Quote:
Originally Posted by alansmithee
I would disagree with that. Most people do not enter into marriage thinking it is disposable, they believe it will be permanent.
As for the definition of a sucessful marriage, I stated before it is relative. Since there is no objective definiton, I believe using that as a metric for government support is wrong. And as for religious tradition, I personally try to leave religion out of debates because it is not something that can be proven or disputed with logic and reason. Therefore, I don't think that the traditional religious basis of a sucessful marriage could be used to set up a standard for deviant behavior.
And honestly, with the rising divorce rate, I personally have started believing that marriage should be harder to attain. I think marriage (and the governmental, legal, and financial benefits relating to it) should be limited to a man and women who are planning to have children. I believe this would limit greatly many societal ills, but that is really off-topic.
But having those beliefs, I don't think homosexuals should be allowed marriage or civil unions. Society gains nothing out of it, and there is no inherent right to marriage. I have no problem with the religious marriages (which are being performed) but I don't favor any special status. Many of the same benefits which have no outside cost to businesses or the government can be attained if desired by contractual agreements between two people (namely inheritance, hospital visits, and child custody).
|
Whether they think it or not, marriage is disposable. That is what divorce is. It is a means of disposing of an unwanted marriage. Your "relative" definition for a successful marriage is maybe commendable, but it completely dodges the issue. Marriage is a commitment, divorce is a failed commitment and a failed marriage. Success can be relative, but not when we have clearly defined goals.
You can't claim that society gains nothing out of it because that statement by itself means nothing. It is a broad statement that is impossible to support credibly.
Equality is not special status. If you truly didn't favor special status you would be against marriage benefits for anyone, not just the homosexuals.
I think the idea that we must protect business from having to provide benefits to gay people is silly. Businesses should not be free to discriminate.