Galt's Gulch

Pregnant Man Denied Divorce From Lesbian Partner Takes Fight To Supreme Court

Posted by khalling 13 years, 4 months ago to News
19 comments | Share | Flag

this has everything (including pictures) except welfare. but ir adds in the forcing state's rights which is very interesting.
SOURCE URL: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2303138/Thomas-Beatie-Pregnant-man-vows-fight-divorce-prove-transgender-marriage-legitimate.html

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by RyanBrock 13 years, 4 months ago
    Hm...I'm more concerned with the mother of the children (the transgender who used to be a man) and his philosophy. I am gay, and so in most states wouldn't be allowed to marry. I am atheist and so see not point in getting married anyways as I see marriage as more of a religious unity and simply just earning the government's approval (which, since I'm Objectivist, I see no need in government approval of my personal life). But, if I did want a marriage, I would not be allowed one. I would say to her, "you went through surgery, found a transgender man to be the father of your children, and managed to get a marriage. So what if the government won't say you two are transgendered? Why would you need their opinion? I didn't ask for their permission to be gay, and I sure wouldn't jeopardize it if I had the chance (though I do not wish to marry, as my boyfriend knows I love him and we are faithful to each other and keep each other for sexual pleasure and an emotion of happiness that we will always be able to count on each other for...we will never cheat for why should we when we can count on each other for comfort and sexual pleasure?)." That being said, in an Objectivist society, government wouldn't control personal life, and so this wouldn't even be an issue. That's just one of the many reasons I love Objectivism so much: it is the only philosophy that allows for truly a free private life not controlled by another person or group of people.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
      -
    • Posted by khalling 13 years, 4 months ago
      I agree with your points. However, I find it interesting when a person needs to straddle so many definitions for oneself there can be none. Man or Woman. Then move forward. I question the sanity of this man/woman. I question the decision making of his lesbian lover who wants the divorce as well as his current lesbian (?) lover. They wish the spectacle and limelight and they are burdening our court system. They should have to either go away or pay all costs to continue their case.
      As well, I seriously worry for their children in light of the spectacle they enjoy and continue making.
      On the marriage thing. I am very supportive of my gay friends seeking civil union. But I'm big into definitions and marriage is already taken. Find another definition, that's all. I am against state sanctions. Divorce has turned into a circus in our court system. Even with pre-nups and how does one divide children like property? that boggles the mind.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by RyanBrock 13 years, 4 months ago
        Ayn Rand supported marriage, but I think she meant one that was not controlled by government. I would gladly get a marriage if it became private and not government controlled. Also, if the religious would share the institution and it became a privatized business. In the mean time...me and my boyfriend are faithful and loving and we don't need the government's papers saying it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo