Gay marriage is looming large in the U.S. national debate. It seems likely that Bush will force an amendment that defines marriage as something strictly between a man and a woman. I'm a heterosexual married man and I don't claim to have my mind all around the issue of gay rights. However, I was wondering what would happen if all married couples who believed gays deserve equal protection and the right to marry, if all these husbands and wives, jammed the system by filing for divorce, what impact it would have on the policy makers and institutions that depend on people being clearly defined as married.-- jackottabox, Feb 13 2004 Alternatives to Marriage Project http://www.unmarried.org/This link seems relevant, even if this idea isn't. [Laughs Last, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 21 2004] 1) Divorce lawyers would become so mind-bogglingly rich that the rest of the world would have to abandon the concept of money entirely, and revert to the barter system.
2) Marriage would take on two separate meanings: a] two gay people in a long-term, committed relationship; and b] two very right-wing straight people who read the Daily Mail instead of having sex, and object vehemently to the "gay hijacking" of the institution of marriage.-- friendlyfire, Feb 13 2004 I'll swap you my husband for that coat rack, [ff].-- k_sra, Feb 13 2004 [k_sra] I politely decline, but suggest that if Mr k_sra were to make a corresponding offer, I have a very nice popcorn maker that I'd be willing to exchange.-- friendlyfire, Feb 13 2004 Are you suggesting that I am full of hot air? <frowns>-- k_sra, Feb 13 2004 Were you suggesting that your husband is very tall, very thin and frequently put-upon?-- friendlyfire, Feb 13 2004 You could then get a gay marriage to your wife - well, you could claim that you were both gay, at least. I mean who's going to know?-- hippo, Feb 13 2004 Don't think I'll do that seeing as my husband annd I just married last Friday. It only took 45 years to get there.:)-- sandysme, Feb 13 2004 [ff], I don't have a husband, slender or otherwise, so it was actually just a ploy to get your coat rack... *sigh* <throws coat on floor>-- k_sra, Feb 13 2004 Leave out all the sex stuff right wing politicians are so fascinated with (Don't they have anything else on their sick minds?). Just allow everyone to designate another person to take on all the responsibilities and get all the benefits usually reserved for a spouse (medical decisions for each other while one person is incapacitated, support in case of financial trouble, shared health insurance, lower estate tax, cannot witness against each other in court, ...). This will also help single parents who want a backup in case something happens to them.
Such a regulation will take away any incentive to get married. People who still want a ceremony can have it, but it won't have any legal impact.-- kbecker, Feb 13 2004 I think the only way up and out of this tangle is for the state to get out of the marriage business altogether; let the government define *every* married couple as a civil union for taxation and representation and if the culture wants to call it a marriage or not, then leave it up to the culture to decide that. All I know is, this is shaping up to be one hell of an election year. Cultural carnage for years to come.-- RayfordSteele, Feb 13 2004 Oh - I guess I just properly read your idea - oops!
Did you ever consider that we're just playing catch-up? Many of us have been "married" for years. Now we're just married.
After having the priviledge of paying taxes, folllowing all of the other laws that everyone else has to, etc., I finally have the right to get married. So what? Think that the divorce rate is going to be any higher among gay people than straight?-- sandysme, Feb 15 2004 random, halfbakery