Giuliani, McCain Both State New Disapproval Of Civil Unions
Nuance From Giuliani

Ryan Sager is startled, as he so frequently is, to hear conservative candidates endorsing conservative positions.

The perpetually-startled Sager is shocked, stunned, and in all other ways entirely befuddled by these announcements.

In Giuliani's case, it's a clear case of flipflopping evolution, but in McCain's, it's not quite so clear-cut; McCain was slippery in previous statements, stating he was in favor of allowing gay couples to enter in to contracts giving one another power of attorney, etc. In other words, the same sort of contractual agreements any two people, in love or not, can enter. "How generous," Sager snarks.

Well, with all due respect, marriage is mostly contractual, and similar contracts can be entered into giving any two people, essentially, the same legal obligations to each other that married couples have. Marriage is sort of an omnicontract, incorporating a host of other contracts all in one by default, but those obligations can be contracted out of -- say, by a prenup.

So yeah, no problem with gays entering contracts with each other.

True enough, the state acknowlegement of marriage carries certain rights, such as collecting a spouse's SS survivor benefit after death, and private health insurance contracts usually (but are not required to, God knows) extend to the immediate family as defined as legally-recognized spouse and children; but the bulk of what gay-marriage proponents scream about -- such as hospital visitation rights -- can be secured by contract.

Of course, this could all be handled as a private affair, without the sanction of the state. Oddly enough, it seems that it's very, very important for private-contract-championing "libertarians" to have an offical state imprimature for this particulae contract.

Almost as if it's not actually "libertarianism" itself impelling this conclusion, but simple social liberalism.

Nuance! RTFQ, Ace. Read the effin' quote.

Allah did, and Giuliani is not objecting to civil unions generally, but this particular civil unions bill (in NH), for reasons which seem... unconvincing.

posted by Ace at 05:58 PM

| Access Comments