Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bababooyee
That is not true. Terms with clear legal definitions are often different in scope (narrower or broader, depending) than their common use in society. Sometimes, the legal definition is even at odds with a term's commonly accepted meaning.
So, defining marriage as X simply means that the law will only view X as a marriage. Couples, families, churches, groups, whatever can still have marriage ceremonies and recognize it/them and live accordingly. The marriage just would not be reconized under the law as such.
|
Right, B, but churches, groups, families, etc. don't grant legal rights, custody rights, inheritance rights, health care rights, and any other of hundreds of rights that are only conferred by legal marriage. This is the thing- if, God forbid, Mary Cheney would die while the child was still a minor, her other parent would have NO legal rights to the child, to Mary's estate, to any sort of rights that a couple that's been together as long as they have should have. None. And this is what the Republicans are pushing for- for gay couples to have no legal rights. And a constitutional amendment would put that into law. And so, here you have one of the leaders of the party pushing to ensure gay couples have no legal rights, who happens to have a daughter who is having a child with her lesbian partner, who will have no legal rights to their child. Getting marriage recognized legally is FAR, FAR more important than by a church or a family group or whatever.
Though frankly, with all the work Mary Cheney does for the Republicans, I'm more interested in how she justifies all her work to herself than how her dad does.
And in spite of all that, I wish her an easy pregnancy and her and her partner a beautiful baby.
