Why the marriage thing IS necessary

[GlamFelix]

Yes, you are all sick of hearing the 'yay' or 'what do you think about...' but anyway. I want to actually try and explain why it is a big deal, and maybe help some of those against it, to understand why we pushed for legality of same-sex marriage, even though same-sex love is legal already. please excuse any typos. <3 And note that I did my research. I most certainly did not pull this out of my ass, as some people have claimed.

---

Marriage, as many people say, is a religious ceremony.

Okay. I will accept that. It most certainly does have its roots in religion.

And that the religions it comes from do not support same sex marriage.

Okay.That seems true to me as well. Marriage, religious marriage has been defined as the union of a man and woman. Now, I don't think that makes sense, or see why it must be a man and woman, but it isn't my place to judge this fact and I'm not here to argue that point.

So what is the problem? Why allow same sex couples to take part in a religious ceremony that does not accept them? Are we forcing religion to go against its beliefs?

Maybe. When you think about it like that, it sounds kind of..well, bad. Maybe you support gay couples or not, but either way, we don't want to not support religion, that would be against the constitution, right, to ignore religious freedom?

Now, that may be true. We do need to support religion, whether we agree with it or not, because of the freedom of speech--we know how important that is, all of us.

Now, here is the problem with that.

Marriage has a lot of 'benefits'. Most of which have nothing to do with religion, but rather, basic rights that a spouse should be able to have, such as making decisions for their partner when their partner is sick, or dead, as well as other things such as tax benefits and home ownership--I'll get into more detail as we go on. The basic point is that marriage, despite coming from religious roots, has governmental value--and I think we should all be able to agree that humans living in the U.S.A. deserve to have the same federal rights.

But isn't there another option for same sex couples?

Yes...sort of. There is something known as Civil Union, and it is not religious at all. However, we can't use it, not as an easy alternative for those who don't fit in the definition of religious matrimony.

Marriage: Marriage is a unique legal status conferred by and recognized by governments the world over. It brings
with it a host of reciprocal obligations, rights, and protections. Yet it is more than the sum of its legal
parts. It is also a cultural institution. The word itself is a fundamental protection, conveying clearly that
you and your life partner love each other, are united and belong by each other’s side. It represents the
ultimate expression of love and commitment between two people and everyone understands that. No
other word has that power, and no other word can provide that protection.

Source- Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders [GLAD]. I fact-checked this with other organizations and legal sites and religious definitions, and everything is true, but this is the best worded definition I have found.

What is Civil Union?

A civil union is a legal status created by the state of Vermont in 2000 and subsequently by the states of
Connecticut, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Illinois, Delaware and Hawaii. It provides legal
protection to couples at the state law level, but omits federal protections as well as the dignity, clarity,
security and power of the word “marriage.”

Source- same as above.

So firstly, what we need to realize is this 'alternative' wasn't even in the entire country of the US.

Now, it says that it provides legal protection. That's good, but what are these 'ommissions'? It says federal protection. Let's look into what that means.

Firstly, since civil unions are not in every state, they are not necessarily going to be treated as a 'real thing' in states that don't provide civil union, if a couple moves--and very few states have civil unions. Not only that but impoverished couples who do not have the financial support to move to a state where they are honored cannot be joined in civil union.

Federal benefits: This won't cover all, but some legal protections and responsibilities that are included with civil marriage, but not union: leaving work to care for a family member, the right to sponsor a spouse for immigration, and social security benefits that can make the difference from being impoverished in old age, or being secure in your old age. There are many more, but these are among the most important I found in my search. None of these have to do with religion, so why should they only be available to those who are within a religious code of conduct [hetersexuality]?

The federal government has not recognized civil unions--only state government. That means that taxation is made endlessly more complicated--are you single, are you married? Neither.

And in fact, while you are not married, and the government does not recognize a civil union as marriage, you can get in trouble--fraud--for saying you are single on tax forms and other government forms, because you aren't. So you really don't know if you're going to be okay on that front.

So in conclusion, it is my belief that as marriage is firmly entrenched in our society, our government, it should be completely available--as anything in the government should be. All US citizens should have the right to these benefits mentioned above. Perhaps the government should never have given marriage such federal and legal benefits, but as it has, it cannot be pretended that marriage is solely a religious ceremony. Our government cannot deny human rights because of a religious holdover.

Now, I do not think we should force churches to marry same-sex couples if the individual church is against it. THAT would be a breach of religious freedom, and while there are religious same-sex couples, there are other options for marriage, such as courthouse marriages.

Thank you for reading. I would love to answer any questions, both in comments and by updating this take, and I would appreciate all comments to be rational--this isn't a place to rant and hate, but to debate and educate.

Oh dear. I apologize for those rhymes. Anyway, thank you.

~GlamFelix

[Redwolfrunner]

My sibling believes that marriage is a thing for only a man and a woman as God created man and woman to be together -- not woman and woman, and he showed me a part of the bible that specifically said that homosexuality was a sin / disapproved by God. Even so, no one knows if that's exactly what was supposed to be in the book or anything, and even then, other people believe differently. It's not that he hates transgenders / homosexuals / any other genders -- it's just that his religion disapproves of it.

What I think is that marriage is religious -- the government has no right to ban it. If they were going to do that, they might as well ban everything that is religiously banned. But seriously, if they do that, I'm making up a religion about not eating McDonalds and everyone has to wake up every morning and do 100 push-ups. >:^3

[GlamFelix]

ah, yes. It's strange--to be honest, everyone disagrees about what the bible says, because no matter what it says now, it's vague enough that it could be mistranslation, and really, it's hard to be CERTAIN. I mean, yes, people are certain, but I'm not sure if it's right to be so certain about the translation of something originally written so long ago.

I think the problem is that while marriage can be religious, the thing is, if it is, we cannot use it as our process for unifying a couple, because what if there is a muslim couple who wishes to have the federal benefits? They are entitled to them as citizens, but Christianity has infiltrated our system so that their marriage is saturated with it.

okay that is evil my friend though
banning mcdonalds i wouldn't be opposed to cx

[Ozanne]

I feel like I'm the only one married on the site. For many reasons marriage has strengthened my bond with my husband. When you're in love, you just know.

[GlamFelix]

Ah, that's really sweet. I think an important thing is that a lot of [younger] people these days think marriage is outdated and only necessary for the legal things and it's really not--for some people it's the right decision love-wise as well, and personally, though I can't say for sure, I think I'd want to marry the man or woman I loved.

[Ozanne]

I think because their generation is seeing almost all of their parents divorcing, so it's hurting them and now they feel it's unnecessary. But relationships can still be like marriage. If it's over, and kids are involved, it will still be just as painful. Can't avoid that. :( But marriage is supposed to be a good thing, and in my experience it is. :)

[Zamac]

Kudos for the married and happy people out there. :)

[Guy13]

This is nonsensical. Intelligent Design says same-sex marriage is nonsense. Even the animals, such as dogs, mules, etc know same-sex is against Purpose of Union. To reproduce, spread, and take dominion over the earth is the Purpose of Reproduction. Same-sex relations violate Purpose stated above, Form (2 penises and/or vagina), and Function (a penis and vagina fit together where 2 penis and 2 vaginas are useless Intelligent Design... there is none).

This is not difficult. I understand that you possess only a Secular worldview... so you are disadvantaged when it comes to a Biblical understanding. More time and Data, beyond opinion, would have been helpful. Common sense and Intelligent Design is enough to say it is nonsensical in its conception, Form, Function, and Purpose.

[ixi10]

Marriage is not necessary, especially in this day and age

[GlamFelix]

Might I ask why you think so? c: