Gay marriage or some form of it should be legal in the sense of the same guarantees afforded to legally married couples. Yet I don't think it should be called gay marriage. If it is a right, it intrudes upon the historical and religious value of others that do not feel comfortable with it. Why can't I have a bartmitsfa? (sp is horribly wrong, sorry) Because I'm not Jewish.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
How does gay marriage hurt you ?
Page 21 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
imported_Michelle
Junior Member
A ban on gay marriage will teach my children that gay relationships are not "normal." Gays cannot reproduce, the only benefit they get from having sex is pleasure.
You can love many people, but gay marriage is not just about love, it's about sex and it's about telling society that gay sex is totally normal. A lot of gay men look for young men to have sex with because there is a better chance that the young guys aren't infected with the HIV virus. Gay men do not seem to be leading the best life. The majority of the people that have AIDS are gay men. A lot of gay men now think it's cool to ride "bare back" (without protection). It's like you're a hero if you sleep with someone who's infected. Then you have the bi-sexual people who sleep with the people that have AIDS and then carry it over to heterosexual people while we spend billions and billions of dollars trying to help people that get AIDS.
If gay marriage is allowed it will affect everyone's children because your children will be playing with the adopted children of gay parents. Gay relationships will become the norm in the children's eyes. Maybe people in America aren't ready for gay marriage because they just don't like it and they don't want their children to grow up thinking that it's normal to want to have sex with someone of the same sex that provides no benefit whatsoever other than pleasure and possibly AIDS.
You know a lot of you people think too much in the gray, like there is no right or wrong and that people have no right to believe in right and wrong. Well we all have a right to believe the way we want and I'm sick and tired of people telling me how I'm supposed to think when it comes to homosexuals, women, minorities, who to hire, and who to fire. If the American people are not ready for gay marriage then they're not ready for it! Move somewhere else! It should be up the people. This is OUR country, we share it, and everything we do affects others. Some of you people say that gay marriage doesn't affect anyone else. It affects our children and it affects our health insurance rates.
Someone mentioned that encouraging the gay community to stay with one partner would help slow these diseases. I honestly don't think that the people that are spreading these diseases are the same ones pushing for marriage!
You know, maybe if the gay community tried to tone down the gay parades that have floats of all kinds of body parts for our children to see, as well as men strutting around in little g-strings, society would be more accepting. Maybe if gays started using protection and actually took on a little more responsibility with regard to the fight against AIDS, society would more accepting. Maybe if gays were not as sexually promiscuous as they are, society would be a little more accepting of them. Maybe if they hadn't attacked the Boy Scouts, society would be a little more accepting. Maybe if they didn't try to shut Dr. Laura up (because she of course has no rights when it comes to freedom of speech), society would be more accepting.
These gay right organizations are already targeting children in our schools. It's not about teaching children not to bully others in general, this organization is teaching children that it's okay to be gay. How in the heck am I supposed to respect an organization that is teaching my children something that I do not approve of and that goes against everything I've taught them? Children do not need to learn that it's okay to be gay in school. Why? Because you would have to explain sexual pleasure, not reproduction, and that's the difference. Parents should be the ones who decide what to teach their children. Gay sex is not something that needs to be learned in elementary schools. Yes, elementary schools. You cannot make the general public "accept" something that is FORCED on it. We don't have to "accept" anything we don't want to. That's supposed to be the great thing about being an American. Gays can keep trying to push their lifestyle on Americans but Americans have the same right to refuse to accept it. We are allowed to think what we want to think last time I checked. Oh, but with all the speech codes, political correctness, and thought reform, maybe we won't be able to in the very near future.
Note: The Massachusetts Department of Education and GLSEN co-sponsored a conference at Tufts University entitled "TeachOut." There was one workshop entitled, "What They Didn't Tell You About Queer Sex & Sexuality in Health Class." Children between the ages of 12-21 were welcomed to attend. They learned about cum and calories, spit vs. swallow and the best thing for a man to eat if he wants his ejaculate to be sweeter. One boy suggested that if you're going to go down on a guy, you shouldn't brush your teeth for four hours prior to going down on him. This is to avoid HIV/AIDS transmission. Oh, they also discussed fisting. Yes, this is just the kind of lifestyle I want my children and grandchildren to be a part of. Don't you?
Google "It's Elementary: Talking About Gay Issues in School" if you really want to know why Americans do not respect these organizations that "represent" the gay community.
totalcommand
Platinum Member
Michelle,
I laff at your post.
It's funny the way you talk about these things. If you think love is not more than just sex, you're very mistaken. I'm sure you love your children. Do you want to have sex with them? Love is much more than what you make it out to be.
It's funny that you think allowing gay marriage will be allowing gay sex. I got news - gay sex is already around. Right now, there are a lot of guys out there taking it up the ***, I really hate to tell you. Right now, there are a lot of girls out there getting *** by another girl, I really hate to tell you. I'm wondering why you don't think the government should ban gay sex altogether. Wouldn't it solve all the STD problems in the world? AIDS, herpes, everything would be eliminated. I can see it right now.
This paragraph is the one I laff at the most:
It's great that you talk about what's right and wrong, and then you say that what should be allowed should be up to the American people. Unless I'm mistaken, what's right and wrong doesn't come from the majority of people, what's right and wrong just IS what's right and wrong. And who the hell are you to tell me what's right and wrong. It comes from my own experience, not your religion.
I laff at your post.
It's funny the way you talk about these things. If you think love is not more than just sex, you're very mistaken. I'm sure you love your children. Do you want to have sex with them? Love is much more than what you make it out to be.
It's funny that you think allowing gay marriage will be allowing gay sex. I got news - gay sex is already around. Right now, there are a lot of guys out there taking it up the ***, I really hate to tell you. Right now, there are a lot of girls out there getting *** by another girl, I really hate to tell you. I'm wondering why you don't think the government should ban gay sex altogether. Wouldn't it solve all the STD problems in the world? AIDS, herpes, everything would be eliminated. I can see it right now.
This paragraph is the one I laff at the most:
It's great that you talk about what's right and wrong, and then you say that what should be allowed should be up to the American people. Unless I'm mistaken, what's right and wrong doesn't come from the majority of people, what's right and wrong just IS what's right and wrong. And who the hell are you to tell me what's right and wrong. It comes from my own experience, not your religion.
JustAnAverageGuy
Diamond Member
I'm sure you put a lot of effort into this post, however I'm just going to say that it is very stereotypical, and perhaps a bit prejudiced. However, it still didn't answer the question of how it would stop the spread of STDs.
imported_Michelle
Junior Member
I apologize. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear late last night. You actually made my point. I love my children and I love my friends, but I don't want to have sex with them. I'm a married women I know plenty about love.
Well last time I checked, married people usually have sex, make love, whatever you want to call it. I don't think people are comfortable with gay sex, therefore, they're not comfortable with gay marriage. We can't stop gay sex but we can make a decision to decide that gay marriage should be banned. You must not have read my post, because if you had, you would have realized that I totally understand that gay sex is already around. We all know that and by banning gay marriage we are saying that we do not think gay marriage (which would include gay sex) is right. Gay marriage will teach our children that it is perfectly okay to be gay.
Q]You know a lot of you people think too much in the gray, like there is no right or wrong and that people have no right to believe in right and wrong. Well we all have a right to believe the way we want and I'm sick and tired of people telling me how I'm supposed to think when it comes to homosexuals, women, minorities, who to hire, and who to fire. If the American people are not ready for gay marriage then they're not ready for it! Move somewhere else! It should be up the people. This is OUR country, we share it, and everything we do affects others. Some of you people say that gay marriage doesn't affect anyone else. It affects our children and it affects our health insurance rates.[/quote]
It's great that you talk about what's right and wrong, and then you say that what should be allowed should be up to the American people. Unless I'm mistaken, what's right and wrong doesn't come from the majority of people, what's right and wrong just IS what's right and wrong. And who the hell are you to tell me what's right and wrong. It comes from my own experience, not your religion.[/quote]
If you think gay marriage is right or if you think gay sex is right then our views of what is right and wrong are already totally different. You made my point again in this paragraph. Who in the hell are you to tell me gay marriage is right? It comes from my own experience, as well. BTW, I'm not religous so don't assume that you know where my opinions come from.
It's great that you talk about what's right and wrong, and then you say that what should be allowed should be up to the American people. Unless I'm mistaken, what's right and wrong doesn't come from the majority of people, what's right and wrong just IS what's right and wrong. And who the hell are you to tell me what's right and wrong. It comes from my own experience, not your religion.[/quote]
If you think gay marriage is right or if you think gay sex is right then our views of what is right and wrong are already totally different. You made my point again in this paragraph. Who in the hell are you to tell me gay marriage is right? It comes from my own experience, as well. BTW, I'm not religous so don't assume that you know where my opinions come from.
[/quote]
You are the perfect example of bigotry, it is not what you believe in therefore others should be forced to comply with what you believe in, your morality.
I think you should sit down and know your place woman, you think you have a RIGHT to speak up before being spoken to? Think again.
Now go back and cook dinner for your husband, know your place.
Who the hell are you to tell me that womens rights matter?
Did you know that if your body fails to produce enough nandrolone (nor-testosterone, every pregnant woman produces it, it has been shown to develop certain parts of the brain more or less) during pregnancy your male child will most probably be attracted to other males? Whadda gonna do about that? Tell your child he is sick and disgusting? (thank GOD there are few mothers like you out there, that there are enough of you is clear when you look at the suicide numbers of teenage gay males).
The funny thing is that i never realized this until some nutjob brought it up that it could be treated, i researched it and found it to actually be correct, but the treatment only made the men hornier though, towards the same sex.
Gay relationships are perfectly normal. They exist in every human culture. An absence of gay relationships within a culture would be abnormal or odd -- but of course a human culture has never been found where gay relationships do not occur.
And by the way, it is not the role of marriage law to "teach your children" anything. If you want to inculcate bigotry and prejudice in your children, you need to do that on your own time. Gay couples have the right to equal treatment before the law (with respect to heterosexuals) -- that is a fundamental and constitutional right, and it is a right that certainly trumps your silly notion that marriage law should be used to "teach" your children a lesson in bigotry and prejudice.
Infertile heterosexuals cannot reproduce -- according to your logic "the only benefit they get from having sex is pleasure"... is this a rationale for banning marriage among those who are infertile...? Lol. Right.
1. Are you suggesting that heterosexual marriage is just about love? (i.e., it is not about sex?) Every book on the psychology of human relationships I have read suggests that sex between a marital couple plays many roles other than a procreative role -- in particular, it enhances emotional closeness, and strengthens the bond between the couple. I see no reason why this wouldn't apply to gay couples every bit as much as it applies to heterosexual couples.
2. Gay sex is as normal and natural as the rain. IMHO.
3. The idea that in general, gay men prey on young men because young men are (paraphrasing you) "less likey to have the HIV virus" is to my mind absurd. I would love to know where you are getting this information from. You are really just spreading nasty lies, stereotypes, prejudices about gay men -- the sad thing is that you are putting forth your ignorant and stupid lies about gay people as if they are established, documented fact. Shame on you. Where is YOUR morality, integrity, decency?
4. You say gay men don't seem to be leading the "best life". What is "the best life" according to you? Do you think you have a right to coerce gay men into leading your idea of a "best life"? Do you understand that the purpose of a constitutional democracy is to allow citizens to make choices that are DIFFERENT from the choices that OTHER citizens make. There is NOTHING ILLEGITIMATE about people making "lifestyle" decisions that are different from your own. I find it bizarre and odd that you seek to demonize gay men simply because many of them do not share your own constricted, inflexible and illogical fundamentalist xian or social conservative dogma. Please, continue believing your silly beliefs--but realize that you have no right imposing those beliefs on others.
5. Sex feels better without condoms. Surprise, surprise! People within monogamous relationships will often get a health check-up; and then agree to not use condoms within the relationship. Most of the men into "barebacking" are already infected with the HIV virus. So far the evidence that individuals can be re-infected by HIV (once they already have it) is sketchy. So 'bare-backing' (sex without condoms) is predomently a phenomenon that occurs among people who already have the HIV virus. Barebacking is not a widespread phenomenon. Gay people have been very quick to change their sexual behaviors; that is one of the reasons the spread of the HIV/AIDS virus within the gay community has been dramatically reduced.
6. Are you "blaming" bisexuals who transmit the HIV virus from the gay to heterosexual community? I would have thought it is the responsibility of every individual to take measures to protect themselves from STDs.
One in three lesbian couples are raising children; one in five gay couples are raising children. Your children are already playing with the children of gay parents. Some of those children are adopted; the majority of kids being raised by gay couples were produced by one or both of the gay partners in their former/ prior heterosexual relationships. Your desire to segregate children raised by gay couples from your own children is just noxious bigotry.
You keep coming back to this "pleasure" issue. Do you object to the idea that people might actually ENJOY sex?!? You know, the vast majority of sex is had for reasons of pleasure, not for procreative purposes. Two questions for you: How many pregnancies have you had? How many times have you had sex with your partner?? If the answer to the second question is much greater than your answer to the first question, it would seem to me that you are guilty of having sex with your partner because... YOU ENJOY IT. What does that say about you, I wonder? 🙂
Historically, majorities have a poor record of protecting the rights of minorities in the US (and just about every other country). The beauty of a constitutional democracy is that certain inalienable rights are specified in the constitution, and those rights cannot be taken away from citizens simply because an "angry mob" thinks they should be. Gay people in the US are absolutely entitled to be treated equally before the law (with respect to heterosexual citizens) and they also have a right to due process. Eventually the gay marriage ban will hit the US federal supreme court; and that court will likely (IMO) find that denying gay people access to marriage IS unconstitutional.
If that is your belief, then WHY are you using examples of the former (people who are--allegedly--spreading disease) to oppose gay marriage? That is sheer dishonesty on your part.
The spread of HIV/AIDS has been drastically reduced in the gay community. That is due to the efforts of gay community health programs -- most of which have been funded by the gay community itself, because the US federal government does not like federal money being used to provide sexually explict (i.e., accurate) information to citizens on ways to prevent the transmission of STDs.
Most gays aren't sexually promiscuous. I am amazed at your nastiness. You seem to be quite deliberately slandering gay people, evoking and perpetuating all the old stereotypes of gays as sexual predators, gays as promiscuous, gays as irresponsible and careless, etc. Frankly, *I* don't think that "people like you" SHOULD be trusted with the important task of raising children. What can you possibly offer a child, other than hatred, bigotry, prejudice? On the other hand, I won't be seeking to pass legislation banning social conservatives or xian fundamentalists from raising children. Even "people like you" have the right to be treated equally before the law. 🙂
Whatever. Please crawl back into your hole.
You know, there are heterosexual people who believe that DENYING gay people access to civil marriage is what "devalues" the institution of marriage. Right now, they see the civil marriage institution as compromised and flawed -- it is less valuable because it is a discriminatory institution (specifically, an entire class of individuals are unfairly denied access to it). There is a movement of heterosexuals who are refusing to marry until laws are changed and gay people have equal access to marriage. I think that is amazing, and wonderful, that there are heterosexual people willing to take a stand on this issue.
The other point to make is that support for gay marriage is now a "middle of the road" position among people under thirty. The most opposition to gay marriage occurs within older age groups. History, and time, is on the side of supporters of marriage equality. It's only a matter of time before the old bigots die off. 🙂
espressoman
Member
The only problem is, those old bigots pass their bigotry on for generations. Stupid people tend to procreate more. More stupid people, having more stupid kids, thus passing on their stupidity. (Perhaps we should have the government mix birth control into public drinking water supplies?)
imported_Michelle
Junior Member
It sounds to me like you're the one that is trying to force your beliefs on me! You seem pretty intolerant of my beliefs and the majority of Americans that are against gay marriage. Further, it seems that gay rights organizations are the ones trying to force their agenda on Americans that obviously are not ready for it. If the majority were to agree with gay marriage, then I'd have to accept it.
LOL! I suppose I do think I have the right to speak up before being spoken to in this day and age. I'm sure you know that it's LEGAL for me to speak before spoken to! Gay marriage is ILLEGAL right now. The majority of Americans do not want it.
You crack me up! I only wish I could stay home to clean and cook, watch a little Opera, spend time with my kids right after school, have lunch with friends, shop, and not have to worry about my financial situation!
Actually, I don't think I did. Look, you're not going to be able to offend me by making these comments. As a matter of fact, if you're talking about the rights of women that the National Organization of Women support, then you're really off. I can't stand that organization. Good try though.
Yes, the suicide rate among young gay men is very high, as well as drug use, and sexually transmitted diseases. I also know that a large number are molested by gay men when they are young. Further, many of them know people that are dying from AIDS. It's really sad and I'm sure living that lifestyle can be pretty depressing.
I would still love my son if he were gay. However, I wouldn't hesitate to speak up if he were trying to push and force his sexuality on young children (by way of thought reform), had multiple sex partners, abused drugs, and didn't practice safe sex. I would let him know that the road he is traveling leads to depression, suicide, or possibly living with a disease for the rest of his life. I seriously doubt gay boys are suicidal because of their mothers! Geez.
JustAnAverageGuy
Diamond Member
I know you're just trying to illustrate how the traditional values have changed over time and will likely continue to change, but that was uncalled for.
I recently had to do a position paper for my sociology class about gay unions stickly on the bases of crivil rights and not the marriage/religious side of things. I was put on the site of pro-gay marriage and even though I dont agree with the whole idea of someone being gay, the fact remains that there are people that choose that life style and some of the research i've done has brought to light some things that would be very frustrating for me had i been in that position. They are a minority for sure, the election told us that, in the 11 states that did vote on the issue, they all voted to ban gay marriage and it won by a land slide. I think that gay and lesbian couples should be afforded the same rights as heterosexual couples because it is a matter of civil rights, not how you personally feel about it.
Merely disagreeing with your ludicrous 'opinion' cannot be equated with "forcing beliefs onto you". If someone was to legislate to ban Xian worship, or legistlate to ban parents from teaching homophobic "moral values" (prejudiced against gays, sexual bigotry) to their children -- now THAT would be trying to "force beliefs onto you". In fact, it is the Xian right who is attempting to force their beliefs onto others, by seeking to use the law to deny equality and liberty to fellow citizens.
LOL! I suppose I do think I have the right to speak up before being spoken to in this day and age. I'm sure you know that it's LEGAL for me to speak before spoken to! Gay marriage is ILLEGAL right now. The majority of Americans do not want it.
[/quote]
"IN this day and age"?? In other words, you acknowledge that social and moral mores changes. What was once considered inappropriate or sinful (women speaking their mind) is now considered not only acceptable but desirable. So too with same-sex marriage. Times change.
And by the way, gay marriage is not illegal in Massachucetts. Married same-sex couples are every bit as married, under law, as married heterosexual couples.
Whether the laws (or interpretation of laws) that ban or outlaw or prevent same-sex couples from marrying in other states are constitutionally valid or legal remains to be seen. I believe it is only a matter of time before laws preventing same-sex couples from marrying will be struck down by the federal supreme court. This is not "judicial activism". Rather, it is the court looking at what has been set in place by legislature, and making a determination as to whether those laws are in line with the constitution.
As for what a majority of Americans want... 1/3 of US citizens support full marriage rights for same-sex couples... another third of US citizens belief lesbian or gay couples should have access to civil unions (with the legal protections + responsibilities associated with marriage)... only 1/3 of US citizens believe that gay couples should be denied any rights at all... so in fact, it is the bigots and haters who are in the minority.
It is not "gay men" who are molesting children in large numbers... men who sexually molest boys are "sex offenders", "child sexual abusers", "pedophiles", or "ephebophiles"... they are not "gay men".
If a man sexually abused his daughter, would you refer to him as a "straight man" or "heterosexual man" -- or would you refer to him as a "child abuser"...? The most salient feature of adult-child sex is not the gender of the adult in relation to the child; it is the fact that an adult has chosen to violate and abuse a child. Gay men are no more likely to sexually abuse children or teenagers than are heterosexual men, and it is wrong to blithely refer to men who molest boys as "gay" or "homosexual". Such men should be given the name they deserve, and a name which accurately conveys the nature of their sexual preferences -- i.e., "child sexual abuser", "child sex offender", "pedophile", etc.
By the way, what kind of person joins a tech forum, then in his very first posts, zeroes in on gay marriage...?
JustAnAverageGuy
Diamond Member
Would you have felt better if you knew at that time that sexual orientation was not a choice? 🙂
Someone merely disagreeing with your ludicrous 'opinion' cannot be equated with "forcing beliefs onto you". If that someone was to legislate to ban Xian worship, or legislate to ban parents from teaching homophobic "moral values" (prejudice against gays, sexual bigotry) to their children -- now THAT would be trying to "force beliefs onto you". In fact, it is the Xian right who is attempting to force their beliefs onto others, by seeking to use the law to deny equality and liberty to their fellow gay and lesbian citizens.
LOL! I suppose I do think I have the right to speak up before being spoken to in this day and age. I'm sure you know that it's LEGAL for me to speak before spoken to! Gay marriage is ILLEGAL right now. The majority of Americans do not want it.
[/quote]
"IN this day and age"?? In other words, you acknowledge that social and moral customs do change with the passing of time. What was once considered inappropriate or sinful (women speaking their mind) is now considered not only acceptable but desirable. So too with same-sex marriage. Times change. 🙂
And by the way, gay marriage is not illegal in Massachucetts. Married same-sex couples are every bit as married, under law, as married heterosexual couples in that state.
Whether the laws (or interpretation of laws) that ban or outlaw or prevent same-sex couples from marrying are constitutionally valid or legal remains to be seen. I believe it is only a matter of time before laws preventing same-sex couples from marrying will be struck down by the federal supreme court. This is not "judicial activism". Rather, it is the court looking at what has been set in place by legislature, and making a determination as to whether those laws are in line with the constitution.
As for what a majority of Americans want... 1/3 of US citizens support full marriage rights for same-sex couples... another third of US citizens belief lesbian or gay couples should have access to civil unions (with the legal protections + responsibilities associated with marriage)... only 1/3 of US citizens believe that gay couples should be denied any rights at all... so in fact, it is the bigots and haters, such as yourself, who are in the minority. 🙂
It is not "gay men" who are molesting children in large numbers... men who sexually molest boys are "sex offenders", "child sexual abusers", "pedophiles", or "ephebophiles"... they are not "gay men".
If a man sexually abused his daughter, would you refer to him as a "straight man" or "heterosexual man" -- or would you refer to him as a "child abuser"...? So why is it that men who abuse boys are referred to as "gay men" (or "gay priests" 😉 ) instead of "sex offenders" or "child abusers"?? The most salient feature of adult-child sex is not the gender of the adult in relation to the gender of the child; it is the fact that an adult has chosen to **violate** and **abuse** a child. Gay men are no more likely to sexually abuse children or teenagers than are heterosexual men, and it is wrong to blithely refer to men who molest boys as "gay" or "homosexual". Such abusers should be given the name they deserve, and a name which accurately conveys the antisocial and harmful nature of their sexual actions -- i.e., "child sexual abuser", "child sex offender", "pedophile", etc.
By the way, what kind of person joins a tech forum, then in his very first posts, zeroes in on gay marriage...?
Are you talking about the initial attraction to someone of the same gender, or the decision to act on that attraction and become sexually intimate with someone of the same gender?
Clearly the decision to have sex with someone (of any gender) is a choice.
I don't believe that we get to decide who we are actually attracted to in the first place, though. I mean, did you make a conscious decision to be attracted to girls? Was there ever a point in your development where you said to yourself, "well, I could go either way, but I think I'll decide to be attracted to girls from now on..."
Out of interest, what was it that made you think this is more of a civil rights issue? (I.e., you said that gay couples face certain situations that are not very pleasant). I wish more people who opposed same-sex marriage or civil unions would like you be willing to acknowledge the "civil rights" aspect of this discussion.
S0Y73NTGR33N
Senior member
There is one simple reason why gays and marriage should not coincide. Who invented marriage?... GOD... if you don't believe in GOD then some religious leaders did. They said.. hey it's between a man and a woman. That's how it is... Sure gays can have life partners and share vows and stuff.. but marriage... only if they are kidding themselves.. cause marriage is defined by GOD and religion, both of which say... NO GAYS.
depends on who you ask. conservative christians have a rather different outlook on homosexuals than say liberal christians. It's all open to interpretation.
conservative christians believe the first 4 chapters of the new testament are the direct word of god, liberal christians believe it's just the same ol story retold by the other guy.
God inventing marriage, now that's something new to me
Civil marriage is not defined by a god or gods... civil marriage is defined by State law in the US.
Be aware that historically, marriage has not always been connected to the Catholic or Xian Churches. The Catholic Church really only muscled in on marriage in a big way in the 12th century.
Marriage is a way of organising society, and it appeared in our history long before it was rennovated into a "religious" or "holy" institution. Early in the history of marriage, the marriage vows actually took place between the groom, and the father in law. (In those days, the woman's own wishes were considered so irrelevant that she wasn't even asked if she wanted to marry; all the negotiating took place between her father, and the prospective groom). For most of our (human) history, marriage has been used as a way of ensuring the orderly passage of property and other assets from generation to generation. Christian or Catholic church involvement in marriage is (historically speaking) a relatively recent event. Throughout much of the history of Ancient Greek and Roman civilisations, marriage was regulated by the state and had no religious component.
Sureshot324
Diamond Member
If 60% of Americans voted that all religion should be made illegal, would you just accept that and give up your religion? If you didn't, by your reasoning, you would be unjustly imposing your beliefs on the majority of Americans.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
