Gay Marriage - Who Cares?

Monday, May 17, 2004
Today is the first day that Massachusetts will allow Gay couples to get married.

What has always struck me as strange is that a majority of American's oppose Gay Marriage. I just don't understand this. I can see somebody believing that marriage is between a man and a woman. But why should government make that distinction?

The argument against gay marriage is that it is against the will of God. Fine, let those people go to hell. Why should you get to judge them while they are on earth? Let God do it when these people face judgment. But the US government is not supposed to support religion one way or another. If marriage isn't a religious thing then you can't argue that homosexual couples shouldn't marry and if it is a religious thing then government shouldn't be involved.

And don't argue the morality of the whole thing. Who's morality are we to use? If it is a morality issue than you shouldn't allow divorce, you shouldn't allow people to have pre-marital sex, etc.

Can someone please explain to me their position that the US government should be involved in this debate. I would really like an argument so if you have one please share. I won't accept any argument that as its basis is based on religion or morality. This person has a good post that describes some of the arguments I find particularly frivolous.

6 comments:

Kat said...

i agree with you. here is one reason people say the government should be involved in deciding if gays should be allowed to marry: marriage is a legal contract that entitles both parties to health benefits, inheritance, custody of children, etc.

i think i just may agree with john kerry that marriage should be left as a religious institution and civil unions should be recognized by the state. then anyone can have a civil union and still have the legal entitlements i listed above, while religious people can have both if they want.

T said...

Yes, marriage implies certain legal benefits and I don't necessarily have a problem with this (I do a little bit but that is an argument for another day). But that doesn't answer the question about why there should be a distinction between Gay and Straight marriage.

My problem with "civil unions" is that separate but equal is never ever equal. If it were we would still have segregated schools. The only way I would be in favor of civil unions is that if every law on the book changed the word marriage to civil union and government had nothing to do with marriage whatsoever.

Anonymous said...

I know you want people to post with reasons why the gov shouldn't allow gay marriage but I just can't think of one. I have to agree with Kathryn that we should leave the religious aspect of marriage to the church and let the state authorized civil partnerships.

susan said...

That was not anonymous, that was me. :)

Amanda said...

Marriage is a religious institution. The government should stop recognizing marriages altogether. Let everyone who wants hospital visitation rights, healthcare, inheritance rights, and other government-given rights have civil unions. People who want to solemnize or sanctify their commitment before their god, by the rules of their religion, can then go to their church, synagogue, mosque or temple and participate in a marriage ceremony which, being a religious ceremony, would have absolutely no legal standing what-so-ever. There. Gay marriage debate solved. Do you think the gay marriage opponents will go for it?

Anonymous said...

I can't believe how many humans are not opposed to gay rights. Your planet is so messed up.