> I think we're saying the same thing in different ways. > > The financial and governmental advantages and responsibilities of civil > "marriage" should be available to all who choose to pair up to help get > through life and (if desired) rear children.
Not really-- I believe the government should not in any way respect 'marriage' by any definition. There should be absolutely no benefits given simply for the purpose of people getting 'married'. This is wrong, and condoning a religious practice(Roman Catholic sacrament of Matrimony). For practical reasons, contracts should be more common place between individuals(any number and sex) to allow each other power of attorney, rights for health concerns when the other is in the hospital, yada yada. However, no government-condoned financial incentives should exist for such-- the obvious practical ones still will(living together can save money, etc.). -- Derek _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
