No, each has the same rights, and each has the same restriction. It's equal treatment.
Why does polygamy change it anymore than SSM?
I find it interesting that you left out the primary reason...religious belief. Did you not think that that was a viable option for the poll?
For every religion that uses the Old Testament, marriage is the first ceremony and institution that is created and it was created by God and performed by God. You can't find a more holy ceremony and/or institution. It just doesn't exist.
Yes, I know...tons of people have bastardized marriage in the past and some seem to think that is justification for continuing the improper trend. It is not.
As for me, and a growing number of people, it is a violation of the First Amendment to regulate marriage in any manner. If I had my way, the government would drop all references to marriage. Then, if they chose, they could replace marriage with a secular social contract. That would not violate the First Amendment and it would provide a much easier path to the fairness you seek.
No, hypotheticals are foolish games.
No. They each have different restrictions - men cannot marry women, women cannot marry men - those are different restrictions.No, each has the same rights, and each has the same restriction. It's equal treatment.
I find it interesting that you left out the primary reason...religious belief. Did you not think that that was a viable option for the poll?
For every religion that uses the Old Testament, marriage is the first ceremony and institution that is created and it was created by God and performed by God. You can't find a more holy ceremony and/or institution. It just doesn't exist.
Yes, I know...tons of people have bastardized marriage in the past and some seem to think that is justification for continuing the improper trend. It is not.
As for me, and a growing number of people, it is a violation of the First Amendment to regulate marriage in any manner. If I had my way, the government would drop all references to marriage. Then, if they chose, they could replace marriage with a secular social contract. That would not violate the First Amendment and it would provide a much easier path to the fairness you seek.
Marriage in the sense it is being discussed is a legal contract, religion should have no place in this discussion.
How so. If lesbian women can't marry women (as men do) and gay men can't marry men (as women do) then gays are being restricted from marrying their beloved.
It would change the number of people, change the dynamics, change the laws extensively, with the way how people would get married, how things get passed on from one spouse to another, probably change the tax codes, how people get divorced etc. Allowing polygamy would drastically change the institution, while SSM would not, because none of that stuff will have to change when we allow SSM.
Our government is secular, religion has no place in *ANY* legal disussion.
Too bad the religious can't get that through their heads.
because marriage is not between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman...it's between a man and a woman, and all are equally allowed to engage in it.
Marriage in the sense it is being discussed is a legal contract, religion should have no place in this discussion.
So it's ok to ban it because it would be more difficult to regulate?
According to you....unfortunately, you are not the only person it affects.
I think it's going to be legalized despite everybody's feelings, and I bet I don't see 60 (7 years) before it happens.
According to you....unfortunately, you are not the only person it affects.
According to you....unfortunately, you are not the only person it affects.
The religious have no say in government?
Using religion as a reason to deny SSM is against the first amendment, and my religious rights.
Using religion as a reason to deny SSM is against the first amendment, and my religious rights.
Not if willfully disregarding religious beliefs is ok so long as you get what you want.
Not if willfully disregarding religious beliefs is ok so long as you get what you want.
Not if willfully disregarding religious beliefs is ok so long as you get what you want.
We live under a government that is secular, and we must think about secular reasons to justify our laws. Would you be okay with muslims banning pork, and alcohol through law because it is their religious belief?
Religion has no place in laws.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?