I absolutely know it's possible to see things like LGBT rights and reproductive freedom as society becoming less moral. I wouldn't bother arguing so much against that position if it wasn't.https://twitter.com/OldSaintRiot/status/980893110799499264 …
-
-
"I don't care much about traditional purposes of marriage." Then why have it at all? Why should the state (that's us) assign benefits of those who would claim it? Note that guardianship does not confer the benefits of inheritances, power of attorney, etc. between two guardians.
-
Surely you recognise that people can value things for other reasons than tradition? I married my husband to show my love and commitment to him. I don't think the state should privilege married couples over unmarried ones.
-
1. I do; it is beside the point. The value of marriage is not to support tradition. Marriage has become tradition because it has shown that it is a functional element in the smooth operation of a society aiming at eudaimonia. ->
-
Then why would you want to deny it to same sex couples?
-
Threading and timing has got me lost. What does this question follow? Can you quote a brief snippet for context?
-
If you think marriage is benefit for the smooth running of society, why deny it to same sex couples? Won't they do better in committed relationships? Won't their children benefit from their parents being married? (In your view?)
-
(Gimme a sec, I want to respond in order so that we can keep our ducks straight.)
-
I'm not really interested in arguing about same sex marriage any more. It's been done to death and the battle has mostly been won.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.