What are the benefits of same sex marriage?

[Thaluikhain]

Equal rights?

I mean, what are the benefits to not being able to pelt Mormons with jellyfish? We don't do that because it's unfair to Mormons. We shouldn't ban gay people from marrying because it's unfair to them.

It seems weird that we should be asking about the benefits in the first place. If we applied this elsewhere, we'd probably still be owning black people (in the US, at least). I mean, what benefit is there to giving up free labour?

Actually, in that instance, I'm led to believe (not an expert, though) that there were quite significant benefits. The economy had changed, it was no longer profitable to to own slaves the way it had used to be.

As I understand it, it wasn't the Northern states getting rid of slavery on principle and the South keeping them for economic reasons, it was the Northern states getting rid of it due to economic reasons and the South keeping them on principle.

 

[Something Amyss]

Actually, in that instance, I'm led to believe (not an expert, though) that there were quite significant benefits. The economy had changed, it was no longer profitable to to own slaves the way it had used to be.

As I understand it, it wasn't the Northern states getting rid of slavery on principle and the South keeping them for economic reasons, it was the Northern states getting rid of it due to economic reasons and the South keeping them on principle.

Northern benefits from slavery were largely in terms of funding the South in the first place. That's a gross oversimplification, but it's an endemic flaw in the argument.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Not to mention that, if same-sex marriage becomes a nationally institutionalized thing, democrats and the left will probably be able to pick up a new cause (assuming conservatives don't spend all of their time trying to repeal same-sex marriage and then shut down the government in a fit) which means attention can go to some other major issue or group of people being treated somewhat unfairly.

Er...hey?

Discriminations can only be ended one at a time?

Anyway, assuming that to be the case, gay marriage is an important step for gay rights, not the end of the journey. At every step, people will say "But you've got X, why do you need Y and Z the way everyone else does?".

 

[WenisPagon]

It's pretty much this but for social justice rather than economic state

 

[Silvanus]

Except that's not true. One of the big elements of the "back of the bus" problem was that a black person was expected/required to give up their seat if a white person came onboard and there was no room. There's nothing "symbolic" about making black people walk in favour of white people.

Well, there is, but it goes beyond mere symbolism.

I think people tend to be repulsed more by the symbolism, and how that situation represented institutionalised racism, more than the practical consideration. There were other seats Rosa Parks could have moved to, for example, in the "coloured" section, but that's not the point. It was still incredibly demeaning. It symbolised something much wider.

 

[Callate]

When a choice as life-altering and far-reaching as marriage is recognized by one's community, one is far more likely to be willing to engage with and make sacrifices for that community. If you're "all in this together", it makes sense to pitch in, whereas if one feels permanently ostracized for making long-term decisions that are an important part of one's identity, one is more likely to feel that they don't need to step forward to help those who excluded them.

 

[Naeras]

People who want to get married get to have a wedding if they want to?

I mean, in terms of marriage I'm more interested in the legal ramifications of being married, as well as tax advantages(both of which have already been mentioned), but I'd say that's a pretty good reason to allow same-sex marriage as well.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Seems in this day and age straight seem less likely to marry. Its not a thing anymore. Especially when before their was no sex or moving in until after you married. But now people live together, have kids and live a normal life without having marriage to validate themselves. Ok, eventually you may want marriage as a final "you are the only one" gesture but that its really.

I think gay people still have the original "marriage means something" attitude from the 40's. Its a new concept, though im not sure if them being married is as big a deal as the act of them now being able to marry. Either way, if a couple love each other and they want to make that final act to each other then great for them.

End of the day, regardless of what i think or whatever others think - its down to what the couple think and want from life. An if they want to marry then thats their choice.

CAPTUA said never gonna give you up. I wrote it and now scared i may be rick rolled when i click post.

EDIT - I wasnt rick rolled. Although in my head i did sing the rest of the lyrics so did i rick roll myself. :-(

 

[Varrdy]

I mean, what are the benefits to not being able to pelt Mormons with jellyfish? We don't do that because it's unfair to Mormons.

It is? I was wondering why the Police kept on calling!

 

[EternallyBored]

The primary reason is of course symbolic, we establish gay marriage because there is no practical reason for a secular government to arbitrarily draw the line here.

On the more practical side (for the U.S. at least, benefits could vary depending on country):
1.It clears up a lot of power of attorney and inheritance loopholes. Saves the courts and government time and money when they can more easily resolve disputes where the family of a gay person tries to deny visitation rights, or make challenges on inheritance against that person's significant other.

2. The immigration process. If gay people can marry then it becomes much easier for a gay person who is not a U.S. citizen to obtain temporary and eventually permanent citizen status if they are married to a citizen of this country.

3. Adoption. The foster care system in the U.S. is an overcrowded mess, and preference is often given to married couples when seeking adoption. Child care workers consider a two person family to be a greater sign of financial stability. Even just a small increase in adoptions could greatly decrease the burden placed on foster families.

4. STD's. Right now gay men are at massive risk of contracting STDs from sex with their significant other. The main issue with this is that homosexual sex, is ostracized, so it is pushed underground, increasing anonymous and random encounters. Legalization coulr reduce those random encounters by encouraging monogamous relationships. This in turn can help reduce the spread of deadly diseases like HIV that put billions of dollars worth of expenses on the government every year subsidizing part of the expensive treatment process.

I'm sure there's more, but like I said the main reason is symbolic.

 

[thenumberthirteen]

It depends what you mean by "Marriage". Your economic point isn't as valid if Civil Partnerships are legal which can have all the pomp and ceremony (and therefore cost) as any other civil marriage.

In the UK soon same sex couples will be able to get "Married". The difference is mostly just in the wording, and as far as I know there is no material difference between the two. The difference in this case is symbolic. Civil partnerships aren't perceived as being equal to marriage, and in fact are seen as inferior. The love couples feel is the same no matter their gender and so it's not fair to have to have such a pointless difference.

 

[Jenvas1306]

Its pretty simple id say.
for society its just that more people get married with what ever consequences that has.
for the individual that means that same-sex love gets the same legal rights as hetero-love.

I am sad that here in germany homosexual couples can only get a civil union, which requires the same commitments but only garnts some of the benefits of an actual marriage (like adoption related things.
Interessting is that people who are married and then change their legal gender do achive a full homosexual marriage...
I doubt that it will stay much longer like this, but for now the big christian party is blocking the changes to laws that are necessary to give everyone the same rights (which does go against german basics rights).

btw, how many US-states have atleast civil unions for homosexual couples?

 

[Skeleon]

Value in the eyes of society, acceptance of homosexuals. As something like gay marriage becomes normalized, open homosexuality becomes normalized, too. It also removes an "other"-barrier in the sense of tribalism if they are treated more equally, if they are not "separate but sort of equal". Last but in my view most importantly: Individual freedom and self-determination grows, which is (generally at least) a good thing.

 

[fallendong]

As far as legal entitlements of marriage goes, there aren't any benefits. That is to say, the benefits you're entitled to as a married couple are incentives to have children. The only reason a gay couple would want to get married is for the symbolic nature of the act. While that is fulfilling and I agree with it, if you're looking at marriage from a purely pragmatic point of view there's no real point to it for gay couples.

 

[Fluttershy Flutterguy]

As someone who is in a committed homosexual relationship, the reason i want to get married is because then I know I am equal under the law. Yes the benefits are nice but, for me anyway, it will be a symbolic victory. I want to know that my government gives me the same treatment as everyone else. I do got to admit I don't like the government controlling the marriage process f9r the reason of people being able to use the excuse that we are forcing them to change their religion but until that changes I want the same rights as strate people.

 

[madwarper]

1. An economic benefit, with same sex marriage, that?s more people spending money to get married. According to the 2011 Census, there were around 33,700 same-sex couples in Australia. That?s 33,700 potential marriages.

The only benefit specifically tied to marriage being legal are the fees associated with processing the license. Everything else is just an elaborate party, which could be held for any other million reasons.

2. being homosexual and having homosexual relationships become socially validated.

No. If someone thinks homosexuals are deviants/sinners, merely having a marriage license won't change their mind.

3. Homosexual relationships will become legally validated
4. Married partners have immediate access to all relationship entitlements, protections and responsibilities.

Which is the only real benefit. They enjoy the same tax deductions when married, and division of assets when divorced.

1. "Marriages will last longer than say, 72 days."

I'm fairly certain that homosexuals are just as capable of having short, frivolous relationships as their heterosexual counterparts.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Marriage licenses were only created in the US to prevent interacial marriages and were used earlier as a form of control of the church in Europe when they were still in power.

I did not know that. That is awful. That means they are still being used that way, except against gay couples rather than interracial couples.

I had previously assumed that marriage licenses were created as a tax to increase government funds. While, while not particularly pleasant, was at least not based on racism or homophobia.