If the sanctity of marriage is just between a man and a woman and for procreation.....?

Question

should two people who cannot or choose not to procreate be allowed to be married?

If your answer is yes, then why can't 2 people of the same sex be married.

There is a seperation of church and state, so I am not interested in religious views, as they are not valid in creating laws.

Keep in mind the benefits that go with marriage through laws that were created for married couples. People who just "live with each other" do not have the same benefits as married couples.

Answer 1

Originally set up by societies to provide for the wife (widow) and children in the event of a man's early death, civil marriages are based upon religious contracts. It was to make things legally easier for the procreated.

If couples did not have sex before marriage, there would be no means of knowing beforehand if a couple could not have children and rare was the couple who made a choice not to have children.

Our legal system is based upon tradition. This is the tradition from which it comes. There is absolutely no rational reason to not to allow same sex civil contracts (if one wants to avoid the use of the word marriage) or for that matter, multiple husbands or wives in similar legal contracts.

There are many emotional reasons, most of these based upon religious beliefs, for the opposition to allowing anything except a one man - one woman marriage. It is very odd that religious people who claim to be educated and tolerant can also be so narrow-minded based upon their personal beliefs about what Divinity wants.

Answer 2

In Canada, same sex couples have all the tax benefits a hetero couple would have. Hence there is no need for a same sex couple to be married.
Yet the government has still made that legal.
Why I will never understand.
Perhaps bowing to public pressure, lobby groups, etc.

Marriage is also a tradition that is slowly eroding. If a couple plan on not having any children, there is also no need for marriage, as common law exists now after 1 year.

Answer 3

Agree with you, religion is not supposed to be established in law.

Secular reasons to say no?

I'm undecided,I'm asking.

Why add something, that has never existed?
The law doesn't intrude, and ask people if they can or desire to reproduce. Does it need to do so, to be consistent?

Do we want to extend the benefits, and responsibilities of marriage to gay couples?

If we do, wouldn't it be enough to call it a domestic partnership? Why wouldn't this be a reasonable compromise? Do you have to change the meaning of marriage, to get social approval for what you do?

Answer 4

The only reason gay marriages don't exist is because of religious views that are behind the societal values which create laws.

Answer 5

Religious views have nothing to do with my feelings that a marriage between a man and another man is absolutely ridiculous.
Same would go for two women getting married.
In my opinion it serves no purpose and is wrong.

Answer 6

in the present society of ours their is no room for two people of the same sex to get married to earch other, as this is an abuse to human dignity. but if two people wish to get married on the basic of no procreation then let it be between the the two sexes not the same sex married to each other.

Answer 7

Marriage was created through religious views-if your not into religion, then there is no need to get married! two men , two women, or two of anything can do what ever they want.....but to want to get married, or allow them to get married is like allowing a boy to join the girlscouts!....it doesn't make sense...and is quite stupid!