NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm developing a resolution that standardizes civil unions between WA member states. My question is this; what rights and duties of a civil union, in your opinion, should be included?

(Civil unions include same sex unions in this resolution).

To start off, Perhaps you could say that engaged couples or multiple should have a right to choose a type of ceremony.

You could go along the lines of saying that if they choose a non-religious ceremony then no religious rites of any kind, relating to any religious faith, should be associated with the civil ceremony.

It may be simpler to legalize all types of marriages: after all, it is the right of a person to marry two women if he is capable of pleasing both and the two women agree; a bit like marriages of the once-mythical kind. I see nothing wrong with that.

it is the right of a person to marry two women if he is capable of pleasing both and the two women agree

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! hell yeah it is!!!!!! :D

anyway, im very thankful that love, and marriage are unknown on Decapod Ten. we mate, we die. we're only looking for the member of the opposite sex with the largest clutch of eggs/sack of male jelly.

from my understanding of other cultures, id include polygamy, include gay marriage, ban marriage to robots, include polyandry, include interspecies, outlaw marriage to anyone with a brain slug. just for starters.

The twin Neo Kirisuban homeworlds have had legal same sex marriages and well as normal civil unions. We also have interspecies marriages from time to time as well.

Polyandry/Poligamy hasn't quite caught on yet but then again theres been no demands to legalize it.

I would suggest whats been mentioned already is a good start and covers the basics. There might well be an outcry about gay/lesbian marriages but thats par for the course round here.

To start with a counter-question: what will be the value of standardising civil unions?

If you can provide a reasonable justification for this, we'd like to begin by insisting that the 'rights' not include tax credits or welfare benefits. Incentives to enter into and remain in civil unions only serve to preserve a system of antiquated patriarchy.

-- Samantha Benson
Congressional Liaison, Office of UN Affairs
Quintessence of Dust, Delegate of Wysteria

To start with a counter-question: what will be the value of standardising civil unions?


Given immigration occuring between WA member states (and others, but that's irrelevant), and the constant forming of relationships between two persons of different citizenship, it would be convenient to standardise civil union law amongst WA member states and ensure an equality of rights and freedoms.

I was going to legalise polygamy, but thank-you for your suggestion anyway.

By "benefits," I mean things like assumption of pension, automatic inheritance, joint child custody, etc.

To start with a counter-question: what will be the value of standardising civil unions?


Given immigration occuring between WA member states (and others, but that's irrelevant), and the constant forming of relationships between two persons of different citizenship, it would be convenient to standardise civil union law amongst WA member states and ensure an equality of rights and freedoms.

I was going to legalise polygamy, but thank-you for your suggestion anyway.

By "rights and duties," I mean things like assumption of pension, automatic inheritance, joint child custody, etc. Sorry if that was unclear. I guess a better term would be "benefits."

Ah now I see.

A proposal to put all the unions we've talked about on the same footing as a hetrosexual male-female relationship is very necessary.

A non-religious civil union is also necessary and with citizens of other WA nations living and working in other WA nations this would be a safeguard for marriages made in the home country.

This would mean for example a lesbian marriage would have to be recognised throughout all the WA nations regardless of local laws.

I'm developing a resolution that standardizes civil unions between WA member states. My question is this; what rights and duties of a civil union, in your opinion, should be included?

(Civil unions include same sex unions in this resolution).
At the very least property rights, rights relating to inheritance, social security and pension benefits, and next-of-kin rights. But it might be better to allow each country to communicate the rights and benefits it grants to persons in a civil union to a central registry other nations can consult. Those rights could then be regarded as a minimum, although the more liberal nations could decide to grant additional rights to foreign couples in a civil union residing on its territory.

In my country, each case is dealt very individually, so the settlement of divorce varies significantly. So therefore you shouldn't pay too much attention to divorce.

"We're not against same sex unions, or polyamorous unions what so ever but I will in Cassandra like fashion be an Oracle. When the rest of WA finds this the howls of ourtage will reduce the current rubble into fine dust."

"For several reasons - Religiously based nations who disapprove of gay unions of any sort, much less polyamorous ones.

National Soverginity ( did I spell that right?) for what sort of marital unions each nations allows - and OMG you're going to try and force a standardsized set of 'rights' with this...

Shakes head sadly - I know you all mean well, but the screaming is going to get very loud in this thread.

Starting with me. "No! Hell no! You are not going to tell my country they HAVE to allow gay marriages."

it may be possible to have standardization and NatSov. if, for example, you just write a proposal saying marriages/civilunions will be accepted nation to nation, then it might work. (similar to full faith and credit clause US const) if you actually do allow robot-sentient marriages (not a joke, actual problem in my region) some nations will oppose.

In the Name of the Eternal Kawaii, may the Cute One be praised

We rise to point out that in theocratic governments such as our own, so-called "civil" unions of any kind cannot contradict our religious law. Forcing our government to grant "full faith and credit", as you mention, to such unions would violate our nation's right to exercise its form of government and to enforce its law within its territory.