Coffee Break?

That would be Lower, Slower, Delaware and, more and more, appearing the nomenclature is deserved with the new first leg of a constituitional amendment prohibiting recognition of same-sex marriage, civil union, domestic partnerships or ’similar legal relationships’ between people of same gender.  When does Delaware get to advance to the 21st. century?

First, I AM in a domestic partnership of some years, neither of us interested or feel the need for marriage…personally, outmoded  and unnecessary.  I mean, despite all that gets said, despite George Parrish’s assurances of an “unforgettable ceremony”, marriage and a certificate to prove it, they no more keeps couples together these days than they have done for many decades.  Such a commitment is of the heart, not by pen, paper and a third party decreeing and having a couple vow ‘until death do us part’.  Forever, these days, is about as long as four-ten.  Not so much different than a criminal getting life and being out on parole after fifteen years.  Maybe marriage licences and laws should be drastically changed…perhaps something like driving licences?  Need to get a new one every five years and, that being so, no need for divorce…just take along your same partner (or different if you so choose) and renew, , even put your organ donation agreement on it so there is no confusion or dissension later between ex-wife/wives and current…and Bob’s your uncle.  All good to go for another five.  Hey, that makes just as much sense these days as anyone still believing marriage, as it used to be known, is sacrosanct.  And no…it’s not a sour grapes attitude because I was married for thirty-two years…no divorce, no seperations.  Of the industrialized world we in the US have the highest divorce rate…the highest…and, in more recent years, non-remarriage of divorcees has dropped, instead a preference for co-habitation.  That surely says a great deal more about marriage than civil union or domestic partnership.

Civil unions…what fault can be found with Civil Union?  Which, I might add, could also be extended to what once was known as ‘common-law” marriage between two people of opposite genders.  What good reason could we have, these days, for denying them some legalities, particularly when they have shared a home, finances, a life and often children for years?  Domestic Partnership…that pretty much covers it all best…works for same or opposite genders, affords legal as well as moral claims.  Moral claims, you ask?  Sure…because I’m wondering today…if no such relationship is to be legally recognised, how will that effect wills, estates left to a partner;  how will it affect hospital ‘rules’ of ’family visitation only’ or ‘next of kin’?  We are somewhat fortunate in this area as we/our partners are accepted as family and/or next of kin but could this, will it change when we move from the grey area of no specific rule or amendment to this particular clause….if it’s passed? 

Somebody tell me why a domestic partnership, a civil union, cannot or should not be legally recognised.  Forget the marriage…let heterosexuals truly interested in a life-long, certified commitment have marriage.  I don’t have a problem with that.  But why…logically and legally…what reason to deny so many others the peace of mind, happiness and security of having their partnership legal?