Gay Marriage

If marriage licenses are intended to guard against underage, familial and bigamous unions; to serve as proof of the couple's legal obligations to each other; to control who receives government benefits such as social security, insurance, and medical care; and to determine survivor benefits; then marriage licenses are unnecessary.

All those functions can be handled without the use of marriage licenses. Most of them can be handled using private contracts. The rest can be handled by laws that govern behavior, not status.

I think if anyone writes their congressman about this, it shouldn't be to defend the merit of a gay marriage. The merits that should be questioned are the state's.


The "Defense of Marriage Act", signed into law by Bill Clinton while he was cheating on his wife with Monica Lewinsky (but before he got caught) claimed to give states the right to not recognize gay marriage licenses issued by other states, but was really a federal stand against homosexuality - which is why it was named "Defense of Marriage Act (Against Homosexuals)" and not "Defense of State Right to Recognize Gay Marriage (Against the Federal Government)"

Newt Gingrich, a sponsor of the Defense of Marriage Act and very critical of Bill Clinton's affair, had cheated on his first wife, and was cheating on his second wife during Clinton's impeachment. Just throwing that out there - our lawmakers are out of their depth when they talk about things like marriage and morals. Better to repeal all the related laws and affirm everyone's right to pursue happiness by letting them handle this important aspect of their lives without government interference.


Presumably any law that restricts a citizen's private actions must intend to bring about some greater social good. So how does society benefit from the inability of gays or lesbians to get a marriage license? They don't receive any undeserved benefit nor do they impose any burden on others. Any benefit or tax or crime related to sexuality or marriage can be easily rewritten more objectively as being related to procreation, child-raising, household economic efficiency, consent, age, health, etc. and applied to citizens based on their actions instead of their sexuality or marital status. Because laws and court decisions banning gay marriage don't have any proven social value, we need to ask why they persist.