Marriage equality

[jesmu84]

Good for the Senate (and expectedly, the house) for getting this done.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Think you got your houses of Congress backwards, kin.

Agreed that this is good legislation.

IBTL

[Jockey]

Good for the Senate (and expectedly, the house) for getting this done.

Ziggy is right ( a sentence I never thought I would say.

The House was a gimme. The Senate was always going to be the issue.

[jesmu84]

Think you got your houses of Congress backwards, kin.

Agreed that this is good legislation.

IBTL

My wording was poor. Expected the house to get it done.

Regardless, good for all

[tower912]

I have never seen the point in exempting the LGBTQ community from the horror and misery of marriage.

[MU82]

Congrats to the Republicans, including the two senators from North Carolina, for rejecting laws of hate and for recognizing this as good governance.

The language that had to be inserted to get it passed -- that religious organizations don't have to provide "goods or services" for the celebration of any marriage -- was fine, too. Who wants to have anything to do with an organization that hates them just for being who they are?

[Jay Bee]

This isn’t about equality or equal rights. It’s about special benefits for certain people.

Absolutely pathetic.

Treat everyone the same.

[Galway Eagle]

Treat everyone the same.

This is why Jay Bee doesn't care who he puts it in. he's an equal opportunist all for treating everyone the same.

[Babybluejeans]

Treat everyone the same.

Exactly what the bill ensures...should give it a read.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Exactly what the bill ensures...should give it a read.

IIRC, Jay Bee takes issue with married couples getting tax benefits but not single people.

[Jay Bee]

Exactly what the bill ensures...should give it a read.

No, it doesn’t. Why should marriage be a factor in any law, rule or regulation?

Very discriminatory and hateful.

[Jockey]

IIRC, Jay Bee takes issue with married couples getting tax benefits but not single people.

I don't imagine any woman (or man) would have him - as I am sure he is as charming in real life as on Scoop - so he misses out on a lifetime tax break.

[tower912]

Reports out of Ft. Myers said he and his wife were quite pleasant.   

[Skatastrophy]

Reports out of Ft. Myers said he and his wife were quite pleasant.   

I've met some folks from Scoop and they've all been extremely attractive

[Jockey]

Reports out of Ft. Myers said he and his wife were quite pleasant.   

I thought that was Lenny (who I argue/discuss with a lot but seems like a good guy).

[Johnny B]

No, it doesn’t. Why should marriage be a factor in any law, rule or regulation?

Very discriminatory and hateful.

5 year olds should marry 60 year olds cause why should marriage be a factor in any law, rule or regulation? Your comment is outrageously dumb in so many ways.

[Jay Bee]

Two people are exactly the same, except one is married and one isn’t. They are treated differently to cheers of “equality”… why? Marriage rights reward married individuals— why is this celebrated?

[Johnny B]

Your view is confusing and hurts my head. its celebrated cause it protects peoples freedom to get married, whilst people want to take it away. Go ahead and get married. marry a woman or man idc. nothing is stopping you.

[forgetful]

Two people are exactly the same, except one is married and one isn’t. They are treated differently to cheers of “equality”… why? Marriage rights reward married individuals— why is this celebrated?

I'm not sure you understand the concept of marriage, and how many people were barred from partaking in a life together that is recognized by the rest of the nation.

[Jay Bee]

I'm not sure you understand the concept of marriage, and how many people were barred from partaking in a life together that is recognized by the rest of the nation.

I’m asking why are we talking about “equality” when it comes to marriage rights, when the rights defy equality?

Again, look at my question. What is equal about the government giving preferential treatment to those who are married vs those who are not?

Awful and wrong!

[Pakuni]

Going to be a rough night at the JayBee home when he learns about child tax credits, mortgage interest deductions and senior exemptions.

[Hards Alumni]

Going to be a rough night at the JayBee home when he learns about child tax credits, mortgage interest deductions and senior exemptions.

It's okay, his integrity would never allow him to use those deductions for personal gain.

[The Lens]

I thought that was Lenny (who I argue/discuss with a lot but seems like a good guy).

Lenny is fantastic, his wife is fantastic-er.

[Lennys Tap]

I’m asking why are we talking about “equality” when it comes to marriage rights, when the rights defy equality?

Again, look at my question. What is equal about the government giving preferential treatment to those who are married vs those who are not?

Awful and wrong!

JB - you’re 100% correct from an equality/fairness standpoint.

But Congress believes (and I agree) that marriage leads to a better, more stable society. So they offer incentives to encourage it, which is OK by me. Want less of an activity? Tax it. Want more? Subsidize it. It’s what governments do.

[Lennys Tap]

Lenny is fantastic, his wife is fantastic-er.

As always, you’re way too kind to me - but dead on re Mrs. Lenny!

[Jockey]

As always, you’re way too kind to me - but dead on re Mrs. Lenny!

Well, put her on Scoop.

Maybe she’ll agree with me more than you do. 

[MuggsyB]

JB - you’re 100% correct from an equality/fairness standpoint.

But Congress believes (and I agree) that marriage leads to a better, more stable society. So they offer incentives to encourage it, which is OK by me. Want less of an activity? Tax it. Want more? Subsidize it. It’s what governments do.

The "stable society" argument is a tough one for me Lenny.  Especially when divorce rates are at what.....45%?  Would you agree that divorce leads to a more unstable society? 

[Jockey]

I’m asking why are we talking about “equality” when it comes to marriage rights, when the rights defy equality?
 
Again, look at my question. What is equal about the government giving preferential treatment to those who are married vs those who are not?

Awful and wrong!

What are you? Eight years old?

Everything should be fair? 

[warriorchick]

The "stable society" argument is a tough one for me Lenny.  Especially when divorce rates are at what.....45%?  Would you agree that divorce leads to a more unstable society?

Divorce= not being married. 

And divorces have been on the decline since 1990.

[Galway Eagle]

The "stable society" argument is a tough one for me Lenny.  Especially when divorce rates are at what.....45%?  Would you agree that divorce leads to a more unstable society?

Fwiw college educated divorce rate tends to be half that of those with just high school diplomas. College educated people also get married later in life when they're more stable financially. Perhaps marriage does offer stability for those inclined to be stable in the first place

[MuggsyB]

Fwiw college educated divorce rate tends to be half that of those with just high school diplomas. College educated people also get married later in life when they're more stable financially. Perhaps marriage does offer stability for those inclined to be stable in the first place

I think that's probably fair.  But I also think it's fair to argue that divorce impacts society negatively. 

[Jay Bee]

What do marriage “success” rates look like when you break it down to diff cuts? Should the Feds give more or less to one? Or should they TREAT INDIVIDUALS EQUALLY?

[Lennys Tap]

Well, put her on Scoop.

Maybe she’ll agree with me more than you do. 

No chance she’ll ever post here, Jockey - she’s seen me go down the rabbit hole too many times to want to follow!

[Hards Alumni]

I think that's probably fair.  But I also think it's fair to argue that divorce impacts society negatively.

Okay, so what is your solution?  No marriage?

I have a ton of friends who are very successful despite having parents who got divorced, or have been divorced themselves.

[21Jumpstreet]

I used to sound like JB, and I can see the logic. I agree, treat everyone equally…err…well justly until it’s equally. I don’t think the government should be involved in marriage, marriage subsidies, tax credits, whatever. However, the government has inserted itself into marriage and will never be out of the business of legislating it one way or another. So, that means we likely need government to legislate “marriage equality” in order to “make progress.” For better or worse, the government made the unequal rules, so I have come to learn that progress is progress and changing some of the unequal rules is a good thing. We can certainly debate what the best way to do that is, off scoop of course.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Okay, so what is your solution?  No marriage?

I have a ton of friends who are very successful despite having parents who got divorced, or have been divorced themselves.

In general, divorce is a hell of a lot better for kids than living with parents who are in an unhappy marriage. 

[Lennys Tap]

In general, divorce is a hell of a lot better for kids than living with parents who are in an unhappy marriage.

True. Unhappy people are generally pretty good at sharing/spreading unhappiness.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

True. Unhappy people are generally pretty good at sharing/spreading unhappiness.

And you aren't modelling great behavior for what your children's marriage should look like.

[dgies9156]

The difficulty this country has with universal marriage is the difference between sacramental marriage and personal merger contracts.

Sacramental marriage is the blessing that a religious organization gives two people -- in this case, a man and woman (or in the Mormons' case, many women and one man) -- as they embark on a life together. It often includes a Personal Merger Contract issued by the state.

Personal Merger Contracts are what the state hands out. It's a license or contract that allows two people who have attained the age of 18 and are legally able to enter into a contract the right to merge into one entity. It's like a merger of equals in business except there's no fair value accounting!

My faith blindly failed to see the difference. When Illinois debated marriage equality some years ago, the Roman Catholic Church under then Cardinal Francis George vigorously fought marriage equality. They lost and they should have! While I think our faith's position on sacramental marriage is Neanderthal and damaging, nothing in the Illinois act forced Catholic Priests and Deacons to sanction sacramental marriage in cases at odds with the faith's teaching.

Maybe we should do what the Europeans do. Anyone who wants a personal merger applies for a license with the state. When the license is granted, the State recognizes the personal merger, regardless of whether a church is involved. You go to the church for the ceremony and blessing.

[tower912]

It has been 30 years.   I am still waiting on equality.

[dgies9156]

It has been 30 years.   I am still waiting on equality.

Keep waiting -- it's been 42 for me!

[MuggsyB]

Okay, so what is your solution?  No marriage?

I have a ton of friends who are very successful despite having parents who got divorced, or have been divorced themselves.

I wasn't offering a "solution" but more questioning the notion that this automatically leads to a more stable society.  And if being in an unhappy marriage is worse than divorce, and worse for children,  that further amplifies my point.   All things being equal I think if you're raised in a family with a loving and happy marriage your chances of being happy and "stable" are better than the alternatives.  However if the divorce rate is 50%, and the number of unhappy marriages is another whatever %,  I think stating marriage leads to more stability in society is a questionable assertion. 

[Hards Alumni]

I wasn't offering a "solution" but more questioning the notion that this automatically leads to a more stable society.  And if being in an unhappy marriage is worse than divorce, and worse for children,  that further amplifies my point.   All things being equal I think if you're raised in a family with a loving and happy marriage you're chances of being happy and "stable" are better than the alternatives.  However if the divorce rate is 50%, and the number of unhappy marriages is another whatever %,  I think stating marriage leads to more stability in society is a questionable assertion.

Fair enough, thanks for expanding.

[dgies9156]

Okay, so what is your solution?  No marriage?

I have a ton of friends who are very successful despite having parents who got divorced, or have been divorced themselves.

Let me try to address this as best I can. I admit I'm biased. As I noted above, I married a long time ago to a Marquette woman. If she only loved basketball... LOL!

Being the child of a happily married couple is no guarantee of a happy life for the child. The world is riddled with children of good parents who have had depression, substance abuse problems, difficulties with the law and issues associated with job, family and community.

Conversely, as Brother Hards points out, there are millions of people from broken marriages who've done extraordinarily well. My Dad did very well in his life, was married for 50 years to the same woman, Aka, Mom, had six great children despite having parents who were in an unhappy marriage and divorced 10 years after Dad married Mom.

All this said, I'm of the view that having a happily married couple who sees the world close to the same way (yeah, I know, Ms. Dgies and I differ politically LOL) conveys a sense of warmth, belonging, strong relationship and security to their children. In our case, both of our parents were married months short of 50 years when one of the spouses died. I can't say we're perfect or even a model, but our children turned out OK, for now! We did the best we could and, importantly, as times got tough, we never gave up on each other.

The last point is the most critical in a marriage. Never give up!

[warriorchick]

I wasn't offering a "solution" but more questioning the notion that this automatically leads to a more stable society.  And if being in an unhappy marriage is worse than divorce, and worse for children,  that further amplifies my point.   All things being equal I think if you're raised in a family with a loving and happy marriage you're chances of being happy and "stable" are better than the alternatives.  However if the divorce rate is 50%, and the number of unhappy marriages is another whatever %,  I think stating marriage leads to more stability in society is a questionable assertion.

The divorce rate is not 50%.  And I am too lazy to look up the stats, but my guess is that in most respects, children of divorce are, on average, better off than children whose parents never married.

And anyone who doesn't get married because they believe "there's a 50% chance we are going to  get divorced, anyway"  is probably making the right decision.

[Jay Bee]

I used to sound like JB, and I can see the logic. I agree, treat everyone equally…err…well justly until it’s equally. I don’t think the government should be involved in marriage, marriage subsidies, tax credits, whatever. However, the government has inserted itself into marriage and will never be out of the business of legislating it one way or another. So, that means we likely need government to legislate “marriage equality” in order to “make progress.” For better or worse, the government made the unequal rules, so I have come to learn that progress is progress and changing some of the unequal rules is a good thing. We can certainly debate what the best way to do that is, off scoop of course.

I’m aligned with this thinking. I’m just disturbed when pro-“equal” marriage rights say they are fighting for “equality for all”.  They are not. They’re trying to expand a preferential group, which makes sense. But it’s absolutely not attempting to have everyone treated equally. Abolishing the preferential benefits, or providing to all, would be treating everyone equally.

[MuggsyB]

The divorce rate is not 50%.  And I am too lazy to look up the stats, but my guess is that in most respects, children of divorce are, on average, better off than children whose parents never married.

And anyone who doesn't get married because they believe "there's a 50% chance we are going to  get divorced, anyway"  is probably making the right decision.

I guess 45-50% is just a myth.  I'm not really suited for  marriage....unless I find someone with similar idiosyncrasies.

[JWags85]

In general, divorce is a hell of a lot better for kids than living with parents who are in an unhappy marriage. 

Yep

Okay, so what is your solution?  No marriage?

I have a ton of friends who are very successful despite having parents who got divorced, or have been divorced themselves.

BINGO.

My old college roommate was the product of divorced parents.  He was in a serious relationship in his mid 20s that was ready for the next step.  His GF at the time balked on a number of reasons, but a BIG one was that "as a child of divorced parents, you're not predisposed to successful marriage expectations".  I didn't care for her for a number of reasons, but this was a big FU.

His parents were the poster children for what "great" divorce could be.  Unhappy marriage that dissolved.  They remained friendly, were incredibly co-[arents, both remarried very well, and were ever present in his life, including a blended family through his mom's remarriage.

And my roommate?  In one of the strongest and stable marriages of anyone I know.  Almost obnoxiously so.

[tower912]

My parents divorced at the same time I was getting engaged.   The three kids knew for the decade prior it was inevitable. We had several discussions about how we would handle it during our teen years.  My folks waited until the last one was finishing college to divorce.   The timing was about money. Couldn't support separate lives and pay for college.   

[MU82]

From the NYT:

The number of same-sex couple households in the United States surpassed one million for the first time, according to data recently released by the Census Bureau, reflecting a shift toward wider acceptance of such arrangements in American culture and politics.

According to the American Community Survey, a companion to the decennial census that is produced every year, there were about 1.2 million same-sex couple households in 2021. About 710,000 of them — nearly 60 percent — were married and about 500,000 were unmarried.