Marc Perkel’s advice to Gay Couples Thinking about Marriage
There’s an old saying, “Be careful what you ask for because you might get it.” Gay marriage may well be an example of that. As a heterosexual who has been there and done that, I think that a better solution to equality would have been to take marriage away from non-reproducing heterosexuals. There really is no such thing as marriage in America because of no-fault divorce laws. Marriage is only a property contract and a really bad one at that. Having the State as a partner in your relationship adds nothing and if the relationship fails then all your property is divided up with both lawyers getting half.
Before you get married, keep in mind that over 50% of marriages end in divorce and most all of them, myself included, thought there was no chance divorce was ever going to happen. So before you go out and tie the knot, I suggest that you take a long hard look at the reality of what you are getting into. You might want to sit back and take the time to see how it works out for others before you take advantage of the disadvantage of wedded bliss. — Marc Perkel, SysAdmin, Dvorak Uncensored
Kudos!
“There really is no such thing as marriage in America because of no fault divorce laws. Marriage is only a property contract and a really bad one at that.”
I love your article and the insight you put into it.
I mean this in the most respectful way possible, but marriage is a joke anymore and is merely a property contract and serves only the purpose of empowering a judge to make property decisions and legal entanglements if divorce occurs plus a small handful of “benefits” that should not have been related to marriage to begin with.
Giving benefits to married people who do not intend on having children is like flushing money down a toilet as those benefits were intended to help offset the cost of having children.
That’s the spirit.
Perkel’s point still misses the mark about the gay marriage issue.
While I agree the marriage is a mess, it is still the recognized ‘contract’ by business, state and federal government for many privileges and eligibilities.
How about disbanding marriage altogether for everyone and making civil unions the law of the land? Let marriage me a religious ceremony for those that need God’s blessing? Seems like the best option for all.
Marc–good one. You fooled me as to where you were going. I think like some, if not many, your recent post on the Church of Reality has me thinking you are still too “traditional?” Maybe a few more posts like this will give your philosophy a firmer base.
BTW–I thought your Post on Church of Reality did not get a fair review by the blog here. A lot of effort went into your website, yet it got little discussion. I think you violated a few marketing rules like confusing the message?
Yes, marriage like any other contract or relationship should actually be thought about before entering into it. To that end, whether you call it marriage or civil union, the impact of the institution, and your insights about it, make no difference at all. In other words, you identify a set of issues/problems/challenges and your solution doesn’t address them at all.
To your stated issue: yes, marriage/civil union should somehow be made more “permanent.” The only way I can see that happening is with greater education, counseling, screening for those BEFORE making that step.
Yes, I recommend the Nanny State.
#3 yes – agree. Get rid of marriage altogether. Require a prenup as part of a civil union.
I’ve never understood why, in a free country, we require permission from the state to get married.
If a couple wants to get together, and make a bunch of promises (that it’s likely they won’t keep, then have a party with some friends, why should anyone stop them?
#6–Chuck==nobody stops people from doing what you suggest. What is the color of the sky in your world?
Maybe they should toughen divorce to strengthen marriage.
“You might want to sit back and take the time to see how it works out for others before you take advantage of the disadvantage of wedded bliss.”
Yea, you interracial couples who want to get married should keep this in mind too.
I think all couples should be REQUIRED to agree on a prenup and make a 3000 mile road trip together before getting married. Also should be required that the couple prove they were in a relationship for a year at least before getting married.
What’s the best way to prevent divorce? DON’T GET MARRIED!
I’m so glad no one had yet accused me of homophobia here.
I think people need to stop taking complicated issues and applying fundamental, misguided framework that are simply a one size fits all approach. Way to take us back into the middle ages…
tmille51, I really hope that was a joke.
Yes but, gay men don’t get divorced just because one of them finds that the other one has porn on his computer.
Funny thing is that lesbians neither, only straight women seem to have that condition though.
Hey Gov’t. Get out of the marriage business completely. It’s a spiritual event and was co-opted by the gov’t. You wanna get married… go see a pastor. If you don’t want to do that… then don’t get married.
Might want to edit your blog post as 50% of marriage do not end up in divorce. It’s just a horribly flawed statistic that gets repeated over and over to the point people believe it’s true. Just like heterosexual AIDS which was one of the biggest cons of the last 50 years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/19divo.html
Mr. Perkel,
I am sure all the homosexuals that read Dvorak Uncensored… maybe a total of two perhaps, welcome your sage advice at how f’ed up heterosexual marriage is due to traditional values that are actually more myth than reasonable advice in the real world.
I’m sure your experience is stroke for stroke exactly how they will wind up. Because gays are SO much like straights and bow to the social stereotypes of gender assignment by society.
Now the question is, who wheres the pants and who wears the gingham dress in a gay marriage?
Cursor_
I think some people really need to do some research into the history of marriage.
Of course, if you want to solve all the problems, require pre-nups for all marriages and DNA tests for ALL births.
>>Might want to edit your blog post as 50% of
>>marriage do not end up in divorce.
OK, if you tweak the stats just right, it’s 41%, according to your link. Anyway you slice it, hetero marriage is pretty much a failure. And I’m sure that homo marriage will eventually reach the same levels.
Big woop.
Who cares if it’s 5% or 95%. Just sign the pre-nup and move along.
Speaking of stats, Mustard are you going to explain that link on troop levels you posted?
Mr. Musturd,
How many times have you been divorced? Ooops my bad, your state doesn’t allow for gay marriage yet.
#7 bobbo,
#6–Chuck==nobody stops people from doing what you suggest. What is the color of the sky in your world?
Actually bobbo, I think Chuck has a real point here. I don’t think you and your partner can simply walk into a lawyer’s office, draw up a contract that says exactly the same thing as a marriage contract, complete with conveying next of kinship rights, sign it, and walk out.
Perhaps I’m mistaken about this.
However, unless that is possible, Chuck is right. One must first get permission from the state to marry. And, the state does seem to have a real and invalid opinion about the exact pairings allowed in such a contract.
Personally, I’m not even sure why we limit to pairs, let alone put restrictions on the pairs.
If marriage is indeed broken, a point I do not concede, then we should fix it for everyone. Whatever the resulting marriage contract looks like, it should be allowed without discrimination against any particular group.
Marriage is for Lovers
#20 Wardie
>>Ooops my bad, your state doesn’t allow
>>for gay marriage yet.
At least you acknowledge the inevitable; eventually, people will be allowed to marry the man or woman of their choice.
That’s the first step towards recovery.
#21–Scott. I reread Chucks entry and my own. I can confirm the unusual outcome that on our disagreement, I am right, and you are wrong.
You post as if chuck said you can contract for all the right and privileges of marriages. That would be an incorrect statement, but that is not what chuck said, he said something much more limited and in that more limited statement, I was right. Nothing stops you from drawing up a contract and doing everything chuck suggests.
You are correct on a different statement that you cannot contract and receive all the benefits of a standard marriage contract as drafted by the various States.
What a GREAT way to start the week. Firefox tomorrow. The future is cataract bright!
And yet Gene Simmons has stayed with Shannon for what, 100 years or so? ( 😉 )
Marriage is more a state of mind I think. If you’re in an intense relationship and wouldn’t cheat on your partner(s), then you’re married.
If you have a contract, or rings, or not, who cares if you’re happy.
People just need to learn to leave others alone that have a slightly different view.
I agree mostly with what the article says, however I dont’ think it really needed to have anything to do with “gay” marriage, just marriage in general.
#14, Warden,
Interesting link. I had always thought the number of 50% a little high.
I was most surprised that less education was a greater factor in getting a divorce. Maybe that somehow ties in with strong religious types are also more prone to divorce.
#18, Mustard,
Anyway you slice it, hetero marriage is pretty much a failure.
I can’t speak for you, but our family is very happy. I think that makes us a success.
#21, Scott,
If marriage is indeed broken, … then we should fix it for everyone.
Very pertinent point.
#23, Bobbo,
Wrong. Chuck raised a relevant question and you sarcastically asked what color the sky was. Read his question again and you might notice, if you are even semi sober, he asks why people can’t make private agreements among themselves if they don’t intend on keeping them.