Nobody has a marriage licence from the United States. It always from the state they reside in. Personal relationships are a civil matter and a state matter. I simply propose that the individual states privitize personal relationships to get rid of queer marriage controversy and put divorce attorneys out oif business by making their trade irrelevant. Divorce is never in the child's best interests anyway.
Why? The federal government does not issue marriage licenses. It would be a violation of the 10th amendment for the federal government to regulate marriage since that conflicts with state's rights to regulate marriage. If you don't like the law move. If the federal government regulates government you have nowhere to go.
Privitize marriage at the state level. It's not the federal government's interest to regulate. There goes the controversy. Also the media needs laws in place to respect our privacy so the news dies not violate privacy with the next Tiger Woods scandal.
Actually, why should it be at the state level? It's no one's right to say who I can or can't marry. Just because I live in Louisiana should I not be able to marry my girlfriend?
But I do agree, the media needs to stay out of people's private affairs like Tiger Woods.
Marriage is a relic of the past that I cannot believe that a post-modern people still engage in it. Why should the state be involved in the private affairs of people. Also, if a relationship breaks up, the non-biological partner should have no rights to be with the children. Your EXs should not be given the power to drag you through the courts.
im totally in :)
equal rights!!!
toxictonyajean 1 year ago
Nobody has a marriage licence from the United States. It always from the state they reside in. Personal relationships are a civil matter and a state matter. I simply propose that the individual states privitize personal relationships to get rid of queer marriage controversy and put divorce attorneys out oif business by making their trade irrelevant. Divorce is never in the child's best interests anyway.
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
Why? The federal government does not issue marriage licenses. It would be a violation of the 10th amendment for the federal government to regulate marriage since that conflicts with state's rights to regulate marriage. If you don't like the law move. If the federal government regulates government you have nowhere to go.
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
Privitize marriage at the state level. It's not the federal government's interest to regulate. There goes the controversy. Also the media needs laws in place to respect our privacy so the news dies not violate privacy with the next Tiger Woods scandal.
ToxicOdiousOne 1 year ago
@ToxicOdiousOne
Actually, why should it be at the state level? It's no one's right to say who I can or can't marry. Just because I live in Louisiana should I not be able to marry my girlfriend?
But I do agree, the media needs to stay out of people's private affairs like Tiger Woods.
Oddity08 1 year ago
Marriage is a relic of the past that I cannot believe that a post-modern people still engage in it. Why should the state be involved in the private affairs of people. Also, if a relationship breaks up, the non-biological partner should have no rights to be with the children. Your EXs should not be given the power to drag you through the courts.
ibmsony101 2 years ago
count me in
darkwolfx333 2 years ago
Song title?
lukepttn 2 years ago
lol Americans are such cavemen =)
iamnotapie 2 years ago 2
Funny how the homophobic people in NOM like to say that they are for marriage when they are the ones who keep passing anti marriage legislation.
PlayerXT 2 years ago 5