More on the FMA

To be honest, I don't often read Andrew Sullivan's blog, especially while he's on his high horse regarding same sex marriage. To be honest, he keeps repeating the same thing and I've heard his arguments and just don't agree with him so why bother.

However, I also have some thoughts on the issue. A friend of mine was asking why he couldn't marry his partner, and it is an honest question. My answer was no, I do not think granting same sex marriages was/is a good idea for reasons that have nothing to do with religion.

My primary issue with not granting same sex marriages is because it starts a slippery slope were I do not want to go.

If we allow same sex marriages, the next group will be asking why a brother and sister or cousins who live together cannot have the same benefits of marriage. Even if they are not engaged in a sexual relationship, they can claim they love each other and should be able to have all the benefits like two non related people have, what is the harm? Its a private affair and none of the business for the rest of us.

Likewise, once we allow additional forms of marriage, there will no longer be any defensible reason to not allow polygamy or bigamy. Again, consenting adults chose to be in that relationship, its a private affair and its none of our business.

And so on and so on. My friend's reply was we won't have the slope. Look at Canada and Netherlands where same sex marriages are legal, you don't see that there.

But my reply is simple, there isn't any reason to not allow it and someone will (remember in Islam, a man is allowed up to 4 wives, how long before a lawsuit will be filed to allow the practice to continue in the name of religious freedom).

I would propose that the government get out of the marriage business all together. Let the government setup a civil agency like they have now and the joining of two people would be a contract like any other. For folks who are religious, they can still have a religious ceremony but the religious person would not be authorized to marry people in a legal sense, only in a religious sense. Then the Church could get tough on premarital counseling and on what marriage means. It would put a lot of drive through chapels out of business but then that is no loss and people could still have a ceremony there it just wouldn't have any legal standing.

So get rid of the filing status in the tax code, no single, married filing join, head of household or married filing separate, everyone has the same filing status (single), people who are legally married would combine their tax and withholding and pay it.

I'll say it again, get the government out of the marriage business and end the favoritism given to married couples and the whole issue goes away. Like my friend says, he wants the same benefits that I have, and I can understand that.

(ed: earlier Carpetblogger post here)