Why are there so many "Should Gay's Marry" ads?

by Elsewhere 25 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Big Dog

  Its all part of my master plan to jump in on the ground floor of being a gay divorce specialist. I can't wait for gays to get married, a huge vast untapped sea of potential clients locked in custody battles, fighting over the benz, fighting over the artwork. Imagine lesbian couples fighting over the Prada handbags, gay men fighting over the Prada handbags, the possibilities boggle the mind.

  Gays have no idea what they are letting themselves in for.

  But the devil's advocate is here waiting for them.
• 

  steve2

  Gays have no idea what they are letting themselves in for.

  Ummm, yes we actually do.

  Property Division. Before the legislation was passed, when a same-sex relationship ended, division of property was hugely contentious and often degenerated to "proving" individual ownership by having on hand old receipts and documents. So, you can imagine that, if a relationship foundered after, say more that 10 years, the difficulty in proving ownership. In addition, property rights were determined by who had the best lawyer. Now, after a specified period, the property is jointly divided.

  Death. Just as importantly, the legislation protects the surviving partner in the case of death. Prior to the legislation when same-sex relationships were not recognised in law, the family could legally step in and effectively negate a will and testament. Imagine if your family disowned you when you came out as gay and settled down in a long-term relationship and when you're dead, the partner you've spent your life with, has to fight your family in court to keep your joint-owned property and other assets.

  Next of Kin. Another area that is now protected is the area of law referred to as kinship: Before the legislation was passed, same-sex couples could not include their partner as their next of kin, no matter how long they had lived together in a monogamous relationship. In the event of admission to hospital, the hospital was not required to keep the same-sex partner informed about medical treatment and could go right over the partner's head and consult with the patient's family of origin even against the will of the patient - because they were the legal next of kin. True, hospital's often did show sensitivity in this are, but make no mistake: They were not required under law to do so. This was often problematic, because in times of serious illness, feelings often do run high and families - especially parents - are known to force their way back into a son's or daughter's life and ignore the wishes of the patient's partner.

  Yes, it could still be a bumpy ride when a same-sex relationship ends. However, thank God the legislation gives same-sex couples the same protections under law as heterosexual couples have been able to make use of for decades!
• 

  Big Dog

  Steve2, a bumpy ride? Heh, vicious custody battles are a little more than a bumpy ride my friend. I have seen shit fly out windows and former lovers be separated by baliffs and deputies during those badboys.

  Oh, and then there is alimony, that should be interesting. In the US in some states once you say I do everything becomes community property, so if you have a net worth of 1 million before marriage and your partner 10 bucks, after you say I do, his net worth just increased substantially.

  Division of property, let me tell you, it can be far from orderly for heteros, I have seen some truly epic battles over who owns what.

  But as I said, I'm all for it, why should us heteros have all the fun. Yes, there are some benefits to being married in terms of health and possible pension benefits, but here in the US most of it can be gotten around in other ways, probably health benefits being the most difficult, but all in all, big picture, hmm, I don't really know that gays stand to gain more by being allowed to marry, but I know that lawyers sure do.
• 

  steve2

  I don't really know that gays stand to gain more by being allowed to marry, but I know that lawyers sure do.

  Well, Big Dog, as I said earlier, property division is just one part of it. To me, it's more important that I have the protection of a civil union for inheritance purposes and so I can have my partner as my next of kin. It's well worth it on those two grounds alone.

  By the way, there are opting out clauses that can be entered into before a relationship changes from 'de facto' (outside the law) to 'facto' so that the property aspect can be attended to.

  I agree: The savagery of some separations is astonishing. It's like this: We can have laws against murder, but people still end up killing others. It doesn't mean the law is a waste of time. Besides, I don't think any of the gay commentators whose views I've read on the topic of civil unions are being "bright-eyed- and bushy tailed": It's a legal provision that's there for those who want it...Otherwise, the couple are perfectly able to not have the civil union...just like straight couples may choose not to marry or formalise their relationship.

  I speak as one who was terribly burnt when I did not have the protection of the law in a previous long-term relationship that had no legislative protection...and believe me, it had a siginificant adverse impact on what I redeemed from that relationship and what legal recourse I had (zero).

  You make a good point when you say lawyers end up the winners! Ain't that almost always the case?!
• 

  Big Dog

  Steve2,

  All kidding aside, I am sorry to hear that you had a bad experience in a long term relationship, gay, straight, it doesn't matter, that just plain hurts.

  I am all for equal protection under the law, so many laws we have are archaic and phobic in their origins and I think its high time to take them off the books. There has been a long trend of enlightenment but it would seem the pendulum has swung and now its headed back to a more conservative bent, at least here in the states. This too shall pass, I really don't think we are headed for another darkages.

  Edited to add:

  You make a good point when you say lawyers end up the winners! Ain't that almost always the case?!

  Why do you think I went to law school?
• 

  steve2

  Why do you think I went to law school?

  Hey Big Dog, that makes sense to me, too, and I see your thoughts in a different light! A lawyer friend speaks very similarly to you on the topic of civil unions, knowing from firsthand professional experience that the protective aspect of the law sometiems has unintended consequences.