If you are against gay marriage, explain why without mentioning religion

[Michael-5]

Brutalyst said:

Well, firstly marriage is a comunion between two people, who take an oath before God, usually performed by a Priest/Pastor/Vicar or whatever. So how can you ask people to argue against gay marriage without mentioning religion? Now you could say it doesnt have to be performed as such, but if its not would the marriage be recognised as such?

I should point out, im not religious and know little about that subject (so maybe someone can clarify this next part for me) but doesnt it say in the bible marriage/love etc should be between a man and a woman? maybe even go as far to say between a man and man (or two women) is forbidden?

So there is the problem in itself, if a religous person believes the word of god/biblical writing etc, they have to believe that too.

Next I should point, though my comments so far might point to otherwise, I am not against marriage between two men or women. If a man loves a man and wants to show it with a commitment such as marriage, more power to them.

The problem lies in religion as if someone believes something such as God, the Bible etc, its there choice to do so, and someone else cant make those people do something, or perform an action that contradicts those belief's.

Finally, I believe marriage in itself to be a sham, though now its something people believe to be binding and an oath sworn under the eye or a witness of god/before god, thats not what it should be, and its not where its origin lies, and is something that became over time by the Romans I believe).

A marriage shouldnt be about religion or god, and just a commitment between two people. If two people want to make that commitment they should be able too without the need of a church or religion. But then as I said eariler who would recognise the marriage as such. Marriage to me has become intertwined with religion, and it shouldnt be. It should be nothing more than one person commiting themselves to another.

 

Homosexuals can get civil unions, which are like marriages, and show a commitment to one another. I agree with you about gay marriages, in Canada same sex marriage is legal, but it's the priests choice if he/she wants to perform a marriage. Most don't.

Also the bible does specificially state that marriage is a sacred ritual performed between a man and a women, but it doesn't condone homosexuality post marriage. So I can see why Christian homosexuals wish to become married.

What I do't stand is why don't homosexuals make their own sect in the Christian religion? Don't Anglican marriages allow divorce, and protestant marriages allow their preists to marry? Did King George the ___ not make the Anglican sect because he wanted to divorce his wife and marry a different women?

As for your last statement, I kinda agree. Civil Unions are like marriages in this way, but they don't grant the same power in all places as marriage does. Civil Unions should be renamed something more extravagent, and people who don't follow a particular religion, should just get these performed. Homo and Heterosexuals alike.