I'm against gay marriages being legalized.

[paecmaker]

Just to make me understand(as I take it for granted you talk about usa.) How does wedding work there, can you only do it in some kind of church or can you get married in for example a town hall without a priest(aka no religious things)?

If thats the case I see no problem to make a law that gay people can get married in atleast non religious matters while the churces are free to choose wether or not they want it.

The thing is today marriage is as much about beurocrazy(yay for spelling) with laws and stuff than just a bond between two people.


Now I might have no idea what I actually talk about as I basically know nothing about weddings in the us.

[Mizel]

Just to make me understand(as I take it for granted you talk about usa.) How does wedding work there, can you only do it in some kind of church or can you get married in for example a town hall without a priest(aka no religious things)?

If thats the case I see no problem to make a law that gay people can get married in atleast non religious matters while the churces are free to choose wether or not they want it.

The thing is today marriage is as much about beurocrazy(yay for spelling) with laws and stuff than just a bond between two people.


Now I might have no idea what I actually talk about as I basically know nothing about weddings in the us.

In the US you can have a religious or non-religious wedding. As long as you get your marriage license and have someone that is certified to marry you, it doesn’t matter. We had a non-religious wedding. My father-in-law is certified, and he is the one that married my husband and I

Gay marriage is one of those topics where I will never be able to see the other side of the argument. The 2 main arguments that I typically hear for one to be against gay marriage (minus those bogus arguments such as, “Gay marriage will lead to beastiality!”):

1) It’s against my religion.

I don’t agree with it, but I actually understand why people use this reasoning. However, how does one justify controlling other people’s lives based on their OWN beliefs? And also, what makes these people think that THEIR beliefs are the THE right ones and that everyone should have to follow those rules? That part never made a damn bit of sense to me. For example, say that someone Catholic is against gay marriage because their religion tells them to be. Now, they think that it should be made a law that every single person in the US should have to follow regardless of their religion. If you want to make it a rule that no one can join your church if they are gay, then fine. But to force your beliefs on an entire country (especially a country with such diversity in religions)? How, how does one justify this? I will never understand. Can anyone offer some insight into this?

2) I’m not against it, I just find it gross.

Ah, the typical response of someone that has just watched an hours worth of lesbian porn, but is against gay marriage. This one’s not hard. If you don’t like it, don’t do it. Denying someone basic human rights because you don’t like it is just absurd.

Laws for marriage/taxes are already in place for same sex couples. Allowing gays to marry will change nothing (with the exception of minor wording). Separation of church from state says that religion should have no bearing on laws. Again, I’m baffled by the fact that gay marriage is even still an issue.

[BobTD]

weddings are as much of religious tradition as anything else. Of course you can be non religious and have a wedding that makes perfect sense. But to say that we should have laws that enforce a certain religions customs in a religiously tolerant country is a joke.

If you take away the governments hand in hand relationship with this ancient tradition then we remove a form of religious discrimination. And with separation of church and state that is how it should be.

So rather than argue for gay rights I argue for freedom from religions influence in our laws.