Robert de Niro and Nathan Lane play dons of rival mob families. With the feds pressuring them to testify against each other they move to Vermont and marry, thinking that the feds will not be able to force a man to testify against his spouse. Then the trouble begins. Shortly after their marriage, they learn that since gay marriage is only recognized in states where it is legal, the dons cannot leave Vermont without losing their immunity. Meanwhile, a gaggle of feds follows them constantly, trying to prove that the marriage is a sham. The result is a screwball comedy, think of it as “Some Like it Hot,” meets “The Bird Cage.” Can two macho mafia dons act like a happily married gay couple in small town Vermont? Find out in, Are You Not Talking to Me?
He's not just being silly; his point is that same-sex marriage might not be used in good faith, and he teases out some implications thereof. For example:
Viewed from this, practical perspective, when we think about gay marriage we cannot simply ask whether giving homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples might be a good idea in the abstract. In practice, it is about allowing any two adults who are not close relations or otherwise married to enjoy the legal benefits and privileges that come with marriage. Unless we want the government and our employers to decide who is and who is not a legitimate couple (a terrible thing from the perspective of privacy), that is what gay marriage entails.
The University of Florida recently asked that couples applying for domestic partner benefits certify that they are indeed in a sexual relationship [Yikes! I recently warned a pro-same-sex-marriage reader that this would happen, but didn't know it was happening already --Ed]. This is no surprise. Given the monetary benefits of marriage, the potential for fraud is real.
RTWT. Good title, too: Gay Mirage.
