Mawwiage

[legalmoose]

Many of my friends, and friends-of-friends, are getting engaged and then married in the next couple of years.

And they're trying to get me on the bandwagon.

Actually, they're trying to drag me, kicking and screaming, onto the wagon.

*grumble*

I'm not completely sure how I feel on the issue. I'm not terribly impressed by the institution as a whole. I think people would be better off with private contractual agreements that are recognized by the state, but without the "one-size-fits-all" crap that you get now in the legal system. Yes, most would opt for a "standard" marriage, and yes, I'm assuming people will pay attention before they get married (which is a big assumption). This being said, if asked to give a public showing of my affection for someone, I'd likely say yes if it were that important to them.

But it doesn't mean I wouldn't grumble about the whole process. :-

Comments

marriage

[virtualexile.livejournal.com]

I also like the idea of personally negotiated commitments. I wouldn't get "married" even if gay marriage were an option.

As for commitment ceremonies, i.e. "weddings", I typically find them to be dreadful affairs and would never want to host one myself.

I think that the best way for the government to handle the benefits issue is to mandate that any benefit offered to legally married spouses should also be available to registered domestic partners.

I dunno..

[ex-ultraboy803.livejournal.com]

I've always liked the idea of a great big ol party where two people stand up and declaring themsleves to each other in front of all their family and friends. No actually cermony except maybe a nice speech and then just a racuous party with good food and everyone gets drunk.

And lots of gifts.

Can't forget the gifts.

Re: great big ol party

[virtualexile.livejournal.com]

As long as I don't have to wear a tux or a tie, I'm there!

Re: great big ol party

[ex-ultraboy803.livejournal.com]

hrmm but I bet you look nice in a tux!

Re: great big ol party

[virtualexile.livejournal.com]

eeps, er, thanks, I'll let Moose answer that, he saw me the last time I wore one ... I just hate dressing up :-|

Re: great big ol party

[ex-ultraboy803.livejournal.com]

I agree completely - that picture of me in the tux is one of two times I have ever wore one.

Re: great big ol party

[virtualexile.livejournal.com]

I think I've only worn a tux twice myself, both for brothers' weddings.

Maybe someday I'll get invited to a shirtless or fetish-wear only wedding? ;o)

Re: great big ol party

[ex-ultraboy803.livejournal.com]

LOL
the best wedding parties are where you end up waking up naked next to one of hte groomsman!

Re: great big ol party

[virtualexile.livejournal.com]

Well! I suppose that happened to you? There was a groomsman I wanted to do at the last wedding, but he's married to a woman and I don't wanna help people cheat, no matter how cute they are.

Re: great big ol party

[ex-ultraboy803.livejournal.com]

*feigns innocence*

Re: I dunno..

[legalmoose]

Yeah, I suppose.

But that's the private aspect of it. The public aspect (i.e., state involvement) should be minimal.

And there are the gifts, but I don't accept gifts (or compliments) well. :)

Re: I dunno..

[ex-ultraboy803.livejournal.com]

well unfortunately we live in a democratic republic - the state feels it must control every aspect of our lives so that we are good, healthy citizens.

[tracytracy.livejournal.com]

i find it interesting that the state requires a couple to be separated for a year before allowing the divorce to go through, but you can sign up for a marriage license and get married that same day. You'd think they'd make you wait a year for that too and perhaps avoid some of those pesky divorces. Go figure.

logic and government don't always mix, must remind myself this.