I live in Sacramento, California. And I have to tell you that I am thoroughly sick of the "same-sex" marriage debate. Such a moronic issue!
Look, if a gay or lesbian wants to marry, he (or she) has exactly the same right as I have: To marry a person of the opposite sex, provided neither he nor his intended is already married. Personally, I have no interest in marriage, so I choose not to marry. This proves I have freedom of choice. Thus, so do Y and X. Should Y or X also have no interest in marrying a member of the opposite sex, he is making the same choice I am. There is no discrimination, no denial of a "right" to marry.
There is no right to marry in the constitution. Therefore, no one has any standing before any court to sue for same, period. Think about this: Were there a right to marry whomever we please, then Charlize Theron would be compelled, under the law, to stop pretending she doesn't know I'm alive. Then I, dirty old man that I am, could finally marry the girl of my dreams and allow her to keep me in the manner to which I would like to become accustomed.
That said, I see nothing wrong with some accommodation so that committed, unmarried adults, regardless of sexual orientation, could enjoy the rights of what is, in essence, a contract. No one should be denied visitation rights in hospitals, etc., because he is not a relative. This ought to be a simple enough thing to accomplish. This is basic contract law.
Hm... Come to think of it, maybe it wouldn't be so simple, given the unconstitutional, yet real, rewriting of contract law in President Obama's bail-out of Chrysler and, soon, GM. Read the fifth amendment.
White House: Here come the tax hikes
3 years ago