Quote:
Originally Posted by J. T. Toad
Shouldn't polygamy be legal then?
What about pedophilism?
Why legislate morality at all?
Have their "rights" actually been hindered without the "certificate" of marriage?
Personally, I can't understand why they would want the extra tax burden unless they solely want to subvert the religious beliefs in marriage in the first place.
It's a semantic argument which has dire legal consequences. It'll be overturned just for the way the prop. was written. My apologies to Jamo.
|
Polygamy is not between two consenting adults, neither is pedophilism. For legal issues 7 spouses on a health plan are not the same as 1 spouse on a health plan. Laws against pedophiles protect our young. Religion has is not the primary concern with either of those.
Whose morality do you legislate? You don't want mine and I don't want yours. We are better off with legislation that keeps people from harming each other, and provides penalties for when they do.
Gays who cannot get a marriage certificate are not viewed equally under the law as somebody who can. There are plenty of benefits to having a marriage certificate that have nothing to do with religion.
Somebody asked before when this topic came up a couple of years ago about why a church should be forced to perform a marriage ceremony for gays in MA. Actually, they are not. Churches are private entities that are still free to have their own rules about who they will marry and who they will not. A JP, however, will issue a legal marriage certificate to any two people who meet all the legal criteria. One of my best friends was given a JP licence for one day to perform the ceremony for my wife and I. Neither of us is religious (my friend is Jewish, but he did not perform a Jewish ceremony).
So what harm does gay marriage cause?
Steve