Now gays have the right to be as unhappy as straights.
Marriage is a LEGAL ritual, which is why it involves the tax advantages and legal protections such as inheritance and medical decisions. If a church doesn’t want to perform gay marriages, it doesn’t have to, but civil marriage has nothing to do with religion and everyone is supposed to be equal under the law. That’s why the Iowa Supreme Court said unanimously that banning gay marriage violated the equal protection clause of the constitution.
Marriage is a social ritual that was sacralized by religion in the middle ages. Law came into the game with democracy (in the French Revolution). It was too important to flush it down the drain along with religion and the old social order, so they adapted it.
How, I think tracht was merely saying that all couples, regardless of sexual orientation, have their issues. Some of them will fail just as some straight marriages do. That’s the human condition.
richgrise - I take it you are a non-breeder, then? You do have a point, and why shouldn’t they? And your point on marriage being religious is dead on, and what one of my gay friends asserts as well.
Since Christians hate gays so much, they should be for gay marriage so they can be just as miserable as the rest of us
DALLASDAN, I don’t think it’s fair to say all Christians hate gays. They don’t. There are a lot of Christians who don’t even find anything wrong with homosexuality because it’s simply the way God made gays.
motive, although I like the idea of separating out the religious from the secular marriage, I think even non-religious couples would be loathe to give up some form of public recognition of their commitment to each other. My atheist sister got married not for financial benefits but because she wanted to make that public statement.
cdward - but public statements need not be made by the state. You can have a ceremony whenever and wherever you want!