Marriage was actually originally a religious institution. Still is, in fact. 'Tis be the reason why some church-affiliated-person-with-some-title-I-can't-remember usually does wedding ceremonies.
Here is basically the progression of the marital institution in history:
Religious institution--Political Institution--Societal Institution.
And I laugh at people who say "Dis aginst mah relgeon" /pseudo noob speak
The Bible has all of one verse about homosexuals, which amounts to "Sleeping with another of your sex is an abomination." People can frown at this all they want, but trying to understand a society over 2000 years later is almost a fallacy. The verse isn't invalid, in that there are problems that arise from that act, as is there from adulterous women/men who sleep around, which are commanded to be stoned as well.
I really wish people would actually read and think about both sides of this issue than get stuff second-hand
It's my job to help the next generation, and set a good example for them. And for that I'll gladly lay down my life.
Hey now, we also have the sleezy Las Vegas people who do weddings as well, my good sir.
However, as [I think?] you implied, the process of Marriage has changed.
Allow me to bring up another point. Women were looked down upon by the Church, and men, in general, for ages. However, when Women were gradually allowed some rights, and I'll use the example of Women gaining the right to vote here, did we decide along with it, "Oh, well, it was originally only Men who could vote, so we have to call it something else, right?" And then decided to set up voting booths for women, tally up their votes separate, and then just burn them all after-wards? No. So why can't Marital Rights just be allowed to "consist of" both Homosexual and Heterosexual couples becoming "one", to be cheesy about it.
I hope that THIS analogy of mine will be understood? Let us hope for not another "Egg-Flop". -.-
Whoa bro, better slow down bro, don't wanna be a bro, bro.
Well, you can't really use the "marriage is a religious thing, and homosexuals are against my religion!" argument anymore, because Atheists get married all the time, and religions are generally against atheism.. derp..
I've always been against homosexuality, but I guess this is a good thing. It is a free country after all.
I thought gay marrige was already allowed all over the country. Apparently not....ô-o
@Shadow: Wow, are you kidding? -.- Only a few states have fully legalized it, and a handful of states, including Illinois, allow Civil Unions, which are not Marriages, but have a portion of the benefits.
Whoa bro, better slow down bro, don't wanna be a bro, bro.
Seriously...I didn't know people weren't allowed to marry a certain gender. It sounds so unreasonable. Anyways, I saw on the internet-people were ticked off about the bill...I also learned a few cuss words looking at the people's conversation about it on a Fox News blog.
The people on Fox news are really, really dumb.. and they don't even make their debates fair.. they either have NOBODY representing the side they disagree with, or like, one person and they never let them talk. I don't know how you can watch it and not notice..
Anyway, that's the reason that church and state are SUPPOSED to be separate. BY THE WAY.. what's marrage? haha ;p
Heres a fine example of religion and state;
Saudi Arabia. :p They aren't such a pleasing nation eh..?
That is why secular nations are better off with a democracy with capitalist armor.
Marriage is a intimate relationship that is verified by documents with added bennifits. Not really differant from a gf/bf relation eh?
My ideal life; Living to the fullest, having fun, and geeking on a linux box.
..There are certain benefits to being married, but, don't you also get them if you've just lived together for so many years? My parents knew a couple who never got married, but lived together for quite a few years, and when they broke up, and the girl moved out she got half of the stuff, or something o.e