I live in a secular society but the politicians all seem to be against it
2006-09-21 12:13:37 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I am married and don't beleve in god
Children are born without marrige so I don't think its necasery
god has no place in austalian politics
2006-09-21 12:21:33 · update #1
Nothing. But maybe we should just get rid of marriage in the eyes of the state. If 2 people want to be together they can be but the government should have no part in it. That goes for straight or gay people.
2006-09-21 12:45:00 · answer #1 · answered by a4140145 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
For the record, I personally am not opposed to gay marriage. In my opinion, marriage is a public, morally binding oath of love and fidelity made between two people before a community of their peers.
The issue I have is when a minority tries to subvert the existing system and enforce their will upon the majority. In the U.S., for example, we have had cases of local mayors, courts and even minor city officials declaring gay marriage legal. This is far beyond their authority. Imagine if they had declared personal property illegal, or gasoline-powered vehicles?
Certainly it is a worthy issue, but I do not believe it is one that should be given a free pass through our established system of checks and balances. It will be far more significant when the issue passes through the voting process.
For example,I was not married in a Catholic church, therefore the Catholic church does not recogize my marriage. I take no issue because the Catholic church bears no meaning in my life. In my mind, I do not have the right to demand that the Catholic church change its views just to meet my needs.
In my opinion, the State should not be in the marriage business in the first place, just as it should not be in our bedrooms. If they wanted to create a secular "civil union" available to all, that would solve many issues. The emotion surrounding this debate, however, is political currency for all sides, so I don't see that happening any time soon.
2006-09-21 19:57:48 · answer #2 · answered by a_man_could_stand 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what's wrong with gay marriage, but it seems the politicians won't vote for it. Seems America is all for rights as long as we're talking about our own, but screw anyone else.
I personally see more benefits than negatives.
As far as the reason that marriage is a sacred union, it does not fly. People have been considered married if they live together for over 7 years; people have gotten married in courthouses by the county government for years with absolutely no religious significance, but in a legalized, recognized union, so the religious argument does not stand.
If God is the reason, that REALLY doesn't stand, given the division of church and state. Regligious people could get married in their church and gays could get married in the courthouse or in churches that recognize them.
There is no reason at all that stands ground and makes any sense.
2006-09-21 19:21:07 · answer #3 · answered by whereRyou? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I am an advocate of getting the government out of marriage altogether. The government should provide ONLY civil licenses that provide the "couple" with the administrative rights of inheritance and to be able to make legal/medical decisions for each other. The religious aspects of "marriage" should be at the discretion of the individual churches. Let them decide whether gay couples are married in their eyes, and act accordingly.
2006-09-21 19:24:41 · answer #4 · answered by kathy_is_a_nurse 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
One thing, Marriage has a religious ownership. Marriage is seen as a religious event. Religion or Religious people oppose gay marriage because they believe it's a man/woman union. So I say leave it be, as far as religion is concerned, no gay couples are getting married. As far as the Law or Govt. is concerned, gay couples are making lawful unions that guarantee all the Social rights to these couples, the same Social rights that married people get. Separation of church and state.
2006-09-21 19:19:45 · answer #5 · answered by Enterrador 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Marriage is the joining of two souls. Nowhere in the traditional wedding vows does it say anything procreation.
Get over this gay marriage thing people. There are bigger problems in this world to worry about than what two people do with their lives. All the time that you are wasting worrying about this you could have been worrying about Aids, drugs, violence in school, your kids' education, greenhouse effect, job outsourcing, etc, etc, etc.....
In other words, leave other people alone if they don't harm you.
2006-09-21 19:24:51 · answer #6 · answered by This Is Not Honor 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is nothing wrong with it.
As for those who claim marriage is for procreation, there would be a lot of childless couples, like myself, who would have to get a divorce.
Single women who have gone through menopause would not be allowed to marry either.
Sterile people would not be allowed to marry.
Yes, gay couples should be able to marry. Absolutely - or this is not a democracy.
2006-09-21 19:28:37 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Marriage is a religious rite - the official stance of alomst all religions(except modern day fanatics) which it is a sacred union between man and woman. I do believe though that gay people should be allowed a civil union.
2006-09-21 19:17:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Gays should be allowed to marry and adopt children - why they would want to, I have no idea.
2006-09-21 20:18:08 · answer #9 · answered by luckywilly17 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
marriage is for a man and a woman to wed thats sacred im not against gays they can be together but marriage is something else
2006-09-21 19:16:21 · answer #10 · answered by bigboss 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋