Lietenut had it right; every Civil Rights Movement is a repeat of another. Hell, the conservative right that are in opposition to legalizing gay marriage are using the same "It's not natural," "It would ruin the sanctity of my own marriage," that they did in the Civil Rights Movement of the 60's in regards to African-Americans marrying Caucasian women.
I think it's probably against the first amendment, yeah, but who is in charge of checking whether or not we're breaking the laws? The judicial branch. And the judicial branch doesn't want gay/lesbian marriage, so that's how it is. Basically, when a governor or the president chooses between gay/lesbian marriage or keeping things the same, they're choosing between whether they want gays/lesbians to vote for them or if they want Christians to vote for them. The government cares because if they pass a law allowing gay/lesbian marriage, they will lose the Christian vote. You see what I'm saying?
Lietenut had it right; every Civil Rights Movement is a repeat of another
thanks hoping someone was gonna read that
ADAM AND EVE, NOT ADAM AND STEVE!!! Thats all I got to say, same gender marriages are against my religion.
wow.....just wow =/ you know what else is against your religion? birth control. Oh you know what else is against your religion? masterbating. you know what else is against your religion? 85% of things that could help/is natural for people to do... ya your religion isn't always right.
and besides it wasn't adam and eve... it was something from the water coming on to land and evolving into primates.... then eventually humans and overtime to what we are today.
In response to the original question, the government cares because couples who are married enjoy different legal obligations and benefits that couples who are not married do not enjoy. So because the government ultimately has to decide whether gay couples can count as married for the purpose of hospital visitation rights and health decisions, how the can file taxes, etc, they have to care about the marriage issue.
The government should get out of the marriage business all together. Marriage is essentially a religious institution so it's really up to religions weather or not they want to allow gays to marry. IMO the government should only recognize civil unions, not marriages in the religious sense, and gays should be allowed to have civil unions (civil union). I know that would probably piss alot of people off but that's their problem.
Saddly quoting myself from way back on page 3... I still have to stand by this opinion. Marriage is religious concept. That's way I don't think the government should recognize it. I think there should be legal protocols for having a marriage and a civil union performed as one ceremony and freedom of speech dictates that a person can call a civil union a marriage if they like. I think that only civil unions should be recognized for government and legal purposes though.
Marriage is essentially a religious institution so it's really up to religions weather or not they want to allow gays to marry.
The institution that has since been translated into marriage was around for far longer then the religious use of it. If I remember correctly it developed back in Roman times as a legal agreement between two people that could take multiple forms (often such as modern pre-nups as so on). It was not originally a religious institution, so I don't see why it should have to be called such.
That said I can understand that in modern society there are different connotations surrounding the word itself, so if the government were to stop recognizing "marriages" and started to recognize "civil unions" for all people I would be fully behind it. Still, there's going to be a debate regardless, because in states that already allow civil unions to take place with the full benefits of marriage there are already movements to deny gays and lesbians those rights.
