thatguymd
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2006
- Messages
- 368
- Reaction score
- 93
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Believe it or not I actually managed to come to a conclusion that doesn't agree with either side (that I've heard anyway).
Here are my thoughts:
To get to some common ground you must first decide why the government recognizes heterosexual marriage. Why would they care about an institution based on love?
Whatever you come up with you need to then decide why that should be exclusive to whatever group you think it should be restricted to (for most people that is either just straight or just straight and gay). So why can't there be more than two people? Why should we restrict minors at all? Or any other restriction you can think of.
I couldn't think of a solid reason that marriage of any kind should be recognized. So my conclusion is to get rid of all marriage (equal rights for all) and leave the marriages to other institutions. Am I missing a good reason why marriage should be recognized?
Here are my thoughts:
To get to some common ground you must first decide why the government recognizes heterosexual marriage. Why would they care about an institution based on love?
Whatever you come up with you need to then decide why that should be exclusive to whatever group you think it should be restricted to (for most people that is either just straight or just straight and gay). So why can't there be more than two people? Why should we restrict minors at all? Or any other restriction you can think of.
I couldn't think of a solid reason that marriage of any kind should be recognized. So my conclusion is to get rid of all marriage (equal rights for all) and leave the marriages to other institutions. Am I missing a good reason why marriage should be recognized?
