Straight Marriages – Gay Unions

The debate of gay marriages has been a very hot political topic for many years and with being such a hot topic it is almost astounding the number of places that have come out publicly either for or against the topic.  While there are few states who allow the idea of a gay or same-sex marriage there are those more liberal affording almost equal rights.  Massachusetts is the only state currently in the United States that allows same-sex marriages.  The state of Rhode Island is generous enough to recognize as legal marriage any same-sex marriage that is performed in Massachusetts, which is a major victory for many same-sex supporters.

The elections of recent years have seen this as a very hot topic button, and with the White House, stressing that marriage involves a man and a woman only, not same-sexes many states have been very reluctant to allow the same-sex marriages. However, a few states have come forward and allowed same-sex civil unions, which are very similar to a marriage.

These states are California, Hawaii, Maine, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Vermont.  The District of Columbia also recognizes same-sex unions and soon the Governor of New Hampshire has stated publicly that he will sign a bill giving the ok to same-sex unions.  This is a major victory for those who are supporting the movement. 

While many states have not given the green light on the same-sex issue, there are states who are sitting around discussing the issues.  Many couples who are fighting for their rights have argued that there is no difference in the way they run their households compared to their heterosexual counterparts.  They have also stated that while they may be with a partner who is the same sex as them, they do still love their partner and should have the right to get married. 

This has always been a hot topic, and likely will continue to be a hot topic for many years to come.  With the issues raging within the states and at the national level it will likely be a very long time before the gay and lesbian rights groups are able to truly declare a victory for their cause.  Nevertheless, there is some solace to be taken in the small victories as they occur, and another Governor of a state being willing to allow a civil union is at least a step in the direction towards a victory. 

The fact remains that often the views of the individual states tend to reflect the views of the President.  With a President in office who is a staunch opponent to the concept of same-sex marriage as well as civil unions it is unlikely to allow much room for many victories until a more accommodating, or rather liberal, President is in the White House. 

Once the bill passes all of the channels, it can go into effect as early as next year for the New Hampshire residence who have long been awaiting this victory.  With each state that gives this right to its residents, it opens the doors to more states to start becoming more tolerant of all their inhabitants.  Finally, this is paving the way for America to join the bulk of Europe in recognizing the legal inequalities between straight and gay couples nationwide.

Stem Cell Research- Good or Bad?

This is a very 'hot button' issue that keeps arising in the face of politicians everywhere in the country.  What if anything should the government involve itself in for the issues of stem cell research?  How far should the government press into the fields of medical science research?  Should the government interfere at all, or stand back and come up with laws to handle the consequences of such research?

It comes into question, how many ordinary Americans really know and understand what stem cell research is, how it can effect our lives, and what does it have the ability to do in the future?  With topics such as abortion being very hot and causing pressures on all sides, it only seems natural that stem cell research should cause just as much controversy.  Many supporters argue that the research gathered will be able to save millions of lives, while those opposing the research all argue that they are killing thousands of innocent children in the process. 

This brings the question, where do the embryos come from?  The majority of the embryos used in the research come from couples that have donated them, following a treatment for infertility; there are often 10 or more embryos left over after such procedures, which can be put to use in the laboratory environment.  The options for those embryos are limited; they can be preserved, adopted to a needy couple, destroyed, or donated to medical research. 

The embryos are only a few mere days past conception when they are frozen, and are unable to sustain life in any form on their own.  From a legal standpoint, they are not living humans, and are not an infant since legally an embryo becomes an infant once the first breath of air is taken.  This leaves the questions of who has the right to determine what can happen to them. 

The embryos are the building blocks of people, yet, they have no rights themselves.  Whom do they belong to?  Who is responsible for ensuring they are taken care of?  Many consider the embryos being used in research as the same category as murder.  Is it actually murder when the child is never born, and is only conceived in a test tube?  Who should really make the decision about how these embryos should be handled?

The embryos themselves are rich in stem cells, which scientists have said can help cure some of the worst diseases and conditions in the world.  This makes the concept very tempting, but is this dabbling in aspects of science that shouldn’t be used?  Should humans really be trying to recreate whole body parts and organs from the stem cells in order to help a few, but at the expense of a few other lives?

The current administration has tried to place a ban on this research and block the use of the embryos.  This has upset many supporters who feel this research is vital to the survival of the human race, while those who digress the ideas are upset that is has not been banned fully yet.  Where is the better side to stand?  Should we allow the government to meddle into the scientific aspects of medicine, or should we continue the research to save thousands, or millions of lives?

Succession Law: The Importance of Having a Will

Although we might not like to think of it, death is a certain fate for us all.  When we pass away, our families will go through a stressful and traumatic time as they come to terms with their loss.  At the same time, there is a requirement for the administration of our estate, and this is usually bestowed upon a close relative or friend during this already painful time.  However, a lack of foresight and planning can be catastrophic, leaving behind a tangle of assets and liabilities and possibly a hefty inheritance tax bill, depending on jurisdiction.  On top of that, the absence of a will can mean a distribution of assets on the basis of standard 'default' rules, rather than on the basis of your individual preferences.  In this article, we will look at some common provisions in the absence of any will, and aim to justify the benefits of making a comprehensive and clear will during your lifetime.

Most jurisdictions will bear some liability to tax on death.  This can be a specific problem for the administrators of estates, usually close friends, who must ensure every known asset and liability is accounted for before making legacies and signing off the tax bill.  A major problem comes with the personal liability attributed to the administrators, which means that should anything 'slip through the net' which is later discovered, there may be increased liability to tax.  In practical terms, this could mean a surprise bill for several thousand which has already been distributed in legacies and for which the administrator must personally account.  Providing for these outcomes in a will is one of the best ways of avoiding this hassle and stress, and it can also be the best way to ensure all assets and liabilities are uncovered.  By drafting an effective will, you can be sure your loved ones don't face financial hardship after you're gone. 

In the absence of a will providing specifically for the administration of a deceased's estate, it is up to the laws of intestacy to determine what happens to the entirety of our worldly possessions.  Unfortunately, this doesn't usually correspond with the way we'd like things to turn out.  For example, in a number of jurisdictions there are automatic provisions for spouses and kids, meaning you can disinherit, even with a will.  There is also usually a default order of preference of who gets what and how much they get, which doesn't necessarily match your favourite relatives, or correspond to actual family set ups.  In fact, cohabiters might run into problems getting anything, including the house in which they live without proper testamentary provisions in their favour.

As you can see there are a number of obvious benefits to drafting a will during your lifetime.  Sadly, many thousands of people die each year without making these provisions, and it really is a real headache for their friends and relatives who are left with the burden of a fair settlement.  Intestacy causes hostility and stress, which can be readily avoided by just simply making a written will.  If you haven't made a will, it is probably a good idea to make a appointment as soon as is convenient with a legal adviser to do so, to ensure your family are provided for as you would intend and to promote a favourable distribution of your estate on death.