Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wayners who wrote (6885)	2/16/2004 4:58:26 AM
From: zonder	Respond to of 20773

Annullments are provided for by law for this very situation, because the law recognizes the purpose of marriage Courts also grant divorce for "irreconcilable differences" and yet "having no differences" is not the "purpose of marriage". There are many couples who cannot conceive, yet stay together. That proves that your hypothesis re "the purpose of marriage is to have & provide for children" is incorrect. I think Gays that want to get married have completely missed its purpose. I don't care if they do it, but have yet to see an explanation of why they want to do it. Off the top of my head... Love? Wishing to declare to the world their commitment to each other? Wishing to put a ring on the partner's finger so others will know he is taken? Making a baby or two is not the only reason why people get married. Did you really need to be told this, or are you just being difficult because you oppose gay marriages out of sentimental reasons? :-) It serves no legal purpose that I see of It serves these legal purposes that I see: (1) Next of kin (2) Inheritance, property ... not to mention social security and tax benefits available to married couples (in many European countries - not so sure about how it is in US). If you would like to talk about the legal aspects, maybe you should not ignore what I wrote in the previous post: ------------------------------------------------------- There are a number of references to "pursuit of happiness" being an "inalienable right" in state constitutions, and US Supreme Court did say that "the freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness." Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12, 18 L. Ed. 2d 1010, 87 S. Ct. 1817 (1967). See also Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 54 L. Ed. 2d 618, 98 S. Ct. 673 (1978). And if same-sex marriages do not infringe on anyone else's rights, the state apparently has no right to ban gay people from forming families of their own (i.e. pursuing happiness) - with or without children. Message 19804604