Marriage has survived in one form or another for millenia...
Has it really existed for thousandS of years?
Even if it did, we could think about how it got its start (property ownership and inheritance, at least in Europe, from what I've read), and wonder if it even has a place anywhere at all...
It's very, very easy to wrap agendas in the flag of being a "civil right." Problem is, whether or not they really are, the moment said argument is put in in front of voters (as this has been) it immediately goes into the realm of the political. If you don't believe that, perhaps everyone here needs to recall the rancor that erupted around CA proposition 8.
But all of those problems weren't political (though some religions align with some political parties to a certain extent), they were religious.
Because there are some people who think that marriage is still religious and that's fine. But what about the people who get married for 24 hours and then have it annulled? Isn't that much more detrimental to marriage in general than a gay couple getting married.
I don't even see how that affects marriage. We had friends that seemed to be madly in love, got married quickly b/c one person's visa was expiring and they were in love anyway, but then about a year later (once the person's citizenship came through) they broke up...and they remained close friends. Can't help but think that maybe they weren't quite as in love as we thought.
But that situation doesn't mess up MY marriage at all. Can't see how it would.
Against.
Society has to be able to draw the line somewhere and I believe it should be drawn to exclude gay marriage. I believe this because from a legal perspective if you permit gay marriage I don't see how you prevent any type of marriage. Why not three in a marriage, or four?
If it is a "right" of any two adults who "love" each other to get married, why doesn't that "right" extend to any THREE adults who "love" each other.
Also I am not comfortable with the topic gay marriage being taught in schools.
OK, but...if you really think about it...beyond the confusing tax stuff...how would that truly impact YOUR life, if the slippery slope were true? I don't understand the attraction between that large family on TV right now, but what on earth do I care if 4 women want to be married to one guy? If anything, it leaves more single men for the rest of the single women!
As long as minors are protected and bio-cousins (or siblings etc) can't marry, if someone thinks that they will be happy with 5 husbands, and they can find 5 guys to agree with it, I can't see how it would impact my world.
Should ANY marriage be "taught" in schools? How is marriage taught in schools anyway?
I never thought about any of this until the CA thing (I don't live in CA). I had already realized that being married didn't keep me with DH any more than just saying i'd stay with him. We had a small handfasting (though I managed to forget the cords) at the National Zoo in front of the plaque bought in honor of my mom on the "big cat island", and from that point forward we felt just as married as we did almost 2 years later (a year after the planned wedding, we had to do some counseling so things were delayed) when we had a ceremony and reception and did the legal stuff. It's not that certificate on the wall that keeps us here!
But then I thought about the people who actually WANT the certificate on the wall, and I got so sad for them. DH and I actually considered the wild act of getting a divorce and remarrying later once things changed. We didn't really want to be part of the system like that. The discussion is tabled for now, as we don't have the money to do all that, and we couldn't tell DS (to not worry him) but we don't like lying to him either.
On the other side, my brother in law is glad it wasn't legal for him to marry in WA, because his partner turned out to be a slimeball, and if they were married he would have been financially bound to him. Best that they were not connected financially during that time! But if he ever *wanted* to marry, I would be very sad for him that he can't in our state.