The reason that serious proposals are up for same-sex marriage rather than inter-species marriage or marriage with hairbrushes is because marriage is an act of consent,and a hairbrush (or an non-human animal) cannot give consent to get married.

So there.

I got one!

how bout we Ban marriage altogether.... and its everyone with everyone wheneever they feel like. That would be fun. you couild have many Dads!!!

i don't know I mean there should be gay marriage because if a couple really love one another than the government shouldn't be stopping them from getting married. But this is going to far, for there to be a real relationship it must be people who are not blood related or people who are just friends.

For all of you who completly did not understand this idea and arent haveing an open mind about it:

It's only marriage in the terms of the legal parts of marriage. So basically it would be to seperate the marriage thing from the state. So ppl could marry however much they wanted to and it would be up to the churches/whatever to decide if they wanted to marry gays or not. However, ppl under certain condititions could together get the legal benefits of being married, without being any love in that way. So marriage is a thing that would only matter to the ppl who do it, and the legal stuff could be enjoyed by whoever need it (be it two loveing ppl, two ppl living together, two brothers etc).

Clear enough or you still dont understand?!

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Clear enough or you still dont understand?!

I STILL DONT UNDERSTAND!!

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid I STILL DONT UNDERSTAND!!

Are you serious? Cause I could explain further, but I dont always note your sarcasm!

I understand but i still think it is BS

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew However, ppl under certain condititions could together get the legal benefits of being married, without being any love in that way. So marriage is a thing that would only matter to the ppl who do it, and the legal stuff could be enjoyed by whoever need it (be it two loveing ppl, two ppl living together, two brothers etc).

i get it, its just bollocks. imagine the legal nightmares inherent in allowing this kind've thing. a best friend could claim defacto status coz they'd shared a living space for a few years. marriage should always be for those in a relationship. extending it is pure bollocks.

indeed its only a loophole at the moment, as the recent amendments left out the wording which stated they must be in a relationship.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,1011...3-13762,00.html

___________________

Go marry a fence post in Sweden, but not here in America, bud.

Sorry. Lol!
[[[smoke]]]]

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i get it, its just bollocks. imagine the legal nightmares inherent in allowing this kind've thing. a best friend could claim defacto status coz they'd shared a living space for a few years. marriage should always be for those in a relationship. extending it is pure bollocks.

So, what exactly would be bad about two persons living together (best friends), that they could claim to have the legal benefits of being married. Since really, they live under the same conditions pretty much so if they want the same conditions and make life easier for them, i dont see why the law wounldnt allow that. The laws are for the best of the ppl, and if this helps to make ppls lives better, than that is a good thing imo.