Suppose they ban gay marriage; then what? ban divorce?

[KurtNYC]

The way the RW and their media have framed this issue, few seem to see this as an assault on families and monogamy. Tony Snow says this is an attempt to protect marriage as has been in this country for a couple hundred years but of course in the last 200 years, legal marriage has included polygamy and until recently excluded inter-racial marriage. So in fact the definition of legal marriage HAS changed over the years.

And what they are proposing is NOT a ban. It is only a ban on giving legal recognition to certain married couples. It may prevent spouses from hospital visitations and from carrying out their partner's wishes with respect to funeral arrangements but it won't stop 2 people from loving each other. It won't stop enlightened churches from MARRYING couples.

At it's core this is a worthless piece of legislation which would only serve to dish out a legislative gay bashing. And they are putting forth a baseless argument in support of it.

They are calling this "the defense of marriage" which really suggests a bunch of potential next steps: ban divorce, criminalize children born out of wedlock, penalize people who do not marry, penalize those who do not bear children, and increase the prosecution and penalties for adultery. But I honestly don't think that is the road they are headed down. All of those lack what seems to be the RW-appeal of the current legislation: gay bashing.

[BayouBengal07]

1. Already ahead of you...

"criminalize children born out of wedlock, penalize people who do not marry"



http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/23/060524012000.d4hes2dk.html

"Marry or get out, US town tells unwed parents
May 23 9:20 PM US/Eastern

A small American town is facing accusations of seeking to drive unmarried couples with children out of town on grounds they do not fit the local definition of a family.

The brewing controversy in Black Jack, a town of 6,800 in the central state of Missouri, began unfolding earlier this year when Olivia Shelltrack and Fondray Loving were denied an occupancy permit after moving into a four-bedroom house they had purchased.

Local officials told the couple that the fact they were not married and had three children, one from Shelltrack's previous relationship, did not fit the town's definition of "family"."

[rurallib]

2. Found it interesting that the state's involvement in marriage

in this country has been mostly as weapon of discrimination. Saw a panel on UCalTV one night. Seems states never even became interested in marriage as something to be involved in until after the Civil War. In the South. To stop a certain type of union.
So to your question about tightening up divorce laws, I see that coming if regressives stay in power. Great way to control them uppity women-folk.

[crazzy]

3. That makes about as much sense...

...as saying, since we wish to allow gays etc. to be able to join together, we believe in doing away with marriage and letting everyone decide for themselves what it is.

[Warpy]

4. Well, the foaming fundies would LOVE to ban divorce

and rich men who now have to marry their trophy wives after paying off the old wives would probably agree to it, since it would keep successive brides in concubinage and much cheaper to dispose of.

The only people who would be inconvenienced would be feckless entertainers and much married Congressmen and preachers. Oh, and divorce lawyers.

It would be a horror for women, of course, and for the men who are in abusive marriages.

[niyad]

5. gee, you have been reading some of the lunatics here in CO--where such

ridiculous bills as you mentioned have already been proposed--or the one in CA which would have made adultery a felony, etc. etc. one bill here would have made it virtually impossible to get a divorce, unless one went through a state-mandated year of therapy (paid for by the couple, of course) with state-approved therapists. no exception for things like domestic violence, incest, etc.

[MissB]

6. I think we should do away with marriage and let everyone

decide for themselves what it is.

*snark*