My perspective on gay marriage

[Gman]

There are three basic kinds of businesses: Sole Proprietorship, Joint Partnership and Incorporation. How we conduct our personal business whether we are a single adult or a married couple is very similar to how businesses are run in many respects except in the case of two married people being a type of joint partnership.

When you file to go into business by yourself as a sole proprietorship you conduct business under an assumed name (Joe Blow Appliance Repair) and you are that business. Similarly, when you personally have your own checking account, pay your own bills, and work for someone for pay you are like a personal sole prop.

Filing with the state as a joint partnership gives you, as a business, the ability to share assets and liabilities, income and expenses with your partner(s) in the business. The business pays taxes on your joint behalf. Jointly, you run the business and do what you want however you want as long, of course, as it's legal. The state doesn't care one iota about the sexual orientation of any partner in the business.

Just as in a joint partnership business, when two people get a marriage license, get married, and the license is signed and filed with the county, the state grants those two people the right to conduct business jointly. They have joint checking accounts, file joint tax returns, pay bills together, etc. However, the big difference is that the state willfully discriminates and will not allow personal business transactions to be conducted jointly as a joint partnership through marriage if the two people are of the same sex.

The state doesn't care one iota about the sexual orientation of people who file to do business together. But the state will discriminate against two people who want to do personal business together if they are of the same sex. It's legally discriminatory since the state also gives recognition and the same status to incorporated businesses as it does to people per federal constitutional court rulings. So I would think the equal protection clause applies here and is being violated. Granted there are some basic legal differences between what's known as the "corporate veil" through incorporation and sole props and joint partnerships. But I think that is only an obstacle to be overcome in argument.

The institution of marriage should be left to religion and the churches since the origins of marriage as we know it today has its origins in religion. If two people of the same sex want to get married, then do it at a church. Maybe the church will allow it, maybe not. If not, find one that does allow same sex marriage. The state should only have an interest in how people choose to conduct business. If you get "married" in front of a J.P., there is nothing religious about that. You've only filed to do business as a joint partnership after some kind of ceremony. There's nothing religious about getting married in front of a J.P. There's nothing religious about filing to do business as a joint partnership in front of a J.P.

I realize all this goes to the heart of the argument in favor of civil unions. But some people want nothing less than a "marriage" recognized as a marriage by the state and they consider a civil union something of less value. I feel that as far as the state is concerned, there is no difference between a joint partnership and a civil union and/or a marriage because marriage is primarily a religious rite performed in a church. Marriage between two people of same or opposite sex is in fact a civil union to the state.

If the state is going to refuse to allow two people of the same sex to conduct personal business, it should also disallow people of the same sex to form a joint partnership business.

Has anyone else thought of this? Has anyone ever thought of challenging the prohibitions on gay marriage on this basis? Thoughts, please.

Gman

------------------
edited for the usual typos and errors you don't see when you proof read but see immediately once you post it.