The Bible is against being non-christian. So why not just ban all marriages between people that are non-christian?
(This was meant to be sarcastic.)
2006-12-14 08:40:43 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
I say we just ban Christians and be done with it. They'll love it. They can finally have a reason to say they're persecuted.
2006-12-14 08:43:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 3⤋
I've been saying this for years! Why stop with gays? Why not ban all non-Christian marriages? Or how about interracial couples? Or people that are more than three years apart in age?
Pagan handfasting ceremonies, the first form of marriage, were around long before Christian marriages (or Christianity, even) but all of a sudden marriage is a Christian right that those who don't believe in the Christian version of God are denied.
What happened to Church and State being seperate, anyways?
2006-12-14 09:43:58 · answer #2 · answered by Rhianna 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
good point! the current government seems to forget about separation of church and state. neither the church, nor the government should be able to dictate who we love! as long as we're consenting, unrelated adults....it shouldn't matter what our gender, race, religion or culture is. we should all have the right to marry. considering the divorce rate, the infidelity, abuse, and blase' attitude some people have towards marriage (i.e. Britney's drunken 55 hr Vegas marriage, and, big surprise! now she's getting divorced!), how could we possibly "harm" the institution of marriage any more than straight people already do? how about banning divorce! bigots never learn!
2006-12-14 14:18:59 · answer #3 · answered by redcatt63 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, No, No, just ban marriage altogether! That way there will be no divorce the children will not be hurt and the lawyers will stop making so much money and of course the courts will be open to deal with the real issues "CRIME"!
2006-12-14 10:34:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I easily do not get why it truly is even an project. in case you're taking the religion out of the question and seem at it legally, there isn't any reason in any respect why marriage continues to be guy/female completely. My boyfriend has noted that there isn't any separation of church and state. There in no way has been. ---------- we are no longer going to get politicians who can separate church and state. it truly isn't any longer the position the commonly used public is; it truly isn't any longer the position the vote is. the commonly used public (at large) choose non secular undertones contained in the criminal gadget and in society. They sense that human beings will be lost sheep with out it. at the same time as this society can base its gadget on morality on my own as adversarial to sin as against distinctive feature, we can see the replace. i somewhat, somewhat choose faith wasn't this manner of ridiculously needed focal aspect in society.
2016-11-26 19:41:11 · answer #5 · answered by valesquez 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because the "banning" of gay marriage has nothing to do with religion (at least on the surface) and is within the rights of the states to do. Also, it is not banning, they are just sanctioning marriage between man and women for various social reasons. Getting involved in religion is wrong for politics and should not happen.
2006-12-14 09:05:50 · answer #6 · answered by straightup 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Why not ban remariage after divorce, which the old testament calls an abomination, and Jesus called adultery? Isn't remariage after divorce an attack on marriage and the family?
(still trying to decide if I am being sarcastic or not)
2006-12-14 08:47:25 · answer #7 · answered by sudonym x 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Even better, why doesn't the government get the hell out of the marriage business all together?
Let churches deal with marriage.
2006-12-14 14:44:33 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is not about religion but about science. Many have banned gay marriage because homosexuality has been the source of many STDs, including HIV and AIDS, and it is not naturally. It is a sexual desire, but it still doesnt have the means of creating life. It is also unhealthy, gay men suffer more from STDs than many other types of people.
Why would the government reward that with benefits?
2006-12-14 09:24:46 · answer #9 · answered by Daniel 6 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Yeah, I have yet to hear a really good, persuasive, logical reason against gay marriage.
2006-12-14 09:12:18 · answer #10 · answered by teresathegreat 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
i have a better idea, let's ban all marriages...
if a house of mutual love will not be classified officially as a marriage, why do we need marriages then..?
2006-12-14 09:02:39 · answer #11 · answered by ddyk 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋