tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9174818662993882005.post2358866792704121797..comments2023-08-13T02:41:59.724-05:00Comments on Daktari: Why "I Do" are the most Dangerous Words in the English LanguageDaktarihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08291715601733518982noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9174818662993882005.post-63342182654803791702008-09-17T01:51:00.000-05:002008-09-17T01:51:00.000-05:00Oh, FFS, finally this:Even Gloria Steinem, who sai...Oh, FFS, finally this:<BR/><BR/>Even Gloria Steinem, who said she didn't breed well in captivity, got married.<BR/><BR/>There is always wiggle room, J.Daktarihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08291715601733518982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9174818662993882005.post-28720650193728021292008-09-17T01:20:00.000-05:002008-09-17T01:20:00.000-05:00Ok, except for this one thing. You said, "And it ...Ok, except for this one thing. <BR/><BR/>You said, <BR/><BR/>"And it seems to me that the state does have a compelling interest in distinguishing between couples considering themselves blood family and those that are more casual -- I'd be all for them de-linking this from marriage, such that marriage is civil and "legal partners" is gov't part, but that de-linking doesn't change the bad origins Daktarihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08291715601733518982noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9174818662993882005.post-61766062453451879752008-09-17T00:45:00.000-05:002008-09-17T00:45:00.000-05:00Vodka gimlet? On the rocks or straight up? Man, ...Vodka gimlet? On the rocks or straight up? Man, I didn't think that someone your age went there. *hat tip*<BR/><BR/>I could respond ad nauseum, but I'm not sure I want to. I've got a good buzz on and I don' want to waste it. :) Enjoy your evening.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9174818662993882005.post-80749168465658989982008-09-16T20:02:00.000-05:002008-09-16T20:02:00.000-05:00Good points. But it seems to me like there is val...Good points. But it seems to me like there is value (separate from the personal/ceremonial value) in a legal declaration of quasi-permanent partner status. The fact that we make it extraordinarily hard to get divorced in most cases is, I think more an argument against extraordinarily cumbersome divorce laws than an argument against legal marriage. Though you are completely correct in that Qhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10444952585830773530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9174818662993882005.post-62697911285017387862008-09-16T18:19:00.000-05:002008-09-16T18:19:00.000-05:00At least for the purposes of this blog post, I was...At least for the purposes of this blog post, I was trying to concentrate on a potential legal approach to help both gays and women. Maybe it was a crackpot idea, but WTF? I was wasting time while watching the silver tight pants play the blue tight pants. All that background about my life was just smart-ass intro. I have thought in greater depth about marriage (as it pertains to me) and I leftAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9174818662993882005.post-78201516985137383112008-09-16T16:44:00.000-05:002008-09-16T16:44:00.000-05:00Truthfully? You can see no reason that gay people...Truthfully? You can see no reason that gay people would want to marry? I mean, I'm all for your aversion to marriage -- or rather, all for you being able to have it and never get married again, etc. But there are several elements of the institution. The state involvement, if it is as recent as you claim, is a distinct element rather than the whole -- perhaps you *only* meant state marriage, Qhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10444952585830773530noreply@blogger.com