Gay Marriage - Yay!, or NEIGH?

[The Yankee]

That's what I'm advocating.

It's certainly an interesting solution to the problem. However, I would expect a pitched battle if someone really tried to get the government to forfeit the word "marriage," especially given the amount of those who believe there should be greater religion within the government....at least in America. It might work in one of the West European nations. But I cannot see it happening here any time soon. Especially given the costs of all the paperwork having to change "marriage" to something with civil union or unionized or what have you...I can expect to see someone raising an argument that it would cost $10 billion just to change that word on the tax forms.

But I can see where you're going with this...and it's actually something I thought about, without going so far as to change the word in official government documents. I always wondered what some people would say if I proposed that the government just give homosexuals that right to marry and if the couple wants to have a spiritual blessing of some kind, then they can go find a priest or rabbi or someone who's willing to do it on their own and just let the government handle the business of what rights and penalties a couple would have, rather than deal with rabbis signing marriage licenses or whatever the proper procedure can be here today.

 

[The Yankee]

I agree with this to an extent

I'm curious. What extent?

Have you read the debate after this statement you quoted where the poster honestly admitted the hole in his argument? It's something to consider, of course.

I'll also add, not just in response to this quote, but that, yes, I am a Christian, but I have attained my position on the matter on two things. One, experience with homosexual couples. Perhaps because for as long as I can remember, my father had two lesbians as friends....but even after that, I've seen that these are just people who want to officially commit to each other as well as gain the rights of what other committed couples have...especially when it comes to legal things like visitation rights, inheritance, tax codes, et cetera.

Two, I'm of the belief that the government should not have laws denying such things to people because there is a religious lobby to have such a law. If there is no priest or rabbi or shiekh or whomever that is willing to perform the spiritual duties of marriage to a homosexual couple, that is in their right, and the couple would have to either give up or continue searching, their choice, IF they want to have the ceremony. But it's not the government's right to decide such a thing for them, because it does not infringe on anyone else's rights and it certainly won't spell the end of civilization as we know it or some kind of catastrophic outcome some predict.

 

[Ballazic]

Whats the problem if to happy people marry? Really? And what does Hetrosexual mine?

 

[IglooDame]

Whats the problem if to happy people marry? Really? And what does Hetrosexual mine?

Heterosexual refers to an individual who prefers sexual intercourse with someone of the opposite gender, or the relationship between the two. For your first (and second) questions, scroll up.

 

[IglooDame]

Well, I got to the point where I realized I was no longer defending my position, because of belief. Rather, I was defending my ego. That is where I draw the line. I am perfectly willing to be wrong about something, but once I recognize that, I cannot continue onward simply to save face.

*Respectfully salutes John HSOG*

 

[stormbind]

First of all, I wish to point out that I believe gays deserve equality.

But no marriage and let me say why.. Marriage comes from religion, and in western states it's generally from the bible.

Marriage is not about tax returns, Marriage is not about adoption, and Marriage is not about increased social security. These things are manufactured by the state as incentives to promote family values.

Those incentives don't work! They encourage people to get married when really, they are not yet ready for the commitment. Too many people are getting married for the perks, which inevitably leads to divorse. All bad stuff.

So, back to gays.

Gay people deserve the same crappy incentives offered to heterosexuals, which should be $0 but for as long as it's not $0 then gays should get the $$$ incentives.

That does not mean gays should be getting married because, as already pointed out, marriage comes from the bible and means something completely independent of $$$ incentives.

Gay marriage undermines the a fundamental concepts in out western culture, tradition, society and religion.

 

[Håkan Eriksson]

But no marriage and let me say why.. Marriage comes from religion, and in western states it's generally from the bible.

How come marriage existed in all nations long before the bible ever were written?

 

[stormbind]

... 'cause they had other religions

I suppose if a new Gay religion came allong then I would be OK with it. I just associate current marriages with the traditional cultural background from which it was derived. It offends me to disrespect the religion

 

[EzInKy]

First of all, I wish to point out that I believe gays deserve equality.

But no marriage and let me say why.. Marriage comes from religion, and in western states it's generally from the bible.

Which is why the government needs to get out the marraige business altogether.

 

[stormbind]

EzInKy, yes!

Marriage is spiritual, not political or economical

 

[Gladi]

Bright day
So marriage is strictly christian/judaistic/islamic? Does that mean that I, being slavic pagan, cannot get married?
I apologize for not reading whole thread, but which exactly western values does it undermine? And what are western values?
Anyway marriage is beyond religion, it did not originate there and does not end there. And I really wonder how many pairs said, let us get married we will be able t file joint taxes!

 

[The Last Conformist]

How come marriage existed in all nations long before the bible ever were written?

All nations? Citation for that?

(This is actually something I've wondered about - I've never heard of a society that does not have an institution we'd call "marriage", which stikes me as somewhat unexpected - so I'm not only being my usual contrarian self.)

 

[stormbind]

Yeah, but in different societies, define it differently.

From Christianity, it is strictly one man & one woman.
I find it (slightly) offensive to define it as anything else...
From Islam, it can be one man & many women.
From the Viking-religion, doesn't it extend to burrial partner?
From Star Trek, it can be many men & many women.

I don't care what you get up to, but to collect all the possible definitions and throw them in with the christian interpretation is not going to make me happy

 

[IglooDame]

Yeah, but in different societies, define it differently.

From Christianity, it is strictly one man & one woman.
I find it (slightly) offensive to define it as anything else...
From Islam, it can be one man & many women.
From the Viking-religion, doesn't it extend to burrial partner?
From Star Trek, it can be many men & many women.

I don't care what you get up to, but to collect all the possible definitions and throw them in with the christian interpretation is not going to make me happy

Got a cite for the Star Trek definition?

 

[The Last Conformist]

From the Viking-religion, doesn't it extend to burrial partner?

I'm not sure what you mean? Burial partner?

The Viking Age Scandinavian view was essentially that a man could have one wife, plus as many concubines as he could afford.

 

[stormbind]

Weren't some burried with living partners?

 

[The Last Conformist]

Not that I've heard about.

However, slave girls were sometimes ritually killed to accompany their masters on the trip to the afterworld. Ibn Fadlan wrote a famous eye-witness account you might try googling for.

 

[The Yankee]

EzInKy, yes!

Marriage is spiritual, not political or economical

How come heterosexual atheists can get married?

 

[the mormegil]

How come heterosexual atheists can get married?

You're right!

I never even thought of that before. If atheists can be married so should homosexuals.

You're a genius Yankee (sort of... )

 

[Armydude]

I'm curious. What extent?

Have you read the debate after this statement you quoted where the poster honestly admitted the hole in his argument? It's something to consider, of course.

I must admit that i did not read on after reading that, and posted right away. After reading on I find that the argument is flawed and i humbley retract my previous statement. *bows out*:suicide: