Quote:
Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB
Marriage is NOT a civil right. Since you have to get a license it is a privilege.
|
That's horseshit.
The restrictions or burdens imposed by a license are minute. They are intended to ensure you don't marry a close relative and that you are not already married to someone else.
Voting rights come with restrictions, too. You are required to be 18, to live in the district in which you are voting, to be a citizen, to not be a convicted felon, and to not vote more than once.
Do those restrictions mean that voting is not a civil right, but a privilege?
The restrictions imposed on voting, like the restrictions on marriage, are designed to protect and strengthen the institution.
But if discriminatory restrictions are imposed for no valid reason, then you are denying someone equal rights.
Saying someone must live in Texas to vote for Texas governor is not a discriminatory restriction. Saying someone must be white to vote in Texas obviously IS.
Marriage has always has been a "right" for heterosexuals.
It was simply denied for no good reason to homosexuals. All the justifications for excluding homosexuals turned out to be bullshit.
Procreation is NOT a requirement for marriage. We let old people and sterile people get married, so long as they are opposite sex. Why not same sex also?
Marriage confers rights to both spouses that merely shacking up does not, like inheritance rights, hospital visitation rights, health plan membership, tenants rights, and many others. Heterosexuals enjoy those protections by the mere fact of getting married - there is no requirement that they seek legal help to draw up special will provisions or make civil union contracts.
There is NO rational basis why same sex couples should be denied those protections that opposite sex couples enjoy without even thinking about it.
Denial of those equal protections of the law are based on nothing more than good old fashioned Old Testament bigotry.