Law Students

My Controversial Idea.

By Steve Pirates

Someone suggested I post controversial things for discussion so here goes:

In light of the Proposition in California to ban “gay marriage” I think a new definition of things is in order. “Gay marriage” is not “gay” at all. It is simply gender neutral. It allows a man to marry a woman, or a man to marry a man, or a woman to marry a woman, regardless of their orientation or gender. Sure, I can’t imagine many straight men marrying one another, but hey it isn’t my (or the government’s) business. The people must affected by this type of law are the intersexed. Those who are either hermaphroditic in some form, or who were born one gender but are now another, whether it be from a botched circumcision, or from a “wrong sex” feeling. Without gender blind marriage the intersexed are the most discriminated against.

That got me thinking. Marriage, sex, and gender are really all markers for reproductive status. So is “having children”. We already protect Marital status, having children, and gender (though not as strictly as we protect race). So my controversial idea is to redefine the whole category as “reproductive status” to include all categories relevant to the biological or social perpetuation of our species. That would include marital status, kids, gender, sexual orientation, and medical disability relating to reproduction.

Your take?

Full post as published by Jolly Lawger on October 09, 2008 (boomark / email).