My Liberal Identity:
You are a Reality-Based Intellectualist, also known as the liberal elite. You are a proud member of what’s known as the reality-based community, where science, reason, and non-Jesus-based thought reign supreme.
Take the quiz at www.FightConservatives.com
Hospital Visitation and Families
posted Wednesday, 28 May 2008
Alternet had an article today that took the position:
Gay marriage does nothing to address fundamental problems of inequality. What is needed is universal access to basic necessities like housing, health care, food, and the benefits now obtained through citizenship (like the right to stay in this country). Legalized gay marriage means only that certain people in a specific type of long-term, monogamous relationship sanctioned by a state contract might be able to access benefits. While marriage could confer inclusion under a spouse's health-care policy, it does nothing to provide such a policy. Marriage might ensure hospital visitation rights, but not for anyone without a spouse.
I read the article, not intending to comment, but after reading one comment to this article, I was prompted to make a response;
The original comment:
So the article wants universal healthcare. And allowing homosexuals to marry doesn't help that. But the article seems to suggest that hospital visitation rights should be extended. That seems nuts to me. I can imagine some idiot trying to sell me a burial plot or a home alarm system when I'm in a hospital bed. Why not restrict that to family?
My response to this comment was aimed directly at the last sentence: "Why not restrict it to family?":
The problem with hospital visitation rights is that the hospital defines who may count as "family".
For some of us, gay and straight, our best friends and lovers mean more to us than our blood kin. The author is saying that all people ought to be able to define who their next of kin is for themselves, not have the hospital dictate who that is. If need be, people could carry cards in their wallets listing such self-chosen next of kin.
To suggest that she meant than anyone off the street, such as an obnoxious salesman, should be able to randomly come in and bother a hospital patient was being deliberately obtuse, I'm thinking.
Your thoughts?
Gay marriage does nothing to address fundamental problems of inequality. What is needed is universal access to basic necessities like housing, health care, food, and the benefits now obtained through citizenship (like the right to stay in this country). Legalized gay marriage means only that certain people in a specific type of long-term, monogamous relationship sanctioned by a state contract might be able to access benefits. While marriage could confer inclusion under a spouse's health-care policy, it does nothing to provide such a policy. Marriage might ensure hospital visitation rights, but not for anyone without a spouse.
I read the article, not intending to comment, but after reading one comment to this article, I was prompted to make a response;
The original comment:
So the article wants universal healthcare. And allowing homosexuals to marry doesn't help that. But the article seems to suggest that hospital visitation rights should be extended. That seems nuts to me. I can imagine some idiot trying to sell me a burial plot or a home alarm system when I'm in a hospital bed. Why not restrict that to family?
My response to this comment was aimed directly at the last sentence: "Why not restrict it to family?":
The problem with hospital visitation rights is that the hospital defines who may count as "family".
For some of us, gay and straight, our best friends and lovers mean more to us than our blood kin. The author is saying that all people ought to be able to define who their next of kin is for themselves, not have the hospital dictate who that is. If need be, people could carry cards in their wallets listing such self-chosen next of kin.
To suggest that she meant than anyone off the street, such as an obnoxious salesman, should be able to randomly come in and bother a hospital patient was being deliberately obtuse, I'm thinking.
Your thoughts?
sound off! (1)
1. catty left...
Wednesday, 28 May 2008 7:36 pm :: http://savetheamericanfamily.blog-city.c
I would have asked, "Define family?" Good points.
