Why should the Government or State of a predominately Religious society ';allow'; same sex marriage?

Why should the State me involved at all? Why not just have civil unions for everyone, same sex or not in order to regulate, health care benefits, partner medical rights,(pull the plug type scenarios), inhertance property rights etc.?





We could just leave government out of the marriage business altogether, and leave ';Marriage'; rites and ceremonies up to the individual's personal beliefs, be they religious or secular.





What say you?Why should the Government or State of a predominately Religious society ';allow'; same sex marriage?
Because a civil union is a government deal, that is why the government needs to be involved you are an idiot.Why should the Government or State of a predominately Religious society ';allow'; same sex marriage?
Because Society and the Government are two different entities. While we may have a Religious Society, we also have a Secular Government.





A secular government, as designed by our Founding Fathers, is not supposed to take sides on religious issues.





The government is also charged with ensuring that the citizens are ensured equal access to the privileges of citizenship. One of the privileges of citizenship is being able to marry the person whom you love.





In your own words, we could just ';...leave ';Marriage'; rites and ceremonies up to the individual's personal beliefs, be they religious or secular.'; Well then, people should be allowed to marry according to their personal beliefs. If the personal belief of a homosexual couple is that they should be allowed to marry, then they should be allowed to marry. Remember, those were your words.
Works for me.





The reason I'd like to see same-sex marriage legalized is that I'd like to see everyone treated equally. I don't think homosexuals should be denied any rights just because of their homosexuality.





If we abolish government recognition of marriage altogether, that would achieve the same effect, so I'd be happy. However, I think that legalization of same-sex marriage is much more likely to be accomplished than what you suggest.
Morganie, it is knee jerk reactions like yours that makes YOUR views seem absolutely so outlandish. Allowing Gays to marry is NOT the same as allowing people to marry animals, is NOT the same as allowing adults to marry children and is NOT the same as allowing people to violate any of the current laws on the books that are intended to protect any innocent from being harmed in any way whatsoever. Allowing gays, lesbians and bisexuals to marry a partner of the same gender does NOT influence anyone else's marriage, it does not detract from them in any way, shape or form, whatsoever. It merely acknowledges that everyone has the SAME rights as everyone else. PPeriod Gays are not asking for MORE rights than anyone else, merely the SAME rights that you or anyone else has. YOu do NOT have the right to force your narrowly interpreted view of morality upon the REST of this Nation. If YOU want things that way between you and YOUR family, fine, just leave everyone else's family out of it and back off. And don't ell me that if I don't like it then leave. Screw you! I gave blood for YOUR right to believe as you wish to, but I also gave it for MY right to do so as well. When YOU are willing to stand in front of a bullet then maybe I might consider that you have a legitimate right to tell me to abide by YOUR viewpoints. But until YOU do that then back off. You hear ?





Brightest Blessings,


Raji the Green Witch
That would clear the confusion about whether or not marriage was a secular or religious institution. The only problem would be with ';fringe'; cases like an hypothetical church preforming marriages for under aged members or multiple partners. Not implying that either of these are wrong, just that in some cases they are illegal.





It does make sense in a lot of ways though.
Marriage is MUCH MORE than merely a religious ritual or institution. marriage and laws permeating our society concern marriage, the couple and their family and this is because VERY important issues are addressed.





It is the ROLE of government to ';be involved';: in these matters.





As for our country. IT IS NOT A THEOCRACY. It has an amendment which states that it must NOT establish any ONE religious affiliation or belief system.





We MUST be allowed to marry the person they would be able to love and be intimate with. And this must be a person of their same sex.





Therefore for a gay person to enjoy all the rights and privileges of our FREE society (and secular society) they MUST be allowed to marry.





It is NOT a religious issue but a matter of just civil rights.





And a civil union is NOT a marriage in the minds of people or society . And marriage is NOT ';owned'; by any religious group. It should be available to ALL people.





All you ';religious'; people out there who do not happen to like same sex marriage - YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO LIMIT THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. And you do not have the right to commendeer marriage for only yourselves.





And you do not have the rught to have any segmnent of our society deemed or declared second class citizens who are not allowed to be married.
Which religion are we discussing? Christianity IS NOT the only religion in this country. Many religious (christian and otherwise) DO want to see civil unions for same sex marriages.





Civil Unions should not take over Marriages. If people want a religious marriage they should be able to. By taking that away and going strictly to Civil Unions for all your taking away peoples religious rights. Having both is what this country needs. That way the religious still have their rights and the gay community gets their fair share.
Well i say since this is the land of the free. If gay people want to get married THEY SHOULD if lesbians want to get married THEY SHOULD not everybody has the same belief just like not everybody has the same want for the opposite sex. But since we have bible thumpers everywhere we have problems
I agree since the constitution states a separation between state and religion, sadly politicians and Americans may be to dumb for that.
I say if christians believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman because we are supposed to multiply...then what about old people who get married, they cannot multiply..what about the sterile..should they be outlawed
I have always thought this. Agreed.
I agree.
Marriage has been a legal and social contract a lot longer than it's been a christian ceremony. They don't get to claim it as their own, and claim they're the only ones who can define it...they didn't invent it, they rarely respect it, and they certainly don't know what to do in one (look at the divorce statistics).





By the way, currently ';civil unions'; do NOT provide the same legal rights as the legal contract of marriage. Not in any state.





Here's a better idea: have the government do what its constitution says it's supposed to do, and treat all people equally under the law -- since marriage is a legal contract, and government administers the law, they need to be involved.


However, let's do like the vast majority of the rest of the world: give no legal status of any kind to *religious* marriages. Anybody that wants to have a religious ceremony can, but it has no legal standing. If people don't want a religious ceremony, they don't have to have one. If you want a legal marriage contract, you go to the state for that.


That's what most of the world does, and it makes perfect sense.


Even *extremely* religious countries like the Philippines (95% Roman Catholic) do it that way.





That's what I say.





Peace.
You answered your own question already: ';...leave ';Marriage'; rites and ceremonies up to the individual's personal beliefs, be they religious or secular.'; No one should care if we have a ';predominately (sic) Religious society';, as you stated, if the marriage is secular.





The fair thing to do is for the state to revoke ALL marriage licenses, if marriage is truly a ';religious institution';, and that only churches are supposed to officiate them. Anything that the state/government does should apply to all REGARDLESS of religious beliefs. And the belief that ';man should be with woman'; has its' basis in religion.
So we're going to let people marry pigs, 4 year olds, and cheerleader squads now too?





Or is this one of those ';I get to set the rules that make sense to ME!'; kind of questions where you haven't really thought what you're saying through?