• sharkaccident@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I think you missed the main term in my response. Union. A union is a recognized formation of parts that work together for a common interest or purpose.

    A “union” could be designated to have all rights and privileges that you lay out as only reserved for marriage. But a union could also go further. It could go into any level of granularity that the people of the union specify that might be ambiguous with typical “marriage rights”. If marriage defines everything then what’s the point of a prenup? Also, ALL of your examples can be superseded by other legal agreements, contracts, wills, etc. For example, a signed power of attorney takes priority of hospital decisions.

    I’m making quite the opposite point on same-sex marriage.

    • Noxy@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s a lot of “could” and “would” doing a lot of work while ultimately still in support of fascist bigoted bullshit.

      All hypothetical shit when the actual, currently working concept of marriage already exists

      • sharkaccident@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Now you lost me. Are you saying the current system of marriage works and at the same time insisting I’m the one against same sex marriage?

        • Noxy@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yes to both. Your original suggestion is to strip me and my husband of our marriage.

          • sharkaccident@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            No, I’m trying to get your family recognized nationwide by using a different term to remove the barrier to rights and privileges. I’m separating church and state. I’m suggesting the freedom to get “married” by whatever religion accepts people for who they are. I’m saying the government should recognize when two people decide to contribute to society as one.

            You can do both is my point. Get a certificate of union from the government (establish rights) and then go get married by whomever you want. Again problem solved.