Gay marriage

[Larry Flyntz]

I get the feeling that no one here actually opposes gay marriage. But does anyone have a remotely reasonable argument (i.e. a non-religious argument) against it? In other words, can anyone play the devil's advocate here? I've tried, but I haven't come up with anything.

[The Ocean]

I can't think of any reason to be against it.

[Smiff]

Gay people shouldn't have to assimilate to a heterosexual lifestyle to be accepted. Gay marriage is just a weak attempt at asking Middle America to accept them, which won't work. Homosexual relationships, in whatever form, are just as legitimate as heterosexual relationships, and they shouldn't have to mimic a heterosexual union to be considered as such.

[Famous Hogbert]

Its not so much "mimicing", but Gay couples are concerned about getting the social/legal benefits that married couples recieve. Think about when one person from a  gay couple dies. What possessions remain would not be legally entitled to their significant other, and could be taken. However, with married couples, the spouse would undoubtedly have rights the loved ones possessions. Overall American society (and many other societies in the world) are ones that favor married couples.

[Smiff]

The benefits a marriage recieves in our society should be available to all. And yes, all. The fact that gay couples can't recieve health insurance, be notified by hospitals, and recieve tax breaks should not be fixed by the legalization of gay marriage but by a change to the institution of marriage in this country.

There are many other situations other than gay partnership where people are gypped because they aren't married: people should be allowed to distribute their health insurance and visiting rights to whomever they please. As for tax breaks, it should be for households, not marriages.  

Marriage is a religious institution and should never have been mixed up with the law.  The only union that should be legally recognized is a civil one, and only they should recieve benefits and privledges under the law.

[FAGGOT WATCHIN TRON]

Marriage is a religious institution and should never have been mixed up with the law. The only union that should be legally recognized is a civil one, and only they should recieve benefits and privledges under the law.

That's absolutely correct about marriage being a religious institution.  The real argument isn't whether gays should be able to get married, it's whether they should be able to recieve a civil union, which they can't in many states.  Most people just refer to this as getting married, though, because usually when a couple gets married they also receive a civil union, so the two have become synonmous in our minds.  Yet another example of how poorly seperation of church and state works in this country.

In any event, since marriage has really nothing to do with a civil union, there's no reason gays shouldn't be able to receive one, even if the church doesn't want them getting married.