Proposition 8, Marriage Neutering, and Harm

I noticed a couple of comments on the LATimes.com blog entry that I previously wrote about here.

"Dozzer" February 23, 2011 at 12:51 PM:

Can you please tell me, how [same-sex couples] are being hurt. Please, Please tell me.

"coco" February 23, 2011 at 02:41 PM:

Are you kidding? If someone told me I couldn't marry my fiance, I would consider that an injury just on its own.

Yeah, I got bummed when someone told me I couldn’t get a University of California degree by playing Scrabble. So I guess the state owes me the UC degree of my choice, right?

But, here are some more specific ways that gay couples are hurt by marriage inequality:

Please note that a pairing absent one of the sexes is inherently unequal, regardless of the law.

- denied the right to legally co-parent a child - denied joint-adoption rights

Sorry, this is not a right. First comes the natural right of a child to a mother and a father. However, same-sex partners have gotten coparenting assignments without a marriage license. So have shack-up couples of both sexes.

- denied hospital visitation

Can't hospitals handle this without a marriage license? This like saying we must burn down the house because there's a fly in it.

- denied the ability to acquire legal residence for a partner who is a non-citizen

Immigration policy should be about what benefits the nation.

- denied automatic inheritance rights

These sorts of complaints are like a vegetarian walking into a steakhouse and complaining about meat being on the menu. Automatic inheritance rights have been in place to aid the natural family. You can draw up paper work easily to handle this.

- denied bereavement and sick leave if the partner dies or is ill

Shouldn't that be up to an employer?

- denied the ability to have joint insurance policies

Shouldn't that be up to the insurance company?

- denied the right to wrongful death benefits

Like automatic inheritance, these were recognized to aid natural families due to the nature of those families.

- denied the right to benefit from the partner's entitlements (Social Security, Medicare, veteran's benefits, etc.

Like automatic inheritance, these were recognized to aid natural families due to the nature of those families. I don't support ponzi schemes in general.

- denied the ability to request child support, alimony, etc. in the case of the dissolution of a partnership

Wait, how can you need child support when you allegedly (as you started this list) can't have a child together legally, and we know you can have one naturally? Like automatic inheritance, these were recognized to aid natural families due to the nature of those families. This is something that can be addressed without neutering marriage.

Now it's your turn: exactly how does gay marriage hurt the institution of civil (not religious) marriage?

Counterfeits inherently devalue the authentic.

Here are some of the other ways the push to neuter marriage has caused harm:

1. The worth of marriage has been denied. One of the arguments made by supporters of marriage neutering, despite it being contradictory to some of the other tactics, is "Marriage really isn't a big deal. It is a joke anyway."

2. Motherhood and fatherhood have been devalued with claims that neither one is important and that nothing is lacking without the involvement of motherhood or fatherhood.

3. Masculinity and femininity have been devalued much the same way.

4. The importance of children has been denied. "Marriage isn't about children." The interest of the state in marriage has primarily been because marriage is the only kind of association that can naturally create and raise the next generation with one parent and primary role model from each of the two sexes that comprise all of society in a cooperative legal, social, and usually biological union. But marriage neutering advocates put the focus on the minority of marriages that do not involve children and the claim is made that marriage isn’t about children, but rather about the sexual desires of adults.

5. Public servants have been derelict in their duty. Governors and state Attorney Generals such as California's Schwarzenegger and Brown have chosen not to defend the state constitution as amended. What other amendments will be ignored in the future? President Obama has chosen not to defend DOMA. What laws will be ignored or not defended in the future without a final court action?

6. Separation of powers has been denied. In some states, the majority vote has been subverted by judicial activism. No, there is no Constitutional right to a state-issued license that supersedes a vote of the majority on whose behalf the licenses are issued as long as all individuals have equal access, which they do, even if not all want to exercise that access.

7. Federalism is invoked arbitrarily as one state's (Massachusetts) laws are presented as mandating a change of federal policy, but another state's (California) constitution regarding the very same state licensing is presented as subject to invalidation based on a federal court.

8. Religions forming a backbone of American culture, including giving rise to institutions of higher learning, hospitals, charities, and so forth, have been attacked and mocked.

9. Public morality has further been attacked.

10. Universally established core societal foundations are now subject to change based on the whiniest political lobby on behalf of a behavioral minority.

It is foolish to think that these harms won't have a larger impact beyond the issue of marriage neutering, or to think precedents established to neuter marriage won't be used by "the other side" when it is in power.