The GBLT deserve civil rights! (homosexual, marriage)

[michel]

Originally Posted by Mr Spinkles

Civil right:
If citizens are allowed to enter into legal contracts with other citizens in which it is quick and easy for one to visit another in the hospital, this ability should be granted to everyone equally, not just heterosexual couples. To deny it to homosexuals is to violate social equality and, therefore, infringe on their civil rights.

Being treated equally regardless of sexual orientation with regards to tax status is a civil right, i.m.o.

And that can have a consequence (legally) on the custody of Children, on the rights to property on the death of one of the partners. That (I think ) is one of the ones people don't tend to think of.

[evearael]

Not to mention access to health insurance through the partner, or even the right to live in a house or apartment together, in some areas.

[Scott1]

Originally Posted by Mr Spinkles

If citizens are allowed to enter into legal contracts with other citizens in which it is quick and easy for one to visit another in the hospital, this ability should be granted to everyone equally, not just heterosexual couples. To deny it to homosexuals is to violate social equality and, therefore, infringe on their civil rights.

I get ya.... so civil rights are a "legal" term?

Do citizens of others countries have civil rights or only those rights which are protected under their laws?

Being treated equally regardless of sexual orientation with regards to tax status is a civil right, i.m.o.

I'll agree it is fair... and I don't believe the government should have anything to do with the union of two people ( or 3, 4, 5, 20 whatever adults choose to do) and give incentives for any of them.

Thanks for the help.
Scott

[Mr Spinkles]

Originally Posted by Scott1

I get ya.... so civil rights are a "legal" term?

That's how I view it.

Originally Posted by Scott1

Do citizens of others countries have civil rights or only those rights which are protected under their laws?

Obviously, citizens of other countries have only those rights which are protected under their laws. Heck, it's not even legal to be openly Christian (or anything other than Muslim) in places like Saudi Arabia.

Why do you ask? Surely you knew that the laws in many other countries discriminate against various groups...

Originally Posted by Scott1

I'll agree it is fair... and I don't believe the government should have anything to do with the union of two people ( or 3, 4, 5, 20 whatever adults choose to do) and give incentives for any of them.

Of course, the gay marriage issue goes far beyond incentives. Do you think people (including homosexuals) should be allowed to enter into legal contracts with others to predetermine such things as child custody, hospital visitation, inheritance, burial rights (the ability to decide whether the person will be buried or cremated and so forth), etc, and do you think that those legal contracts should be equally accessible to all groups?

Originally Posted by Scott1

Thanks for the help.

You're welcome. How's life?

[Mike182]

Originally Posted by michel

And that can have a consequence (legally) on the custody of Children, on the rights to property on the death of one of the partners. That (I think ) is one of the ones people don't tend to think of.

pensions - if my (hypothetical) partner dies, and we have been together for 20 years, but not legally recognised, his pension goes back to Mr.Tax-man (ok, there are some loop holes, like writting a will declaring you as next of Kin, but it still gets so heavily taxed theres little/no point in getting it anyway)

[Scott1]

Originally Posted by Mr Spinkles

Why do you ask? Surely you knew that the laws in many other countries discriminate against various groups...

I guess I was hoping that your previous answers were different.... I don't have a high regard for laws... or civil rights as you define them.... I prefer justice - something absent from most of society.

Do you think people (including homosexuals) should be allowed to enter into legal contracts with others to predetermine such things as child custody, hospital visitation, inheritance, burial rights (the ability to decide whether the person will be buried or cremated and so forth), etc, and do you think that those legal contracts should be equally accessible to all groups?

Most certainly.... but forgive my ignorance.... can't ANYONE with the correct legal documentation be allowed to do these things? *

Eg: Power of Attorney, Living wills etc. etc.

* (Except hospital visitation... I don't agree that the visitation policy of a private BUSINESS--- which is all that a hospital is---- falls under the umbrella of a "civil right" any more than a person should be able to enter without hindrance into a prison or military base just because their spouse, partner, or whatever happens to be there)

You're welcome. How's life?

Not bad, dear friend... just trucking along... miss all you guys.... my love to you and yours.

Scott

[Mr Spinkles]

Originally Posted by Scott1

I guess I was hoping that your previous answers were different.... I don't have a high regard for laws... or civil rights as you define them.... I prefer justice - something absent from most of society.

Which answers did you hope were different? I have a pretty high regard for justice as well. Is there anything about treating everyone equally under the law which you believe to be unjust?

For the record, I believe people in all countries everywhere should be treated equally....but you asked me if people in other countries had civil rights, not whether or not people in other countries SHOULD have civil rights. Of course I believe everyone deserves to be treated equally.

Originally Posted by Scott1

Most certainly.... but forgive my ignorance.... can't ANYONE with the correct legal documentation be allowed to do these things? *

Nope, not everyone. If that were the case, Bastet would have been able to become an American citizen and move to the US to live with Maize and help her raise her children a long time ago.

I believe anyone can do some of those things as long as they have the correct legal documentation. The catch is that it's much more complicated and confusing and difficult for a same-sex couple to jump through the legal loopholes than a heterosexual couple, who can get ALL of the aforementioned accomplished all at once and with much less difficulty.

Originally Posted by Scott1

* (Except hospital visitation... I don't agree that the visitation policy of a private BUSINESS--- which is all that a hospital is---- falls under the umbrella of a "civil right" any more than a person should be able to enter without hindrance into a prison or military base just because their spouse, partner, or whatever happens to be there)

That's a bit of a complex issue...I'm not sure a hospital should be considered "just" a private business, otherwise hospitals could refuse treatment to those who can't afford it, or otherwise discriminate or use unethical medical practices....plus, the prison and military base are bad examples, as they most certainly are not private businesses.... But this is sort of a side-issue to the main topic I suppose...

[Ody]

Originally Posted by Scott1

They don't today?

Can't marry