I admire you Seece you always add alot to the threads you post in, however I would like to know which facts I had completely wrong? Marriage is not called a right in neither Canada, USA or Australia. In their constitutions or rights bills with which Australia has no formal declaration of rights to my knowledge but I'm not Australian so if they do correct me. Those were the facts I used and to my knowledge they are facts.

Everyone says marriage is a right to all citizens, some point to the American Bill of Rights. However where does it say marriage is a legal right in the Bill of rights or any legal law passed by the US federal Government?

Now Viper pointed out that its supposedly logical like the right to water and food. However that is not logical as Marriage is and has been a religious institution for a very long time.

Now I'm not talking about gay marriage only rather all marriage in general. Whether it be gay, straight or even beast or object. Since both beastiality marriages and object marriages have been carried out globally.

Is marriage a fundemental right is the question, I don't believe their is any legal basis for calling it a right to each citizen.

Now someone pointed out that church's and religious groups that want gay marriage should be able to marry as their religious free will. However thats impossible as marriage's definition had to be changed to accomodate these groups. Like I said its l said you have a dog and a cat, you love dogs so you change the definition of cat to dog. Marriage has always meant between a man and a women, it has always been a religious institution and its meaning has been the same as long as civilized man has existed.

I agree with what others say, the state should stay out of religious affairs based on seperation of church and state, as such they should not have the authority to marry people or give them special government perks for being married. All gays and straits and beastility and object lovers should have the right to civil unions, whether the government gives perks or not is up to the Government.

In the end the Government should just stay the hell out of marriage and religious institutions should be able to marry which ever couple they want under the definition of marriage!

Umm the Constitution of Canada, US and Australia are not twisted thank you, have some respect for the law and our countries founding properties. Marriage no matter which way you slice it is a religious institution and not a right, its not twisted its fact, if you can prove it is a right enshrined in the Declaration of Rights or Bill of Rights be my guest.

Now you getting married obviously I think that you have the right to a civil union and equal recognition as all other civil union couples. You deserve every Government benefit given to a couple that does not have children. However to defile a religious institution is really low.

Just because we have different view points doesn't mean you or I have a twisted argument. Both of us base our opinion's on our world views. I also have a gay friend who plans to marry sometime soon, fact is just because I have a different view then you doesn't make me a homophobe or twisted or any such thing.

I just believe in the seperation of church and state as well as the Constitution and founding values of the Dominion of Canada.

I am glad to see so many people agree church and religion should have the say over marriage, as its their tradition. In my opinnion, marriage is a tradition between a man and a woman, it has been so ever since its foundation, and I#ll do everything I can to keep it so in my country

How about lumping gay marriage and bestiality together? That's proof of how low you're willing to go to get your point across.

It should be a right for everyone to get married as long as they are consenting adults.
Remember that marriage isn't exclusive to the Christian church, or any other religious institution, so there are several types of marriage.
Unless it's a Christian marriage the church have no say. Same goes for all religious institutions.

You don't understand what a constitution is, or what it does.

You don't understand how dictionary definitions work.

You falsely claim that pastors or priests will be forced to carry out gay marriages (they're not even forced to carry out straight marriages, so how you can believe that is slightly beyond me).

You (disgustingly) compare homosexuality with beastiality and pedophilia. Then manage to accuse others of "low" argumentation.

Tell me, will it be worth my time to argue with you?

The idea of marriage existed before the US constitution, before christ was even born so yes everyone should have the right to get married if they want to

Rights can be covered without being explicitly stated. The US constitution doesn't directly grant Freedom of Association... but it is considered to be covered due to, among other things, the freedom of speech component of the first amendment.

Similarly, I would argue that "marriage", being a primarily religious observance, is covered by the Freedom of Religion component of their first amendment. Meanwhile, I would consider the secular component, which are effectively civil unions anyway, are covered by Freedom of Association, as a form of speech, supported especially in the case of gay marriage (or rather, gay civil unions) by the Fourteenth Amendment, which ensures that all people get equal protection under the law, which means that if two people can associate in a particular way and get benefits from that, then such an association should be applicable to any two people.

Also see the Ninth amendment, which does specifically say that the bill of rights is not a full listing of rights, but just a codification of a few of the most important ones.

This is one of the secrets of the various constitutions - they're written to be fairly broad, to allow for interpretation. Why? Because otherwise some people in the future will try to claim that rights not explicitly stated are not covered, and this concern was specifically raised by one member of the Georgia delegation in 1787 - "If we list the set of rights, some fools in the future are going to claim that people are entitled only to those rights enumerated and no others."

marriage is just a title

two people living together long term is as good as marriage

society needs it for it to be successful


give too much liberty and you will end up like what US is today

The right to marry is in the EU human rights bill which was accepted by all Eu Countrys and is law in Gemany Austria Liechtenstein Norway and partially switzerland. The Uk has the Human rights Act that should be more or less identical.