|
|
2006-03-08 - 13:00 8 March 2006 Linc asked a valid question last night. If we intend from the outset not to have children, what’s the point of getting married? "The coming together of man and woman in marriage is one of the most beautiful and highest achievements of human nature. In this union between a man and a woman we create something greater than the sum of its parts. A husband and wife are not just roommates. They are a microcosm of what society can be. We can learn to live with diversity. We can overcome even the most incredible differences. We can make something even more beautiful together than we can on our own or with those who are just like us. Marriage is the ultimate test laboratory for tolerance." That actually came from a conservative diatribe against gay marriage (from The Ashbrook Center), but a good idea is a good idea. For the sake of equal time (although it seems to me that some of the same ideas are expressed), this is a report from Boston.com on the Massachussetts Supreme Court on same-sex marriage: In so concluding, the court enumerated some of the concrete tangible benefits that flow from civil marriage, including, but not limited to, rights in property, probate, tax, and evidence law that are conferred on married couples. Id. at 322-325. The court also noted that "intangible benefits flow from marriage," id. at 322, intangibles that are important components of marriage as a "civil right." Id. at 325. The court stated that "[m]arriage also bestows enormous private and social advantages on those who choose to marry . . . [and] is at once a deeply personal commitment to another human being and a highly public celebration of the ideals of mutuality, companionship, intimacy, fidelity, and family." Id. at 322. "Because it fulfils yearnings for security, safe haven, and connection that express our common humanity, civil marriage is an esteemed institution, and the decision whether and whom to marry is among life's momentous acts of self-definition." Id. Therefore, without the right to choose to marry, same-sex couples are not only denied full protection of the laws, but are "excluded from the full range of human experience." Id. at 326. And don't say that none of this is relevant because Lincoln and I are not a same-sex couple. That's not the point. The point is that marriage has advantages. That's why the right to marry should be extended to everyone of legal age, but I digress. Here are my own thoughts: the advantage of being married over simply living together is that he and I have said the words out loud and made the commitment real in front of our friends and family, who are called upon to support us in our endeavor. We then become a singe unit in society, not two units together. Also, our expectations are laid out. Lincoln can expect of me and I can expect of him that each will be sexually faithful to the other and fulfill the “business partner” role. There are no unwritten rules. In simple cohabitation, the expectations are not so cut and dried. More on this later, I'm actually busy at work today. Gotta get back.
|