96 of 386

Disagree

Write now Article Tools

The question is very misleading and unfair, in my opinion. Gays and lesbians already can and do enter into sacred vows in front of witnesses, just as heterosexual couples do. The difference is they are not allowed to record a document with the auditor's or recorder's office.

To not allow our brothers and sisters the liberty to record this document, makes about as much sense as not allowing them to record wills or deeds. It does not benefit society in any way, shape, or form, but it causes them much grief at times.

It is rather heartless when you consider the three situations the document becomes quintessentially important: dissolution, illness, and death.

In dissolution, it establishes the date for the purpose of determining division of assets acquired while sacredly cohabitating.

In illness, it causes grieving partners to be denied access to ICUs, and leaves natural family more rights to pull the plug, or not, regardless of the wishes of the ill partner.

In death, it leaves grieving partners unable to arrange transport of bodies, and leaves estates built as a couple subject to predatory family members.

It is pretty cold blooded, in my opinion, to say it is okay for her to divorce her husband, but he cannot; to say his wife can inherit his property, but her wife cannot.

If there were due diligence to verify validity of documents currently being filed, as there is with a building permit, and divorce laws were very strict, it still would not be fair; however, society would, at least, not be such a hypocrite.

Learn more about this author, Tom Koecke.
Click here to send author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Marriage should be a sacred institution between only a woman and a man?
We want to hear your view. Write now!