gay marriage

Gay marriage has become a hot topic because social conservatives (read: bigots) think now is the time to use the government to persecute another group of people. The first time this happened it was aimed at Mormons, and their practice of bigamy. Then, interracial marriage was temporarily prohibited, and in some cases, laws prohibiting interracial marriage were on the books until the late 1960's.

Has any of these people considered that maybe, given the history of regulating marriage and the reasons behind these regulations, that codifying marriage into law in the first place is an example of the government getting too far into our private lives? Doesn't it cheapen the ceremony if the contract signed is a three party contract - two people and the government, as now required by a marriage license? Maybe the solution is to drop all laws restricting and regulating marriage so that it once again, becomes nobody's business who marries who.

Isn't this also unfair to people whose religious traditions have no taboo against gay marriage? Are you not forcing a definition on marriage that would not be found in various other religious traditions such as shinto, daoism, and unitarian?

—-No, it does not. If these religious traditions have no taboo against underage drinking, does the current laws against underage drinking force a definition of behavior on them? -Hartnell

George Bush's Gay Marriage

For the last couple of years, George W. Bush has been pushing for an amendment to the United States constitution that prohibits gay marriage. This has been seen as his primary strategy throughout his political career - pander to militant Christians.

Gay Marriage Links

Similar Pages

Categories: politics