Archive for the ‘get gov’t out of marriage’ Category
New Year, new realism
Perhaps the winter winds are blowing aside some blindfolds, making it easier for opinion leaders to see that bad laws hurt real families.
Senator Bob Barr, in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times, has noticed that “the heterosexual definition of marriage for purposes of federal laws — including, immigration, Social Security survivor rights and veteran’s benefits — has become a de facto club used to limit, if not thwart, the ability of a state to choose to recognize same-sex unions.” He should also have noted that this club prevents federal agencies from recognizing unmarried different-sex partnerships. I would love to take a small slice of credit for Barr’s conversion, hoping that my pitch to ditch DOMA on Reason TV helped persuade some of the libertarian voters he was trying to court.
The New York Times editorial page has noticed that “Under Arkansas law, people convicted of major crimes, including contributing to the delinquency of a minor, remain eligible to adopt children or become foster parents. Single people who have no partner — or who have a large number of casual sex partners — are also eligible. Anyone who is in a committed relationship, gay or straight, but is not married is automatically barred.”
Share: 
adoption, get gov't out of marriage
Comments 1
Jan 6th, 2009 by Nicky
Bloggingheads: Ban Marriage?
The two law professors in this video are not suggesting to end the legal status of marriage, just to call it by a new name and make it available to both same-sex and different-sex couples. Granted, this would achieve one important step forward by recognizing more couples’ relationships. But nothing the professors said suggests that they have any problem with privileging some licensed couples over all other relationships. So they really are not suggesting to get government out of the marriage business, merely to rebrand the business with a new, modern name. An interesting moment that shows real bias: they talk unselfconsciously about “downgrading” existing marriages to civil unions or domestic partnerships. If they are proposing to give CU/DP the exact same legal status as marriage with a different name, why would they call it a downgrade?
Share:
get gov't out of marriage
Comments 3
Dec 16th, 2008 by Nicky
Get government out of the marriage business
To mark the one-month anniversary of the election, here’s an unscientific assessment of the impact of Prop 8 and discriminatory ballot measures:
In the past month, at least 18 blogs have discussed getting government out of the marriage business. In the month before the election, only 6 bloggers were thinking along those lines.
Of course, the public’s attention span is short, and fame is fleeting even for an issue that affects 93 million people. As AtMP plans its objectives and activities for 2009, we invite your proposals:
What is the one thing you think AtMP could best do within the next 12 months to get government out of the marriage business?
Share:
get gov't out of marriage
Comments 1
Dec 5th, 2008 by Nicky
Guest Post: withhold marriage from everyone
Nicky asked me if I’d be willing to give an update on my “nuclear option” efforts, and I’m grateful to be able to share them with you here.
I’ve been following the same-sex marriage story here in California for the past four years, ever since San Francisco’s “Valentine’s Day Revolution”, and have over those years read the various lawsuits and decisions that led earlier this year to the California Supreme Court’s landmark decision [PDF] to require same-sex marriage within the state of California. In reading that decision, I was struck by a passage late in the majority decision.
When a statute’s differential treatment of separate categories of individuals is found to violate equal protection principles, a court must determine whether the constitutional violation should be eliminated or cured by extending to the previously excluded class the treatment or benefit that the statute affords to the included class, or alternatively should be remedied by withholding the benefit equally from both the previously included class and the excluded class. –In Re Marriage Cases, p. 119.
Share:
get gov't out of marriage
Comments 1
Dec 1st, 2008 by Guest
How do we end marriage discrimination?
What’s the best way to respond to marriage discrimination? Are you ready to divorce in protest? How could a test case get to the U.S. Supreme Court? Should government recognition of relationships drop the word marriage? People everywhere are bursting with ideas. This is an opportunity to capture ideas, bounce them around, improve them and create an action community. Read the rest of this entry »
Share:
advocacy, get gov't out of marriage
Comments 13
Nov 21st, 2008 by Nicky
