Are there any secular reasons to oppose state-recognition of gay marriage?

[KatKanPlay]

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

Well, by health I mean against things like virulent diseases.

You didnt answer my question.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

That and all the contract benefits. Otherwise only the religious would get married.

I take it you aren't married.

The only reason me and my atheist wife and I are is because we are in love and she wanted to be officially "married". It's a commitment thing and for some, a good reason to throw an expensive party.

Originally Posted by Diesel66

you are born black. You cannot choose to not be black.

Same sex or opposite sex marriages are pure choices. Sexual attraction is not a factor in the govt acknowledging the contract.

Ahh, the old "they choose to be gay" argument.

Originally Posted by Diesel66

WHY do you limit marriage to only two people ?

Why do we only allow 1 person per seat on a rollercoaster?

It's the nature of the arrangement.

There is nothing that says 2 men can't have a contract.

[IminWonderland]

Originally Posted by Diamond Cross

You can't protect people against themselves?


How about the success of seat belts? Seat belts have saved a hundred thousand lives since 1975. And bicycle and motorcycle helmets have also saved thousands of lives since their implementation.

The only way to protect one's self to protect one against AIDs is to not have sex whatsoever. There is no protection against it. Yes straight people get aids, but the most people who get it are homosexuals, and according to the CDC it seems that black men are the highest numbers.
It's just politically incorrect to say that in today;s culture. The info in those links prove it, at least for America. I don't know what the situation is like in Africa as I have not come across that info. Visit the link to the CDC for more information.

No, in general legistlating to protect someone from themselves, when it comes to things like, sex, drugs, or things of that nature, it doesn't work.

A seat belt is a lot easier habit to create than "just don't have sex".

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

I take it you aren't married.

The only reason me and my atheist wife and I are is because we are in love and she wanted to be officially "married". It's a commitment thing and for some, a good reason to throw an expensive party.

the whole tradition bs too is a major reason.

Ahh, the old "they choose to be gay" argument.

next time actually read the comments. I said marriage is a choice, didnt mention anything about sexual orientation being genetic/instinctual/choice.


In MASS (and effectively every state according to the Constitution) a gay man can marry a straight woman, a gay woman, a straight man, or a gay man. A black man would have no choice at all in the matter, so how are they comparable ?

Why do we only allow 1 person per seat on a rollercoaster?

It's the nature of the arrangement.

There is nothing that says 2 men can't have a contract.

They are the exact same bs. You are stopping people in love from joining into a marriage contract, why are you being such a bigot

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by Scrumtralecent

The only reason me and my atheist wife and I are is because we are in love and she wanted to be officially "married". It's a commitment thing and for some, a good reason to throw an expensive party.

Marriage isn't secular. It had no secular denotations until very recently.

[Dumpy Dooby]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

They are the exact same bs. You are stopping people in love from joining into a marriage contract, why are you being such a bigot

I agree with that 100%. Just because polygamy is unpopular, it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be afforded the same rights as the monogamist.

That's why I firmly believe that marriage should not be part of government at all.

[lew]

Originally Posted by Dumpy Dooby

(1) no civil unions recognized by government at all