Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Wedding rings

Great post from Ian Ayres, who just decided to put his wedding ring back on.

Denying couples the benefits of marriage is a profound moral and human rights issue. Ayres points to several ways in which heterosexual couples can express their opposition to discrimination. After reading his post, I just bought his book, Straightforward, on Amazon.

Florida's Amendment 2 would ban civil unions and gay marriages, under the perverse logic of "protecting marriage." I will eagerly vote NO, because somehow I just can't imagine how my relationship with Amy is threatened by the dozens of gay couples I know. I'm trying hard to think of how they might be some kind of insidious threat, but I'm just not coming up with anything. Help me out here.

Until Florida and other states end this discrimination, here's two simple things that straight couples can do: take off your wedding band, and refer to your spouse as your "partner."


Anonymous said...

Dan for President 2012!

(just as long as I get to stay on the farm somewhere and raise cage free chickens :)

We are officially hippies.


Acrobat said...

Really more "hippie commies".

You sure you're "partner" hasn't just concocted an elaborate scheme to acheive spousal applause for removing his wedding ring?

Acrobat said...

I understand the argument more like this. Advancing gay rights makes it more acceptable or mainstream, meaning greater chance that youth will "choose" to be gay. Protecting marriage is essentially about protecting the marriages (heterosexuality) of our children. I may dig a bit to see if I can get more clarity. Sullivan wrote a book about this years ago, no?