cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/66759116
A unanimous vote among the three members of the Seattle City Council’s Housing, Arts and Civil Rights Committee forwarded a proposal to the full council that would amend sections of the Seattle Municipal Code to “recognize genders outside the gender binary, recognize pansexuality and asexuality as orientations, and include consensual relationships with multiple partners as an element of attitudes, preferences, and practices pertaining to sexual orientation.”
The protections would apply to employment, housing, business licensure, places of public accommodation, park usage, and “bias-free policing,” according to the proposal.
Seattle would follow Portland, West Hollywood, Berkeley, California, and a handful of other cities in adopting the expanded protections against discrimination. Under the bill, residents facing unfair treatment could file complaints and seek remedy through Seattle’s Office for Civil Rights.
Yeah. It’s difficult for me to see “traditional marriage” as anything more than financially incentivizing and socially pressuring straight couples to breed. More mindless bodies for the capitalist meat grinders.
Commitments can be lovely and wonderful. Why was the government EVER involved? Because the bible said it was important to do it one way and one way only?
It’s a bit personal for me, admittedly. I don’t think my parents should have had children.
It’s not only about breeding. It recognizes partners as close relatives legally which gives some rights, for example being able to visit their partner in a hospital while they are unconscious. You wouldn’t some rando to be able to do it, but for a hospital to allow partners through they need some proof of that.
You don’t need to be legally married for that, though. I could list anyone I want as a healthcare proxy or emergency contact, and that gives them rights.
If anything, it can be dangerous to trust immediate family with certain decisions by nature of the paperwork they can prove, because they don’t inherently have the person’s wellbeing in mind. E.g. a divorced couple with child, or a couple that is still married but separated and yet to complete the divorce paperwork. Or if the person just has a sensitive issue that they don’t want their family involved with.
That’s basically what it has always been. A program to subsidize breeding.
That’s part of why I hate the idea of tax benefits for married couples in general, because the flip side is that it effectively punishes people for being single. Or I guess just not in a monogamous relationship specifically.