Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Marriage is a traditional relationship between two people, forming into a distinct social unit that has much societal value.
|
Marriage is a traditional relationship between two people, one a man and one a woman. So this statement above, in which you conveniently leave out the one man and one woman part, fails to advance your argument.
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
The expansion of this concept to "five guys, a girl and a giraffe" is an essential change in the entire concept, removing it from the realm of the recognition of the benefits of a pairing.
|
The expansion of this concept to two men or two women is an essential change in the entire concept, removing it from the realm of the recognition of the benefits of a pairing. You conveniently leave out that the benefits of the pairing historically have been that it takes one man and one woman to create a child. I am not saying this is a valid reason, just the historical reason that marriage was created - to further the creation of children. But you conveniently leave that out.
So your statement again fails to advance your argument. I personally think we have too many people on this earth and nothing should be done to encourage even more breeding by humans. However, that is in fact why marriage was created as an institution - to provide a social institution to promote breeding.
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Prohibiting people from entering into this pairing on the basis of characteristics that do not speak to this essential rationale, but are instead based on immutable characteristics subject to personal like or dislike, is a misuse of a state's power.
|
First of all, if civil unions are available, they aren't prevented from pairing with each other in exactly the same way heteros pair, the only difference being the social security and employer sponsored benefits. So the "misuse of state power" (your words) would be limited to only the denial of social security benefits to a non-working spouse or the failure of the state to force an employer to extend employee benefits to gay spouse.
Second of all, if this is such an abuse of state power, explain to me why it isn't a misuse of a state's power to prohibit people from entering into a polygamist union based on their religious beliefs? Explain that to me. These fundamentalist mormons believe that to achieve godhood they must engage in polygamy. They believe this is what god commands them to do.
Why is preventing gay marriage a misuse of a state's power but preventing polygamy not a misuse of a state's power?
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
The voiding of the laws prohibiting interracial sex and marriage did not change the fundamental nature of marriage, but instead merely made it available to all without regard for what became insupportable considerations.
|
Voiding interracial marriage didn't make marriage available to all. It made it available to one woman and one man regardless of whether they shared the same racial characteristics or not. But you conveniently leave out that one woman and one man part yet again.
