I think you missed the basic point: if it doesn’t apply to all citizens it cannot apply at all. That is not loser talk. That is simple to the point and is exactly what you want in a government.
I appreciate everything else you said however. Relating it to the real world situation is reality.
who said the proposal went against traditional family values
And there is the problem of course. Which is absurd. Because who ever is in power gets to determine what a traditional family value is. And that is why citizens need to argue that government is a set of codified rules, bound to all, not some morality maker.
The government, all governments needs to get out of the business of giving a shit about same sex, other sex, any sex, whatever. The only thing that matters is if you have citizens. Nothing more.
You either can allow two citizens to recognize visiting rights, health care, etc, or not. I dont really care if you are married or not.
The government is enforcing contracts. Write up what kind of contacts can exist - divorce with child support, health care etc. And then if two consenting adults want to enter into that contract, they can. End of discussion.
Marriage and companionship is not defined by the state. Only contract enforcement is. And it is completely wrong to say one citizen has access to a contract, and another, arbitrarily does not.
I played through Lollipop Chainsaw on my steam deck. No, not the new one, the original ps3 one with an emulator. Don’t bother with the remake.
It is a good time waster and is humorous.
Well not a history book so much. Its funny how he doesn’t like footnotes “they would incur costs”
He is a entertaining storyteller, but that’s about it.
Calling Jared diamond a historian is just nonsense.
The minute I saw his name I rolled my eyes.
Move along nothing to see here.
Has this ever happened to you?
It is worth mentioning that in the case of krupps they made a lot of money selling arms in WWI and they purchased newspapers to sell the war to increase profits.
Own all the newspapers… Propaganda… Seems familiar.
A conservative would ask you why the woman needs to be an adult?
Again, the only real answer is you have an adult citizen who wants to form a contract (because marriages are a social and/or religious concept) with another citizen. Done.
Exactly what you said: it is a legal contract with downstream consequences (well not really if you dont want to bother with it at all, but I digress). A legal contract. You cannot pick and choose who gets to make contracts, because if you do, they really have no legal basis.
Red heads cant sign contracts with left handed people. That is where you will end up.