This imbalance makes the prospect of same-sex unions a seemingly intractable problem: with only one legally sanctioned version of marriage available, those who rightly or wrongly view homosexuality as a mortal sin are hostile to the prospect of sharing it with gay couples.
As with many things in life, a free-market approach that offers people a choice may provide a solution. As one of the oldest types of contractual relationship, marriage has always been a form of partnership. Subject to certain statutory constraints, businesspeople have long been free to form whatever sort of partnership they consider appropriate to their needs.
Why not make the same flexibility possible for marriage? We have already moved in that direction in some respects: no-fault divorce states, such as California, treat the dissolution of a marriage in much the same way as the dissolution of a business partnership. Couples entering into marriage should also be allowed to use a partnership agreement tailored to their own circumstances and aspirations, one that reflects the values and expectations that they themselves attach to marriage.
Of course, not everyone can draft a workable partnership agreement to govern a lifelong one hopes relationship, so lawyers and other private enterprises would develop off the-shelf marital partnership kits to fill this need, just as suppliers have developed kits and other legal documents already available in bookstores and online. Customized products would be available to those willing to pay for them.
Even greater efficiencies might be achieved through the establishment of marital corporations MCs , each having hundreds or thousands of couples as stockholders, all sharing common values about marriage. Couples getting married would subscribe to the shares of an existing MC, whose charter documents would set forth the terms of the type of marriage to which the subscribing couples agree. Thus, a plethora of choices might be made available to prospective newlyweds. A Catholic MC would forbid its members to divorce.
Progressive MCs would allow gay marriage. Islamic or Mormon MCs would allow polygamy. Plain vanilla MCs would probably be popular among people who just want to get married without thinking about it too much. In any event, numerous options would be available, and consideration of these options might actually encourage people to think about what they want out of their marriage.
When individuals with strong feelings about homosexuals, divorcees, Republicans, or other "disfavored" types of people can exclude such people from their own version of marriage by joining a like-minded MC, they will be less likely to object to same-sex couples joining different MCs perhaps even MCs that accept only same-sex couples Use this link to get back to this page.
A marriage proposal: privatize it. As a legal relationship, matrimony is a monopoly product supplied by the government. At the same time, however, as a personal relationship, the institution has unique, personal importance to those who partake of it.
To some it even has deeply felt religious significance. Thus, there is a mismatch between what is demanded of marriage and what is supplied. It is this imbalance that makes the prospect of same-sex unions a seemingly intractable problem.
Because there is only one legally sanctioned version of marriage, those who personally view homosexuality as a mortal sin rightly or wrongly are hostile to the prospect of sharing it with gay couples.
As with many things in life, a free-market solution that offers people choice may provide a solution. Subject to certain statutory constraints, businesspeople have long been free to form whatever sort of partnership they felt appropriate to their needs. Why not make the same possible for marriage, which is a partnership based on one of the oldest types of contractual relationships?
Couples entering into marriage should be able to use a partnership agreement that is tailored to their own circumstances and aspirations, one that reflects the values and expectations that they themselves attach to marriage. Of course, it will be impractical to expect everyone to be able to draft a workable partnership agreement that will govern a hopefully lifelong relationship.
Off-the-shelf marital partnership kits would be developed by lawyers and other private enterprises to fill this need. Customized products would be available, too. Even greater participation could be achieved through the establishment of marital corporations MCs , which could have hundreds or thousands of couples as shareholders, all sharing common values about marriage.
Couples getting married would subscribe to the shares of an existing marital corporation. Its charter documents would set forth the terms of the marriage to which the subscribing couples agree.
A Catholic marital corporation would forbid its members from divorcing. Progressive marital corporations would allow gay marriage. Islamic or Mormon fundamentalist marital corporations could allow polygamy. Plain vanilla marital corporations would probably be popular among people who just want to get married without thinking about it too much.
Consideration of the wide range of available options might actually encourage people to think about what they want out of their marriage. And once those with strong feelings about homosexuals, divorcees, Republicans or whatever, are able to exclude such people from their own version of marriage by joining a like-minded marital corporation, they are less likely to object to same-sex couples joining more-accepting ones or even ones that accept only homosexuals.
Extending this to marriage is only logical. Marital corporations would be a huge boost to the multibillion-dollar wedding industry, while opening up a vast range of possible business opportunities throughout society. Some could be established as nonprofit organizations that also work in furtherance of social or environmental causes about which some couples have strong feelings. Others might become investment vehicles, whose assets form the marital nest egg.
Still others might charge a subscription fee that would then be invested to pay dividends to lasting marriages upon significant anniversaries. Very exclusive branded MCs could charge extravagant membership fees; getting married through say, the Tiffany Marriage Corp. Some might become social clubs through which like-minded couples can develop friendships or business contacts. With incentives to develop marital corporations that cater to all sectors of society, marriage would turn into an even bigger business than it already is.
This is usually what happens when you offer consumers more choice. Numerous issues would have to be worked out, of course. Just as with any contractual relationship, minors below a certain age would be excluded from joining a marital corporation. Exemptions to securities laws would be needed to free marital corporations from having to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The messy issues that arise in a divorce would still be there, just as they are in any bankruptcy or corporate dissolution. And what do you do if you want to get divorced and remarry but have done your first marriage through a marital corporation that does not permit it?
0コメント