Tuesday, April 01, 2014

Virginia holds that Mashall-Newman protects procreation


The fourth circuit in Richmond is being told that Virginia’s ban on same-sex marriage (Marshall-Newman) effectively protects procreation, according to a Washington Blade story Monday. 
  
My reaction was that sounds like Vladimir Putin’s reasoning.
  
Marriage as a socially supported institution is not set up to ratify the romantic needs of adults, but to provide for children, the state argued.
  
But then, one could ask, why not provide the benefits only when there are children or at least other dependents in a family.  You could count an unborn (from a pregnancy) as a child.
  
As I’ve written so many times before, the real significance of “inequality” is that the unmarried sometimes are called upon to make sacrifices to subsidize the sexual relationships of the married.  For me that started in the 1990s when I sometimes pulled nightcall (without compensation, although I got bigger raises) for those with kids.  Or back in 1970 when my first employer (RCA) paid a higher subsidy during travel for married than singles, even if the spouse didn’t go (story link). 


No comments: