If a church wont marry 2 people of the same gender that's ok. That's their business. Why not let them get married in the court. Don't we have separation of church and state? People are only against gay marriage because of their religion.
2007-03-21 08:32:50 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
why did France's court system just rule it wasn't. This is the one place on earth I thought it would be legal.
You should look at other issues. Medical insurance goes up under family coverage. If you allow gay marriage, then you have to allow family coverage and that increases a company's costs. And that is just one issue.
2007-03-21 08:39:32 · answer #1 · answered by az 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem is terminology.
Religious marriage in the church has nothing to do with secular state marriage. Someone can be married only in the church, and have no legal benefits. Or they can be married as far as the state is concerned, without any church ever being involved.
That's the problem. People cannot seem to understand the difference between the religious status and the legal status.
The simplest solution that solves everyone's problems is to make the term "marriage" apply solely to religion, and states can only grant "civil unions" to everyone, regardless of gender or sexual orientiation. That way, the religious folks get their "sanctity of marriage" and the rest of the country is not forced to deal with their religious prejudices as a matter of law.
2007-03-21 08:37:52 · answer #2 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
as far as i know we do have separation between church and state when it comes down to what we believe in. We can have faith in any religion we choose. However when it comes to law, so far the separation between church and state is non-existent, from what i can tell anyway.
2007-03-21 08:39:20 · answer #3 · answered by aphotic nostrum 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because there are significant financial benefits to the status of being "married", and it would be irresponsible of our government to provide those benefits but allow another entity to define who receives them.
I'd be all for your idea if the federal government ended all of those benefits, but if they did that, the gay marriage lobby would lose interest in the idea immediately.
2007-03-21 08:38:57 · answer #4 · answered by open4one 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There is no legal, ethical or moral reason why a gay man and a gay woman cannot get married.
2007-03-21 08:37:49 · answer #5 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If someone has a sex change operation, they can legally get married. Isn't that ironic?
2007-03-21 08:38:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋