Without Nationwide Gay Marriage, U.S. Government Discriminates

Defense of Marriage Act divides married Americans into two classes

Reader Comments
Back to argument

Just curious, but what is keeping me from having the right to "marry" a monkey, or my dog, or my hand? not that I personally would want any of those things, but when do we draw the line on "marriage" and "marriage" rights?

Could i not marry my dog and give him/her all of the benefits my human spouse would have?

Or should we keep discriminating against beastiality?

What are the prerequisites for "marriage"?

-Someone who you thoroughly enjoy being around almost all of the time

-Someone who excites you sexually

Those are the only 2 attributes I could think of that pertain both to homosexual and heterosexual marriages.

However, there is 1 other attribute that pertains only to heterosexual marriage:

-Someone who you wish to create life with: which is based on human instincts of survival of the fittest.

It is an instinct to wish to leave a part of yourself behind in the world.

There is a clear difference between a heterosexual "marriage" and homosexual "marriage": I believe it would be better handled if they separated them as heterosexual marriages and homosexual unions.

All of the rights given to each marriage/union should be exactly the same, but this method would clear up any future confusion as to who/what a person could get "married" to.

Nick Openshaw of AL 3:41PM December 13, 2012

Marriage is a legitimate term for my relationship of 16 years. We deserve respect, could use support, and have weathered more storms than you would believe together as one.

I am a US citizen living in exile for the last 8 years because I happened to fall in love with someone from a different country. After 8 years in successful careers we relocated to stay together. This is blatant and completely unfair discrimination. I don't have the right to sponsor my partner. That is wrong. So please don't try and tell me that there aren't two classes of US citizens. My rights are just as inalienable as anyone else's, and this blatant discrimination must end.

Tom of NJ 11:30AM October 20, 2011

Most U.S. courts have ruled that there is no discrimination present in marriage laws that limit marriage to opposite-sex couples. There is no "right" to redefine marriage. Feel free to create a social institution that encourages people to make a committment and care for each other if you so choose; but marriage is intended to serve a specific, public purpose.

Ashley of MD 4:05PM October 07, 2011

This is not a debate over the WORD "Marriage" or "Wedding" nor is it a religious debate, nor is it a affront to the freedom of religion. This is basic human rights. and the constitutionality of DOMA. Any law like this is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. We Are Born With Certain Inalienable Rights, Pursuit Of Happiness, being one of them. and a few other words, NO LAW SHALL BE MADE THAT INHERENTLY Restricts or Removes These Rights. This is about the government TAKING AWAY MY RIGHTS. I should NOT have to fight for a right I already should have.

Shane Phoenix of FL 3:23PM October 07, 2011