Quote:
Originally posted by bhutocracy
I think the salient point is the federal benefits gay miss out on because they can't marry, access to their partner's super etc etc. It's ridiculous they don't already have these rights.
Sure getting married in a Christian church with a priest conducting the ceremony? No.. Being about to be lawfully "man and man" and the legal benefits that brings.. there really isn't any argument against that.. they're already living together.. they should have access to their partner's estate if they're willing to enshrine it in law by marriage.. I don't really get why people would oppose it other than the satisfaction of denying someone they don't agree with.. It's straight people who have fucked up the tradittion of marriage, unless you count getting married 3 times as supporting it by volume.
|
Sure, I accept all that and would not oppose some kind of civil union for queers to get the same legal rights as de facto's or married couples. But atleast you can also see the irony in claiming that disallowing someone to marry in a Christian church is somehow denying them their RIGHTS.