There is a difference in how society treats couples living together
versus couples that are married and I can see why that is so.  Some
people that live together regard the act of marriage as nothing more
than "a piece of paper."  That is incorrect and that is where the
difference lies.  If a couple is not committed enough to their
relationship so as to get married, then one can ask why they should have
the same "rights" or "benefits" as a couple that is married.

Leaving the religious aspect of this concept, simply look at the civil
aspect.  We have the same thing between people working together, etc.
For example, if two people go into business together, they will have
contracts drawn up and signed.  They might incorporate or create
partnerships or what have you.  They make promises to each other and
these are recorded.  If the partnership fails or one partner dies, the
surviving partner has "rights" and privileges by law.

If you go into business with someone and you have no contracts, if the
business fails or one of you dies, the surviving partner may have to
shut down the business and lose a lot.  If the business succeeds, the
lawyers will become rich. :)

Society is held together by promises and contracts and such things, the
tools are there.  If you are in a relationship and you refuse to get
married, which is certainly your right, why should you expect to have
the same rights or rather, the same "protection," as a married couple?
If you are not committed enough to each other, why should society be
committed to you?  You still retain your rights, privileges and
protection as an individual, just not as a married couple because you do
not marry.

Now, there may be reasons why you cannot marry.  One of them is that
your relationship does not fit the currently accepted definition of a
couple; one man and one woman.  I can see that this specific issue needs
to be addressed, perhaps with a certain type of union that would be
recorded and treated akin to a marriage for civil purposes.  After all
if two people are committed to each other and want to fit in the mold of
a married couple and gain the "protection" on marriage, that should be
possible.  It's just not a marriage, because there is no husband or
wife.

I am sure there are other reasons why an opposite-sex couple cannot
marry, but these reasons are probably all temporary.  The one cited
earlier about the man already being married, can be rectified.  I
frankly cannot think of any other valid permanent reasons why an
opposite-sex couple could not be married, if they truly wanted to have
the "protection" of marriage.

Denys

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *