# Why do gays insist on marriage? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 7, 2012, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505 "2012-07-07T06:02:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 10:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/81 "2012-07-08T10:31:10Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > Not to mention the Nazi concentration camps, where gays were attacked, even killed by dogs. And where spraying prisoners with water as they stood outside in the winter was especially common for gay prisoners (because one of the slang german terms for gay men was ‘warm’ brother). And where the Allies locked the gays back up once they figured out what the pink triangle stood for. ---
**Author:** ![ekedolphin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ekedolphin/32/10003_2.png) [@ekedolphin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ekedolphin)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/82 "2012-07-08T11:26:13Z")
My answer to the OP: Because marriage is, and ought to be, a fundamental right guaranteed all human beings of legal age. And I find it _very_ disturbing that people talk about drafting an amendment to the U.S. Constitution “protecting the sanctity of marriage” by defining it as between one man and one woman. Constitutional amendments should never, **ever,** be created to _take away_ someone’s rights, or deny them a right that they didn’t legally have in most states. I find it uplifting that the current trend in America seems to be towards legalization. But I think we’re a long ways away from making it legal nationwide. (Quite frankly I don’t have a lot of faith in some of the deep-red states, in that regard.) ---
**Author:** ![ekedolphin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ekedolphin/32/10003_2.png) [@ekedolphin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ekedolphin)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/83 "2012-07-08T11:30:46Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And where the Allies locked the gays back up once they figured out what the pink triangle stood for. _researches_ :eek::eek::eek: My God. Homosexuality remained a felony in West and East Germany for 24 _years_ after the war. That is **insane.** ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/84 "2012-07-08T12:08:28Z")
It’s really simple: Homosexuals are (or should be) socially and legally equal to heterosexuals. I wrote, then deleted a long and rambling post about this, but it’s simpler just to say: homosexuals, by virtue of equal legal and social status, should be able to insist on anything that heterosexuals insist upon (or indeed, enjoy without any insistence at all). ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/85 "2012-07-08T12:22:39Z")
Not that the OP is still reading, but: I was in a domestic partnership in the US for several years. Then we moved to Canada and are now legally married. Though there are differences in rights, so far the main benefits are intangible. These are enormous and deeply meaningful. Because my marriage is federally recognized, I have no worries about introducing my husband to my boss, for example, whereas in the US it was not automatically a good idea: I had to feel out each individual person to see whether it was okay, and once it turned out to be a mistake that cost me my job (my boss was a nun: I was not fired, but my contract was not renewed). Likewise in social situations. I had very few problems in the US, as I lived in urban areas in a fairily liberal state, but the negative reactions I did see were held by people who felt they were in the right. In Canada, people might feel I’m _morally_ on shaky ground, but at the same time they know that I’m _legally_ 100% supported by the laws of the land, and in no way a second-class citizen. TL;DR: From someone who has been on both sides, being married is way, way, way better than being in a “civil union”. ---
**Author:** ![ekedolphin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ekedolphin/32/10003_2.png) [@ekedolphin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ekedolphin)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/86 "2012-07-08T12:31:24Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > Because my marriage is federally recognized, I have no worries about introducing my husband to my boss, for example, whereas in the US it was not automatically a good idea: I had to feel out each individual person to see whether it was okay, and once it turned out to be a mistake that cost me my job (my boss was a nun: I was not fired, but my contract was not renewed). :eek: That’s awful. Anyone please correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the Equal Opportunity for Housing and Employment posters I’ve seen have said that such things cannot be denied on the basis of gender, race, color, religion or national origin, but sexual orientation isn’t a nationally protected class. Some states have made it so, but obviously this is an oversight that has no business remaining in effect in 2012. ---
**Author:** ![Maastricht](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@Maastricht](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maastricht)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/87 "2012-07-08T12:34:16Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Let’s put this another way: Congratulations, **NOLA Cajun** , you’ve been accepted to go to college at Harvard University. Get ready for four years of intense study that will help shape the rest of your life! > > Oh, there’s one catch. The President of Harvard University has this thing about Southerners. He’s kind of ticked off that Southerners go around calling him a blue-blooded damn Yankee all the time. I mean, _all the time._ So after you fulfill all your study requirements, the same ones as your fellow students, you aren’t going to get a bachelor of arts degree. But you’ll get a nice certificate! That certificate will say that you completed your studies and did a good job. It is true that this certificate was created just for Southerners, but it isn’t like it is discriminatory or anything. If a non-Southerner wanted a certificate rather than a degree, they _could_ ask for one. It’s strange, though, no non-Southerner ever does… they all just get the degree for some reason… > > Anyways, depending on where you want to live and work, some employers may fully accept your certificate as being exactly the same as a degree (you did the coursework after all), and others might say, “Certificate? That’s not a bachelors degree! We might have a job on the loading dock for you, but no… you aren’t qualified to start in the accounting department… that just won’t work for us.” > > But rest content in your own mind that you earned that certificate by doing everything that your fellow students did, and nobody can take that away from you, even if you have to work on that loading dock. You will know that you’re a Harvard man, and you have the certificate to prove it. > > Feel better? I just want to say I like this comparison a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/88 "2012-07-08T13:00:48Z")
> [@ekedolphin](#): > > :eek: That’s awful. > > Anyone please correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe the Equal Opportunity for Housing and Employment posters I’ve seen have said that such things cannot be denied on the basis of gender, race, color, religion or national origin, but sexual orientation isn’t a nationally protected class. Some states have made it so, but obviously this is an oversight that has no business remaining in effect in 2012. Quite right. It was in my state, though. In this particular case (as in many discrimination cases), it would be difficult to impossible to prove—she may have just disliked me for entirely separate reasons, and of course that’s the benefit of contract workers: no obligation to re-hire, at least not in this case. It’s my husband who is convinced the orientation is a factor, but even if I were inclined to pursue it there’s no way I’d convince a jury. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/89 "2012-07-08T14:28:32Z")
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers] Quote=SunGazer] No need to get your knickers in a bunch. [/quote] Not wearing any, thanks. [/QUOTE] Way TMI for me! ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/90 "2012-07-08T14:46:50Z")
I’ve never said this before, but I agree with **Der Trihs** \, particularly his comments in post 23: [QUOTE=Der Trihs] Yes, because there are a multitude of legal issues that are relevant to the institution, which in turn is really just a formal recognition of the human tendency towards pair bonding. [/QUOTE] Laws aren’t made in the abstract; they are made to respond to the human condition. And one notable aspect of the human condition is the tendency to pair bond, with a sexual component, in some cases for a more than merely transient period. People in a pair bond live together; they share their stuff; they share their lives; they depend on each other for little things in life, and for big things. And the law of marriage is not some major government intrusion into the personal lives of individuals; it’s evolved over the years to recognise that natural tendency and to provide supports, rights, and obligations for the couple. It’s just like other areas of the law. The law of contract has evolved because people make deals with each other all the time; so you need a body of law that governs those principles. People occasionally get into accidents and hurt other people; so you need a law of torts and negligence to deal with those situations. People want to own stuff, sell stuff, buy stuff, give stuff away; so you need laws governing property rights. And people die; so you need laws governing wills and estates. All of those are part of the human condition, and so we as society have laws governing them. Pair bonding is just one more aspect of the human condition, for which laws have evolved. > [@Qwertol](#): > > I bet there are laws already that enable you to do so (I kept the laws related to children out, because it is really related to parenthood, not marriage itself). So we can get rid of marriage and to keep it simple just create some “relationship laws bundle” composed from this above, which each side can exit on demand and we can save a lot of money which is spent on divorce cases now. And that “relationship laws bundle” is exactly what marriage is, in law. There are all sorts of aspects of living together in a sexual relationship for a significant period of time that the average citizen doesn’t think about when they first meet the love of their life; but over the centuries, those issues have come up in court cases and in legislation. Marriage provides an off-the-shelf relationship laws bundle for a couple. When they get married, they automatically get that bundle of rights. And, I don’t see how changing it the way **Qwertol** suggests would reduce the difficulties of ending the relationship. That’s what the law of divorce does already. It’s not the law of divorce that is complicated; it’s that human emotions can be very messy, and untangling a relationship of joint interaction over several years can be quite complicated. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/91 "2012-07-08T16:18:52Z")
> [@SunGazer](#): > > Court proceedings - Our courts are a sham. We need to move to common law and abolish our current admiralty based laws. If a judge marries two men under a gold-fringed flag, how many violations of the Constitution have occurred? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/92 "2012-07-08T16:43:12Z")
**Moderating** > [@SunGazer](#): > > Well said! I don’t understand what gives us the right to deny someone something just because of their sexual preference? Personally, I believe that the institution of marriage sucks and it should be no business of the government to get involved in it in the first place. If we truly have a servant government then why is it that we need to seek “licenses” to do things from them? If you want to open a separate thread to discuss the ways in which the U.S. has moved away from what you believe its ideals should have been, feel free to do so. We welcome all sorts of discussions in this forum. However, I have only opened two threads, so far, today, and you have interjected into both of them off-topic rants that were only marginally related to the actual discussion. That sort of hijacking will not go well, here. = = = That goes for references to Admiralty laws and related topics by everyone else, as well. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/93 "2012-07-08T16:49:32Z")
**Dr. Drake** , fuck, that’s horrible. This whole thread is making me want to vomit. Twenty-years from now we’ll look back on this like we did with the ban on interracial marriage and think, WTF? > [@SunGazer](#): > > I believe that a marriage certificate does not provide anything of meaning or value to the relationship between two people. On the contrary it imposes undue restrictions. So don’t get married. No one’s forcing you. Oh, and that site you gave us is very, shall I say, “entertaining”? (BTW, the guy who wrote that book was convicted of tax evasion) ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/94 "2012-07-08T17:05:21Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And where the Allies locked the gays back up once they figured out what the pink triangle stood for. And, of course, since the courts decided that herding people into camps and torturing them to death was illegal, the camps weren’t viewed as part of a legitimate justice system. So the time they spent in the camps was not counted against their sentences. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/95 "2012-07-08T18:01:48Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > If a judge marries two men under a gold-fringed flag, how many violations of the Constitution have occurred? Well, bigamy, for one 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/96 "2012-07-08T18:49:56Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > And, of course, since the courts decided that herding people into camps and torturing them to death was illegal, the camps weren’t viewed as part of a legitimate justice system. So the time they spent in the camps was not counted against their sentences. Shit, I never even knew that. Wow. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/97 "2012-07-08T23:41:51Z")
> [@NOLA\_Cajun](#): > > I don’t know where this will go. I suspect it will be moved even though I’m sure there must be an answer to it. > > I seriously want to know why gays insist on marriage and are not content with civil unions? If the term “content with” sounds as if it’s less then marriage or as if I’m saying “Take what you can get, be happy, and shut up.” That is not my intent. > > Do civil unions address all of the rights issues that are the basis for wanting marriage? Or not? Please explain your answer and don’t just say “Yes” or “No”. > > Thank you. > > _ **END OF QUESTION. WHAT FOLLOWS ARE JUST MY OPINIONS AND OBSERVATIONS AND NOT PART OF THE QUESTION.** _\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\*\* > > They call us “breeders” and things like that. Whatever. If some find hetero’s so despicable why do they want to be “like us”? Again, not a term meant to be derisive, just an observation from personal experience. > > My personal opinion is that if they are allowed to get married then they can say “Well now you can’t call us ‘sinners’ because now we’re married and can have sex.” Seriously, this is what I believe. And I say this because if every other issue is resolved and there is no longer any rights that are denied, without marriage, then why would it matter still? Don’t misunderstand me. I’m fine with gay marriage. If you want to lose half your stuff to someone then go for it. I’m also okay if you want to marry a tree too. I’m most certainly against any marriage that violates another persons rights or a child being involved. I absolutely reject any pedophile being able to marry the child of his (or hers) choice. > > As to the argument that gay marriage will destroy the fabric of our society, I also reject that. Given the current divorce rate I’d say hetero’s haven’t exactly lived up to the standard they so adamantly demand homosexuals adhere to. And to all of the divorced Christians that marry 2 and 3 times (and more) and shudder at the thought of gay marriage just remember : According to the Bible YOU ARE AN ADULTERER (which is the sin that homosexuals are accused of committing if they participate in sexual acts). Now that your question has been answered there are a couple of things. Homosexuals are guilty, in biblical terms, of fornication, not adultery. The irony is that people who oppose SSM are participating in that sin. It’s akin to refusing to feed the hungry and then calling them a thief when they steal a loaf of bread. Now that you’ve had this question answered you may want to ask why so many heteros feel that the institution of marriage will be damaged by SSM, when it makes zero sense. And why does anyone want to spend the time and money to create a new classification called civil unions that have all the same rights when you can just allow SS couples to marry. Last but not least. It is a civil rights issue and there are legitimate parallels to be drawn with other civil rights struggles. I’ve never heard anyone say they are exactly the same. ---
**Author:** ![dngnb8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/977dab/32.png) [@dngnb8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dngnb8)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/98 "2012-07-09T14:00:08Z")
> [@NOLA\_Cajun](#): > > My personal opinion is that if they are allowed to get married then they can say “Well now you can’t call us ‘sinners’ because now we’re married and can have sex.” Seriously, this is what I believe. I disagree. JMHO The word Marriage over the years has been an accepted definition of the profession of public commitment in civil law. Over history, many cultures have accepted and recognized this. The inception of marriage is rooted in religion. Only recently in historical terms has marriage been monogamous but that is another discussion. I believe the issue we have today is the Church vs State. The State essentially has accepted the definition as part of civil law. We have built a civil code system based on a religious precept. However, as we become less discriminatory in our treatment of others, we now have the issue of a discriminatory law. To change the definition of marriage, the State is taking it upon itself to rewrite a Church definition. Bad juju follows when State starts defining Church. On top of this, many Homosexuals are Atheist. I believe mainly because of the persecution they continue to suffer from obtuse Christians who only read parts of the Bible that they want to follow. Since these particular homosexuals consider religion to be a fantasy, they have no issue with State defining marriage. They have no problem with eliminating “Church” because to them, it is like eliminating the Easter Bunny, a fantasy. History has shown that the conflicts between Church and State are fraught with peril. Bad history is bad and that is a road we really do not want to travel today. The solution is really simple if you ask me. Under Civil Law, where ever you have the word Marriage, you replace it with Civil Union. This includes every reference to the word or idea of marriage in our law (IRC). Additionally, I would go to the point of saying a Church ceremonial marriage does not constitute a civil union. If we are going to separate Church and State, we must make a complete break. All previous unions will be grandfathered and redefined as civil union. To be qualified as a civil union, one still has to get a license (Civil Union license instead of Marriage License). All that being said, I have talked with numerous gays and they dont want Civil Union, they want Marriage. To them, its like stabbing back at the Church. As long as this continues, I think they do more harm to getting their relationships recognized then if we just go down the Civil Union road. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/99 "2012-07-09T15:58:46Z")
And what of everyone who then complains that gays really DID destroy marriage? Seriously, this has been argued again and again and again. There already IS civil marriage. You don’t have to get married in a church. So why change the term? ---
**Author:** ![dngnb8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/977dab/32.png) [@dngnb8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dngnb8)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/100 "2012-07-09T16:03:48Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > And what of everyone who then complains that gays really DID destroy marriage? > > Seriously, this has been argued again and again and again. There already IS civil marriage. You don’t have to get married in a church. So why change the term? See PP [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505.md?page=6)