Who should regulate marriages?

[gabosaurus]

I say no one should.
First of all, marriage is not about religion. It is a civil ceremony. There are a lot of people who don't believe in religion. Or, if they do, it is not the religion that follows the teachings of the Christian Bible.
I know a lot of you advocate that the government should stay out of people's lives. Why is this different.

I know homosexuality offends a lot of you. It doesn't offend me. But what if I decided that I am offended by an American marrying someone from Russia, or from South America? Can I move for a law or constitutional amendment stating that American citizens can not marry those from other countries?

Why is it the business of the government who should get married? The U.S. is supposed to be a free country. The government should not regulate morality.
We do have laws concerning age limits and behavior with animals. I am talking two willing people, whether they be same sex or different sex.

Please tell me why the government should interfere.

[Kathianne]

I say no one should.
First of all, marriage is not about religion. It is a civil ceremony. There are a lot of people who don't believe in religion. Or, if they do, it is not the religion that follows the teachings of the Christian Bible.
I know a lot of you advocate that the government should stay out of people's lives. Why is this different.

I know homosexuality offends a lot of you. It doesn't offend me. But what if I decided that I am offended by an American marrying someone from Russia, or from South America? Can I move for a law or constitutional amendment stating that American citizens can not marry those from other countries?

Why is it the business of the government who should get married? The U.S. is supposed to be a free country. The government should not regulate morality.
We do have laws concerning age limits and behavior with animals. I am talking two willing people, whether they be same sex or different sex.

Please tell me why the government should interfere.

For many religion plays a most important role in their marriages, raising of children, in their lives. Perhaps none of those apply to you, but the rights are there for those that choose differently.

[gabosaurus]

That's not my point. I want to know why the government shouldn't sanction same sex marriage.
Individuals can think and do what they believe.

[hjmick]

Ah shit.

I agree with Gabs on somethinng...

[ConHog]

I say no one should.
First of all, marriage is not about religion. It is a civil ceremony. There are a lot of people who don't believe in religion. Or, if they do, it is not the religion that follows the teachings of the Christian Bible.
I know a lot of you advocate that the government should stay out of people's lives. Why is this different.

I know homosexuality offends a lot of you. It doesn't offend me. But what if I decided that I am offended by an American marrying someone from Russia, or from South America? Can I move for a law or constitutional amendment stating that American citizens can not marry those from other countries?

Why is it the business of the government who should get married? The U.S. is supposed to be a free country. The government should not regulate morality.
We do have laws concerning age limits and behavior with animals. I am talking two willing people, whether they be same sex or different sex.

Please tell me why the government should interfere.

How is marriage not a religious matter? Marriage IS a religious institution.

Government out of marriage. THat means out as far as marriage benefits or anything of that matter to.

Civil contracts for those who don't with to be married but want certain contractual protections.

Churches can marry whomever they like (consenting adults of course)

[ConHog]

That's not my point. I want to know why the government shouldn't sanction same sex marriage.
Individuals can think and do what they believe.

That's the part that trips self labeled "conservatives" up. They don't believe in freedom. They believe in THEIR freedom.

homosexuality is disgusting. I support the right of free Americans to be disgusting as long as they are not harming other people.

[ConHog]

Ah shit.

I agree with Gabs on somethinng...

I keep trying to tell yall Gabs is not a liberal LOL

[mundame]

Well. Go back to the basics.

Why marry at all? Africans don't marry; indeed, they mostly do prostitution, if you read about those systems, and the women take care of any resulting children, assuming they or the children survive. Primitives in various areas don't marry in our sense --- Australians, New Guineans, etc.

In Roman times marriage was wholly a state issue, and was about heirs and property and money and so on. Augustus famously nagged aristocratic young men of Rome to marry and beget -- they weren't at the time. Rome was extremely tolerant of religion, at least till one religion used that tolerance to take over entirely and force the other religions out, and religion was not a basis for marriage at all.

Marriage wasn't a Christian sacrament till sometime in the Dark Ages. It was quickly challenged by early heresies (no marriage, no begetting or sex in some cases, or orgies, depending on the heresy).

Because of strong Christian roots this American government could until the 1960s rely on marriage for distributing social security and all sorts of legal issues of inheritance and so on. Now, obviously, that is dying out. In our lifetime! Big thing to happen, really.

The government could stop ALL entitlements based on marriage: it's the only sensible response to the DOMA problem, in which some states call homosexual unions "marriage" but the government doesn't give one of the pair spousal benefits.

Marriage stabilizes any state: without it, men gather in male packs in coffee houses or the street corners and get into trouble and do no work, like in Afghanistan and Africa and so on. With marriage, men are productive and repopulate the state. It's a way to harness male energies. Without marriage, women raise all the children by themselves, as in Africa, and everyone is poorer. There's no inheriting, there's nothing to inherit.

So the state wants marriage for general prosperity, but I think that ship has probably sailed.

[tailfins]

Well. Go back to the basics.

Why marry at all? Africans don't marry; indeed, they mostly do prostitution, if you read about those systems, and the women take care of any resulting children, assuming they or the children survive. Primitives in various areas don't marry in our sense --- Australians, New Guineans, etc.

In Roman times marriage was wholly a state issue, and was about heirs and property and money and so on. Augustus famously nagged aristocratic young men of Rome to marry and beget -- they weren't at the time. Rome was extremely tolerant of religion, at least till one religion used that tolerance to take over entirely and force the other religions out, and religion was not a basis for marriage at all.

Marriage wasn't a Christian sacrament till sometime in the Dark Ages. It was quickly challenged by early heresies (no marriage, no begetting or sex in some cases, or orgies, depending on the heresy).

Because of strong Christian roots this American government could until the 1960s rely on marriage for distributing social security and all sorts of legal issues of inheritance and so on. Now, obviously, that is dying out. In our lifetime! Big thing to happen, really.

The government could stop ALL entitlements based on marriage: it's the only sensible response to the DOMA problem, in which some states call homosexual unions "marriage" but the government doesn't give one of the pair spousal benefits.

Marriage stabilizes any state: without it, men gather in male packs in coffee houses or the street corners and get into trouble and do no work, like in Afghanistan and Africa and so on. With marriage, men are productive and repopulate the state. It's a way to harness male energies. Without marriage, women raise all the children by themselves, as in Africa, and everyone is poorer. There's no inheriting, there's nothing to inherit.

So the state wants marriage for general prosperity, but I think that ship has probably sailed.

Marriage has to be a good deal for men or they won't participate. In my case, it was a full time wife (and later mother for the kids) or no deal. I wonder if most men could earn more than the average family if not distracted by other things.

[mundame]

Marriage has to be a good deal for men or they won't participate. In my case, it was a full time wife (and later mother for the kids) or no deal. I wonder if most men could earn more than the average family if not distracted by other things.

Good points. You should definitely hold out for whatever is your bottom line.

Nowadays since women have options, marriage also has to be a good deal for women, or they won't participate. I was reading an article that in Russia, Germany, and especially Japan, women simply flatly refuse to marry and large proportions are saying they won't have children.

Could become a problem......

I'm for depopulating down to an eighth of the current gross overpopulation, but it has to be managed so that high-populating immigrants don't simply invade and take over everything.

[fj1200]

That's not my point. I want to know why the government shouldn't sanction same sex marriage.
Individuals can think and do what they believe.

They shouldn't sanction same-sex marriage. Just as they shouldn't sanction traditional marriage.

I say no one should.

Or do you disagree with yourself?

[gabosaurus]

You don't have to be religious to be married. You don't have to get married in a church.
My sister is not religious. She was legally married in a civil ceremony.

The government says you have to be legally married for either of the partners receive certain benefits.
Several members of my mother's family live in Germany. Except for one of my aunts, they are all married. Germans have nothing against marriage.

I doesn't matter if you think homosexuality is disgusting. It's not against the law. Therefore, there should be nothing saying that homosexuals shouldn't get married.

[DragonStryk72]

I say no one should.
First of all, marriage is not about religion. It is a civil ceremony. There are a lot of people who don't believe in religion. Or, if they do, it is not the religion that follows the teachings of the Christian Bible.
I know a lot of you advocate that the government should stay out of people's lives. Why is this different.

I know homosexuality offends a lot of you. It doesn't offend me. But what if I decided that I am offended by an American marrying someone from Russia, or from South America? Can I move for a law or constitutional amendment stating that American citizens can not marry those from other countries?

Why is it the business of the government who should get married? The U.S. is supposed to be a free country. The government should not regulate morality.
We do have laws concerning age limits and behavior with animals. I am talking two willing people, whether they be same sex or different sex.

Please tell me why the government should interfere.

Um, because like you said, its a civil matter, which requires regulation. Regulation is the only thing that keeps a deranged man from marrying his 14 year old daughter. What? She's willing. So in your estimation from the argument, there's no issue.

Why is it you always make the worst possible argument in favor of gay marriage? I face palm every time you pull one of these arguments. But throwing all regulation out the window only makes those of us on the side of gay marriage look like fucking loons

[gabosaurus]

Um, because like you said, its a civil matter, which requires regulation. Regulation is the only thing that keeps a deranged man from marrying his 14 year old daughter. What? She's willing. So in your estimation from the argument, there's no issue.

There are already age restrictions. As I said in my original statement. Therefore, your point is invalid.
Who says you aren't a fucking loon?

[tailfins]

You don't have to be religious to be married. You don't have to get married in a church.
My sister is not religious. She was legally married in a civil ceremony.

The government says you have to be legally married for either of the partners receive certain benefits.
Several members of my mother's family live in Germany. Except for one of my aunts, they are all married. Germans have nothing against marriage.

I doesn't matter if you think homosexuality is disgusting. It's not against the law. Therefore, there should be nothing saying that homosexuals shouldn't get married.

Maybe not, but it invites God's judgement.