Dear all,
It seems this is about equal protection under the law. It might help if
someone would inform us of how non-traditional couples' rights are
improved by "marriage" rather than "domestic partner" status. I'm not
totally clear on it and maybe others aren't either. All I know is that
if my wife and I file a tax form as "married", we pay more....so much
for marriage benefits.
By the way, thanks to Michael Edelstein for contributing all the other
marriage/contractual possibilities. Are there any reasons we should
restrict "marriage" to just humans? Why shouldn't someone be able to
devote themselves to their animal pet? I realize that it takes a
creature of responsibility to enter into a contract. But shouldn't they
be able to leave their estate to their pet if they can leave it with
their mentally retarded partner? How about their retirement
benefits...maybe some businesses would have problems with that? Just
wondering how far this goes...
Thanks
Mike
Dear Mike;
For the record, people have left their estates to their pets on numerous occasions. I also think we would need a new word other than " marriage ". This word creates such a lightning rod of reactions. The conotations engendered in the word marriage are so numerous to be able to talk to anyone about the topic with out setting off fireworks is difficult.
Any suggestions on a new word for marriage which won't generate so many knee-jerk reactions???
Ron Getty
SF Libertarianm
Mike Denny <mike@...> wrote:
Dear all,
It seems this is about equal protection under the law. It might help if
someone would inform us of how non-traditional couples' rights are
improved by "marriage" rather than "domestic partner" status. I'm not
totally clear on it and maybe others aren't either. All I know is that
if my wife and I file a tax form as "married", we pay more....so much
for marriage benefits.
By the way, thanks to Michael Edelstein for contributing all the other
marriage/contractual possibilities. Are there any reasons we should
restrict "marriage" to just humans? Why shouldn't someone be able to
devote themselves to their animal pet? I realize that it takes a
creature of responsibility to enter into a contract. But shouldn't they
be able to leave their estate to their pet if they can leave it with
their mentally retarded partner? How about their retirement
benefits...maybe some businesses would have problems with that? Just
wondering how far this goes...
Thanks
Mike