regardless of whether you're married or not Wills still require lawyers to muddle through the mumbo jumbo and families and doctors still are part of the hospital equation. But the federal government in today's marriage laws or in the one I described shouldn't require their meddling. Only reason I addressed wills and hospitals was because it was brought up.
In respects to the naturalization in this scenario I know one needs to be married. What I was getting at was that marrying someone still requires you go to the legal process. That's all I was implying. Your application stating your marriage to a citizen should be looked upon with more consideration for approval.
Wait, what? Marriage was about women being protected and men needing secured sex?
Sure people have done that, which sucks because it dilutes what we hold it to be. But if people want to marry for love, secured sex, or for the niceties, how to stop that? I have no desire to say, “ok, new marriage law: no marrying unless its for love" that's redefining marriage in a different way.
I still hold that there is no reason to keep government in the business of defining which marriages are legal or not legal. That has always been my position. “...it is so nice to have a system that gives your SO automatic rights over your life and will..."
That, my friend is scary, because a government that gives you rights can readily take them away. Your rights come from being a human and from a creator and that creator isn't your mom, dad or the government.
If you were wondering the movie last night was good. :-)