# 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:** 6
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/101 "2012-07-09T16:06:06Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > And what of everyone who then complains that gays really DID destroy marriage? They can go piss up a rope. Alternatively, they’re free to gather up the shards of their broken marriage and move somewhere that doesn’t find the need to separate church and state or recognize the validity of gay relationships. You know, places like Iran. ---
**Author:** ![That\_Don\_Guy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/that_don_guy/32/538_2.png) [@That\_Don\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/That_Don_Guy)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/102 "2012-07-09T16:49:21Z")
I can think of two reasons, although I question the validity of the second one. First, some gays consider terms like “civil union” a “core word” - it’s kind of like saying, “African-Americans can have all of the rights that white people have, but only whites can be called ‘people’.” If they are “branded” separately, they will be treated separately. Second, Rosie O’Donnell’s reasoning is, “If you go to other countries, they may not recognize ‘civil unions’ as marriages.” Something tells me if you go to a Catholic-centric country such as France or Italy, they may not take homosexual marriage too kindly, even if it is sanctioned somewhere else. I see that, earlier this year, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that France does have the right to deny a same-sex couple the opportunity to adopt a child, saying that homosexual marriage is not a “human right.” ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/103 "2012-07-09T16:59:59Z")
> [@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? > [@dngnb8](#): > > See PP You’re missing **Guin** ’s point, **dragnb8**. There already **is** , for a man and a woman not presentlky already mrried, over the age of consent, not related within the bounds of consnguinity, an institution whereby they can join in a civil marital union before a judge or other magistrate and two witnesses – it’s called civil marriage. Extending that to same-sex couples is legally a piece of cakle; recreating hundreds pf years of statute and case law to determine, e.g., what happens in circumstance X for a civil union is going to be ungodly complex. Even if we adopt **magellan** ’s definition that they be controlled by one set of laws, there is nothing stopping a legislature from changing that. Why recreate th heel? ---
**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 9, 2012, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/104 "2012-07-09T17:02:53Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > Second, Rosie O’Donnell’s reasoning is, “If you go to other countries, they may not recognize ‘civil unions’ as marriages.” Something tells me if you go to a Catholic-centric country such as France or Italy, they may not take homosexual marriage too kindly, even if it is sanctioned somewhere else. I see that, earlier this year, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that France does have the right to deny a same-sex couple the opportunity to adopt a child, saying that homosexual marriage is not a “human right.” I do not believe my marriage certificate from Canada would be accepted in all countries. I know the US does not recognize it, and it is considered a “Civil Partnership” rather than marriage in Britain, a distinction without a difference barring the important intangibles discussed upthread. ---
**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, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/105 "2012-07-09T18:13:35Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > You’re missing **Guin** ’s point, **dragnb8**. There already **is** , for a man and a woman not presentlky already mrried, over the age of consent, not related within the bounds of consnguinity, an institution whereby they can join in a civil marital union before a judge or other magistrate and two witnesses – it’s called civil marriage. Extending that to same-sex couples is legally a piece of cakle; recreating hundreds pf years of statute and case law to determine, e.g., what happens in circumstance X for a civil union is going to be ungodly complex. Even if we adopt **magellan** ’s definition that they be controlled by one set of laws, there is nothing stopping a legislature from changing that. Why recreate th heel? I think youre missing my point. The term “marriage” in what you refer to is adopted from the Church. Thus, any involvement of the State in re-defining the term “Marriage” will be fought with great energy by people of the Church. It is the Churchs word, so to speak. Thus, where ever you see the word “Marriage” in law, it should be replace with “Union”. Now the Church can say shit. ---
**Author:** ![Inner\_Stickler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inner_stickler/32/318_2.png) [@Inner\_Stickler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inner_Stickler)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/106 "2012-07-09T18:29:10Z")
The abstract concept of Church in no way owns the abstract concept of marriage and I reiterate my statement that any community peeved about the government making rules about marriages can go piss up a rope. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/107 "2012-07-09T19:05:02Z")
> [@dngnb8](#): > > Now the Church can say shit. The “Church” (which church, anyway? The RCC? The Presbyterians? The Anglicans? The Methodists? The Orthodox Jews? Reform Jews? Nation of Islam? Scientology? Pastafarianism?) can say shit now. They have no say in the secular workings of our nation, or at least shouldn’t. You’re capitulating something to them that they DO NOT OWN. Marriage is older than any currently-established church in the world. Not a one of them has a say in civil marriage. Period. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/108 "2012-07-10T00:33:54Z")
> [@dngnb8](#): > > I think youre missing my point. The term “marriage” in what you refer to is adopted from the Church. No. It is not. If anything, marriage is the result of the Christian Church accepting and adapting its beliefs to Roman Law. Christianity, arising East of the Mediterranean as a Jewish heresy, would have probably followed Jewish norms, except that it quickly spread into the Roman Empire and took its converts from that population. They brought what they considered “correct” from the society in which they were raised. This is seen in such aspects of “Christian” marriage as monogamy, (which Judaism did not demand until Christian pressure inspired a change in European Judaism in the ninth century, but which was an absolute in Roman Civil Law). While marriage in Roman society was steeped in the religion of Rome, (as nearly all social phenomena were steeped the the religious traditions of all societies until a secular break occurred in Eighteenth Century Europe), the rules governing marriage–including the rights, privileges, and responsibilities associated with it–were matters of Roman Civil Law. All the various cries of “give marriage back to religion” or “get ‘religious’ marriage out of state functions” are simply declarations based on a misunderstanding of history. The entire tradition of marriage that the people of Europe and North America have inherited is rooted in civil law. Certainly, religion has had an effect on marriage with 2,000 years to work on it, but at root, it is a civil function and always has been. ---
**Author:** ![MyFactCheckBounced](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MyFactCheckBounced](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFactCheckBounced)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/109 "2012-07-10T00:45:59Z")
I don’t care which solution we pick, as long as it’s the same solution for gays as for straights. If we allllll agree that the state has to do the marriages, the state’s decision has to apply to gays and straights equally. If the state gets out of the marriage business, and just enforces the contractual/legal aspects of marriage (inheritance, hospital decisions, pensions, etc.,) just go through the rigamarole to change all the damned laws – uniformly – and whatever attendant expense applies to “happy to glad” (or happy to gay) changes. The gubmit’s role here is to recognize unions that confer spousal rights as a voluntary and binding contract between two people – not to privilege certain people because of their sexual orientation and punish others. Whatever applies, apply it to straights and gays equally – whether you call it civic union or marriage. And as I said before, if you want something extra, go to your church, ship captain, or internet shaman and get your ceremonial description within your ship or church or chatroom. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/110 "2012-07-10T03:09:20Z")
> [@MyFactCheckBounced](#): > > If the state gets out of the marriage business, and just enforces the contractual/legal aspects of marriage (inheritance, hospital decisions, pensions, etc.,) Colour me curious how this would work. ---
**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 10, 2012, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/111 "2012-07-10T03:51:40Z")
> [@dngnb8](#): > > See PP Planned Parenthood? Peter Pan? Polly Pocket? And thank you, **Polycarp** , for understanding my point. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/112 "2012-07-10T04:04:10Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Planned Parenthood? Peter Pan? Polly Pocket? His previous post, I assume. When your username is dngnb8, you’re obviously not one for redundant information. ---
**Author:** ![MyFactCheckBounced](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@MyFactCheckBounced](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFactCheckBounced)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/113 "2012-07-10T09:34:00Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Colour me curious how this would work. Exactly as it presently works in marriage-equality states. Exactly how it works now for straights in states where the law presently discriminates. Change the “m” in the word “marriage” to another letter, and remove any language that talks about gender when referencing married couples (who would now be “xarried” couples, for example.) The xarried couples, xarriages, etc., would continue to enjoy the rights previously held by “married” couples. If you’re “married” at the time of the change, you get grandfathered into automatically being “xarried” when the law takes effect. You no longer get preferential treatment by virtue of your marriage, but by virtue of your xarriage. (If single people ever wake up and protest that, that’s another topic entirely. One issue at a time here.) Hence, the red herring about the false history of marriage (i.e., that it’s always and everywhere been between hetero couples, etc.,) would be left outside of the state’s purview. The State would handle only the legalistic outcomes of marriage - now xarriage - and anybody concerned about the age-old revisionist “institution” would now be free to seek it somewhere other than through the State, which is beholden to another interest, that of equal protection under the law. The argument behind the “Defense of Marriage Act” is that we have to protect a hallowed institution. Yet we know that people are suppose to enjoy equal protection under the law. Fine. If you have an institution you insist _must_ be discriminatory to really work, allow it but don’t attach any significance to it. Who’s to say that the Episcopal church can’t perform _all_ the marriages they recognize? Nobody. But who’s to say that the church down the street _must_ perform _all_ the same marriages as the episcopals? Again, nobody. And most importantly, who’s to say that two people of any kind who love each other can’t be married? Nobody. But they _can_ say “Not in my church! My church discriminates!” I don’t think we want a country where a given rabbi or iman is entitled to dictate that no Jew or Muslim can marry out of his religion. But we also don’t want a country where clergymen are forced to perform marriages against their conscience. As a marrying couple, you just find a clergyman who’ll do the wedding and steer clear of the hardliners. But of course that doesn’t have anything to do with your secular legal rights. That’s conferred in the xarriage. What’s hard to understand? Of course the simpler course of action would be to make the civic intstitution of marriage non-discriminatory. But that offends people’s belief that “marriage” is a cultural institution carrying all this moral baggage, rather than a particular sort of contract. The only interest the state has in marriage at present is that the state enforces contracts, not that the state sets the country’s religion or morality. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 10:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/114 "2012-07-10T10:59:27Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > I do not believe my marriage certificate from Canada would be accepted in all countries. I know the US does not recognize it, and it is considered a “Civil Partnership” rather than marriage in Britain, a distinction without a difference barring the important intangibles discussed upthread. Yes but the part I underlined is because they’re “translating” to their own legal figure. If they ever switch to calling their own SSMs marriages, they will call yours one. The Spanish government doesn’t officially recognize your marriage as a marriage: they recognize it as a _matrimonio_, _matrimoni_, _matrimonio_ and _ezkontza_. The UK doesn’t involve a different language, but it does involve a different legal structure and they are defining your situation according to it. My _Ingeniería Superior_ is called a “Bachelors of Sciences in Engineering” in the US. That doesn’t mean I actually spent four years at a US college, it means that my huge-ass piece of cardboard with the words “Ingeniero Superior IQS” on it gives me in the US the same rights that I would get from a smaller piece of cardboard with the words “BS in Chemical Engineering”. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/115 "2012-07-10T13:28:48Z")
> [@dngnb8](#): > > I think youre missing my point. The term “marriage” in what you refer to is adopted from the Church. Horseshit. It’s adopted from the Latin _maritare_, which predates Christ by at least several hundred years, let alone the Church. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/116 "2012-07-10T14:00:45Z")
> [@MyFactCheckBounced](#): > > Exactly as it presently works in marriage-equality states. Exactly how it works now for straights in states where the law presently discriminates. > > Change the “m” in the word “marriage” to another letter, and remove any language that talks about gender when referencing married couples (who would now be “xarried” couples, for example.) You’re inventing new terminology, when my question was much more basic: how does the government enforce “the contractual/legal aspects of marriage (inheritance, hospital decisions, pensions, etc.,)” (or “xarriage” or whatever)? They would have to _know_ that two people were married/xarried, right? One would hardly expect them to just take the word of someone who _says_ “I was married/xarried to that rich person who died and I want the government to enforce the inheritance laws and give me all the dead person’s stuff”, even if that person is waving around a pretty certificate of marriage issued by some church that might no longer exist (or might never have existed), or exists in another country. We would expect the government to rely on its _own_ records, filed when the marriage/xarriage was initially formed, and isn’t that basically what a marriage license _is_ - making sure the government has your marriage on file, and is thus obliged to go to legal bat on your behalf on issues of “inheritance, hospital decisions, pensions, etc.” ? ---
**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 10, 2012, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/117 "2012-07-10T15:24:58Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Yes but the part I underlined is because they’re “translating” to their own legal figure. If they ever switch to calling their own SSMs marriages, they will call yours one. The Spanish government doesn’t officially recognize your marriage as a marriage: they recognize it as a _matrimonio_, _matrimoni_, _matrimonio_ and _ezkontza_. The UK doesn’t involve a different language, but it does involve a different legal structure and they are defining your situation according to it. > > My _Ingeniería Superior_ is called a “Bachelors of Sciences in Engineering” in the US. That doesn’t mean I actually spent four years at a US college, it means that my huge-ass piece of cardboard with the words “Ingeniero Superior IQS” on it gives me in the US the same rights that I would get from a smaller piece of cardboard with the words “BS in Chemical Engineering”. I get that, but the point is that one Canadian institution is currently represented by two different statuses in other countries, rather than just being mapped onto the equivalent of marriage. A Canadian “marriage” (French “mariage”) between a man and a woman is called “marriage” (Welsh “priodas”) in the UK, but our Canadian marriage is called “Civil Partnership” (Welsh “partneriaeth sifil”). Side note: I don’t know why they used the made-up word “sifil” (pronounced like English “civil”) rather than “dinesig”. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/118 "2012-07-10T16:25:36Z")
> [@That\_Don\_Guy](#): > > Rosie O’Donnell’s reasoning is, “If you go to other countries, they may not recognize ‘civil unions’ as marriages.” Do you believe these other countries will recognize a gay marriage as a marriage either? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2012, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/119 "2012-07-10T20:37:10Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Do you believe these other countries will recognize a gay marriage as a marriage either? It really doesn’t matter much – the important things like inheritance, employee benefits, pensions, child custody, divorce, etc. all take place in your own country. The things that are likely to happen in other countries (medical emergency, crime victimization, etc.) are mostly short-term crisis things, and in that crisis the local authorities there will be depending on the person accompanying them for help – whether that person is a relative, a spouse, just a friend, or a domestic partner. ---
**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 10, 2012, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505/120 "2012-07-10T21:59:11Z")
> [@t-bonham@scc.net](#): > > It really doesn’t matter much – the important things like inheritance, employee benefits, pensions, child custody, divorce, etc. all take place in your own country. Not necessarily. My parents are from two different countries, and my husband is from a third. I think that sort of situation is relatively common. We certainly have pension issues with all three countries, and I would imagine eventually inheritance issues. We’re hoping to avoid divorce altogether, of course. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-do-gays-insist-on-marriage/627505.md?page=7)