Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
quote:
How do others read the situation, Masters as well as submissive male-to-female transgendered males? Randi, I think you would have been received a better response putting his question and your situation in the 'General Discussion' section. I don't think the government should be involved in a person's relationship decisions in any way. On this issues, as a 'person' I'm in favor of a person's 'right' to be married to anyone they want. As a pragmatist, I don't agree with this law. It didn't provide 'equal rights', you already had those. You had the ability to marry equal to everyone else. You wanted/needed more rights - the right to marry a person of the same sex. Again - on principle, is should not be a government issue. But what of the ability to marry more than one person? A dog? A doll? A plant? A stuffed animal? People claim deep emotional ties, and desires to these too; albeit not at the same level, and obviously not the same acceptance level as currently enjoyed by same sex partners. However - why should one sexual relationship preference/practice be legitimized over any other? Personally, I don't think they should, but it brings us to the practical side of the equation. When it comes to issues like this, often it comes down to money. Its no different in this instance. Now I happen to be married now and have a partner declared for my insurance. However, if I didn't, and instead I had a close friend who didn't have insurance, had a very bad illness, and happened to be of the same sex - I'd 'marry' him for access to my benefits. That's one of the main reason why many industries, and the government for that matter, opposes the idea. Morality is a tool used to manipulated the masses on both sides of the issue, as well as a moving target; cost is straight forward and money is always a consideration. Now in CA same sex partners are already legislated into law; nationally it is another story. Which brings us to the impact of the Federal Government. They do not recognize the union. That means, although you can file joint returns on your CA State Taxes, you won't be able to declare 'married' as your status on the Fed return. Well, of course you can, but it would be subject to audit. More than likely - that's how this issue will get to the Supreme Court. Money issues such as wills, retirement benefits, and even mundane corporate policies come into play. For instance, I often relate that one of the reasons I decided to marry beth was that while traveling to Seattle adding her to the car rental agreement cost me $25. As my wife - she would have been added without cost. Will Washington State recognize your CA marriage? Will any other? I'm afraid the CA law gives you 1/2 a victory. The reality is not much has really changed. Your trans-gender status shouldn't mean anything to the government or anyone else. The knowledge should be yours to share with whoever you care to share it. Perhaps more information than your wanted huh? The difficulty with trying to create fair laws is the reality that 'fair' is a concept of perspective. Better to have no law, and the least government as possible. My best wishes to you and your happiness. Your sincerity and knowledge of self comes through in your post. Stay true to yourself. I hope you find a person who can appreciate you. Good luck!
|