I think what's happening is that the 'early adopters' of gay marriage or same-sex civil unions are probably the most committed same-sex couples, who have no doubt been together for a lengthy period of time and ironed out their relationship glitches, and therefore are perhaps less likely to separate. It will be interesting to see what happens over the long term, when gay people get to the point where they are just as blase about marriage as heterosexual people appear to be now, and therefore marry at the drop of a hat without much forethought.
At any rate, I think it is amusing that rates of divorce/ separation are lower among married same-sex couples than heterosexual couples -- the exact opposite of what the hysterical anti-same-sex marriage social conservatives have been predicting.Article:
"In Vermont, Gay Ties Are Binding
"The early statistics on Vermont's same-sex civil unions are in. The finding? Gay couples are treating civil union more seriously than straight couples are treating marriage."
http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/swayne/swayne7.html
Clip from article:
"In 2002, 353 straight Vermont couples got divorced after having been married for two years or less. Take this number, and straight Vermont couples are nearly twice as likely to dissolve their unions as are gay couples that have been legally united the same length of time."
Because the state 'believes' it has a vested interest in encouraging stable marital relationships between adults, for one thing. Linking marriage to a range of rights, benefits, privileges for couples is a gentle way of coercing (or bullying?) couples into marrying. The Europeans are heading in the opposite direction -- all of the next-of-kin rights, property & inheritance rights, child support and alimony/ palimony considerations are steadily being *separated* or un-coupled (lol) from civil marriage itself. I.e., couples who are cohabiting together, raising kids together, etc. but who choose not to marry, are treated the same before the law as couples who actually go ahead and marry. I see this as a good approach. I don't think the government does have a 'moral right' to force couples into marriage -- which in my opinion is essentially what the government is doing when it links a couple's access to social security, health care, pensions, and tax breaks to their marital status. This is one of the reasons why gay couples want access to marriage in the USA -- it is the only way they would be able to access the legal and financial protections for themselves & their kids that married hetero couples take for granted. In countries where those legal protections are available to cohabiting (non-married) couples the requirement for gay marriage is less urgent, because gay families can often access the various legal, financial protections typically associated with marriage despite not being entitled legally to marry themselves.
it would be nice if you could delete a post entirely.
this one, from me, shouldn't be here. oh well.
this one, from me, shouldn't be here.
oh well.
Pliablemoose
Lifer
- Oct 11, 1999
- 25,195
- 0
- 56
judasmachine
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2002
- 8,515
- 3
- 81
OrganizedChaos
Diamond Member
- Apr 21, 2002
- 4,524
- 0
- 0
Don't forget the cats:
"One partner was a 33-year-old religious educator from Boston, the other a 39-year-old professor based in Washington... The most difficult part of the settlement appeared to be custody of their three cats, who will live exclusively with the professor... But 'in recognition of the emotional hardship of such relinquishment,' the settlement reads, the professor agreed to provide his ex 'with periodic updates, photographs, and any health-related information pertaining' to the cats."
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter