...care for a Child together.
If Marriage is a Right between (2) Adults then it has to be Expanded Equally in Law to all variations of Consenting Aged Adults.
It is Unconstitutional to Deny people Rights without Due Process.
Explain to me how Two Lesbians and a Mother and Daughter or Two Sisters of Consenting Age are different when it comes to Deserving Marriage Rights.
peace...
Yes, ideally and to be fully constitutional where no one can argue there is religious bias,
the state should only oversee CIVIL CONTRACTS that could be for ANY legally responsible consenting adults.
Anything to do with marriage is technically personal private religious or spiritual
and should not be in govt hands; the exception being if all people in a state AGREE to a policy, that is not imposing a religious bias if everyone is equally represented and consents.
But this is purely theoretical/technical only.
In political reality, people can't focus on "rights for ALL PEOPLE/Groups in general"
but go for political expedience and convenience "one target issue at a time" to mobilize through public media.
If you look at Equal Voting rights, when campaigns pushed for the rights of Blacks and of Women combined together as Human Rights,
this was too much for people to respond to and follow. Advocates divided the suffrage issues into two separate battles in order to win either one.
Blacks won the right (15th Amendment in 1870) to vote before Women did (19th Amendment in 1920).
What we SHOULD do is use the Gay Rights agenda, and 'right to health' propoganda
to argue for Equal Political Freedom for all views: right to life, right to secede, right to free market health care
as political beliefs protected under the First and Fourteenth from discrimination by creed, same as gays and singlepayer advocates who believe in their agenda.
And hold PARTIES responsible for funding managing and representing their own political agenda, similar to religious beliefs that don't belong in govt unless all people consent to be under such policies.
