Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Gay Marriage

I don't have any gay friends at all, which is purely a matter of chance, so I have no strongly vested interest in my state's new gay marriage thing. I have never felt, certainly, that two people of the same sex getting married constituted any danger to me or to my marriage, and since I am against discrimination in any form I was quite pleased that the court ruled as it did.

I'm actually against any laws regarding marriage. I think laws should be about civil unions and should not discriminate whether a couple is of the same sex or not. Marriage should be a matter between the couple and that couple's church, and should be defined by that church.

Recent pictures in the news, couples beaming with happiness as they are wed, have "vested" my interest a bit more. You cannot see that much happiness and not know that something has gone right.


  1. Anonymous1:14 PM

    I found the arguments that the anti's used were BS.. I think a lot of hetero marriage were in danger from themselves, never mind the gay issue.

    Marriage has almost always been a civil issue, becasue of legal issues, inheritance, etc. As far as a church (or any religious affiliation or sanction), wehat about atheists? They don't have a religious issue, so thiers would be a true "civil" union.

    That being said, miost religions have some sort of ceremony wher ethe union is blessed by the respective deity. No real reason why any union can't have that.

    And why would a loving God not accept love, no matter where and how it is found?

  2. My thoughts exactly - like incorporation. The states should do civil unions and if you feel the need have a ceremony based on the mythology of your choice.