I understood this from the beginning, Fatman. We disagree. I doubt the world will stop revolving because we disagree. No problem...
True enough Prof. I do like the ability to disagree cordially though.
In support of Marrage the Government has given certain priveledges to the married.
Why? What does the Constitution say about marriage, gay, straight, or polygamous?
There is a long list of these priveledges , but Marrage predates our government , might predate government itself , and doesn't need the government's help to exist.
But it needs the governments help to protect it from homosexuals? (Constitutional Amendments)
As long as the government doesn't do things harmfull to marrage , it is all good.
What possible harm can government do to marriage? It's been around forever (above) so I don't buy into the idea that because some homosexuals marry each other that it's suddenly under assault and about to fall into this morass of depravity.
Lets allow anyone to designate a power of atturny to a single other person of his choice , and to this coupleing let the tax advantage, the right to speak for , the right to visit in hospital and all other appropriate rights attached to marrage ,give.
Why not? What business of yours is it? Because Soon every gangster in the county will have "married " hs bookeeper? That's a straw man argument and we both know it. How many husbands and wives marry each other to further their criminal enterprises? Relatively few I would imagine, I don't see how it would be different with gay marriage.
Oh well , unintended consequences are oten more important than the intended ones.
So the best policy is to always do nothing because it may have unintended consequences more important than the original? That's hogwash plane and we both know that too.