Ban gay marriage / ban ALL marriage

[TooStonedToType]

I'm all for banning gay marriage.  In fact I'd say ALL marriages should be banned (or the government recognition of such).  There is no reason for the government to be in the marriage business.  The proponents of the same-sex marriage bans claim they wish to ban gay marriages to preserve the sanctity/holiness of "their" institution of marriage.  What better way to do that than get the government out of marrying people altogether?  With the State controlling marriage, offering tax incentives and preferential treatment to married persons, marriage has become a financial institution and a sham to many. I personally know two gay men who married two lesbian co-workers for the financial, travel and health benefits only!  We joke with Adam some times about seeing his fat wife at the store/restaurant.  But the truth is he hasn't seen her in 5 years.

If people are serious, and not just wanting to bash gay people, they will call for everyone to be treated equally regardless of marital or other status.  If people wish to be married - that is an expression between themselves, their church and God (if they have one). Lets leave it at that.

---------------------------

$13 Million Spent on Gay Marriage Political Fight
By ROBERT TANNER, AP

(Jan. 24) - The 2004 election campaigns that ultimately banned same-sex marriages in 13 states were funded by a mix of national groups, churches and individuals, with ban supporters narrowly outraising opponents and total contributions breaking $13 million, according to a new analysis of state-level fundraising.

Patricia McDonnell, AP
Same-sex marriage was a hot election issue for 13 states in 2004. Today, 19 states have passed bans on such unions.

Supporters of the state constitutional amendments raised $6.8 million for ballot committees; opponents raised $6.5 million, according to the study by The Institute on Money in State Politics, a nonpartisan research organization in Helena, Mont.

The single largest block of givers were advocates of gay and lesbian rights, donating more than $3 million.

Conservative organizations affiliated with a network called the Arlington Group gave nearly $2 million, the report found. Churches also invested heavily, contributing $1.9 million, overwhelmingly in favor of bans on same-sex marriage.

Despite the nearly even split of the $13.3 million raised by ballot committees, the amendments passed overwhelmingly, sometimes by as much as a 3-to-1 ratio. The closest vote, in Oregon, passed with 57 percent in favor of a ban and 43 percent against.

The two sides together spent more than $2 million in each of several battleground states, including Michigan, Oregon and Ohio. But much less went into campaigns elsewhere, with under $100,000 spent in a half-dozen states, and less than $10,000 total in Mississippi and North Dakota.

   
The fight over gay marriages isn't over. Texas voters in November approved a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, though Maine voters rejected a conservative push to repeal a new law that outlawed discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Efforts have begun to put same-sex bans before voters in at least seven more states, according to the report.

"There was a coordinated effort to bring this issue to the ballot in a number of states," said research director Sue O'Connell.

Conservative groups affiliated with the Arlington Group included Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council, whose leaders had been outspoken against gay and lesbian marriages after Massachusetts' high court found that the state constitution allowed same-sex marriages.

Among the big-spending advocates of gay and lesbian rights were the Human Rights Campaign and the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force.

In all, 19 states have passed constitutional amendments outlawing same-sex marriage. Only one state - Connecticut - has enacted a law legalizing civil unions without a court order.

[Hyakitaki]

You know you are right Marriage is linked to religion which the government shouldn't have anything to do with.

 As for gay marriage, frankly I could care less they want to get married let them.  It doesn't effect me at all, so I don't care.

[Amomynous]

I'm all for banning gay marriage.  In fact I'd say ALL marriages should be banned (or the government recognition of such).  There is no reason for the government to be in the marriage business.

I couldn't agree more.

[winder]

Let's look at the state-run portions of marriage...they are mostly about property rights, power of attorney, inheritance, etc.  What do those have to do with religion?  NOTHING!  It is all basically contractual verbiage that is udnerstood and handled by the state, although the parties never read what their rights and limitations are until needed (medical crisis, death, or divorce).

What I don't get is why lawyers haven't cashed in on this for gay couples?  They should have a pre-packaged set of documents for any pair to sign outlining all the stuff - inheritance by means of will, PofA for making medical decisions, etc.  What an easy buck.

By this means, then 10 people could marry 12 widgets and 3011 dogs.

[TooStonedToType]

Oh, the attorneys do have such things and are making bucks - believe me.  But when it comes to things like estate/inheritance taxes the government does discriminate against gay and single people.

[Amomynous]

I'm all for banning gay marriage. In fact I'd say ALL marriages should be banned (or the government recognition of such). There is no reason for the government to be in the marriage business.

You know, I actually got to play the bastard on this one once...

I had an insurance policy, and the company wanted to see "proof" that I was married to my wife (largely because we have different last names). I said OK and faxed them the documents, but I refused to send over any "legal" documents: I sent over the certificate issued by the church (we were married in a Catholic ceremony). At first they didn't want to accept it, but they eventually relented.

I had a hard time believing the irony of the situation. For pete's sake, the state is more of an authority on marriage than a church? Get real...

[cenacle]

i was just married on dec 31, 05, and i found it funny that an hour-long ceremony took like 6 months or more to prepare for...it was in my wife's church, catholic, so we did a non-mass marriage...i still had to say something religious in the ceremony, which bugged me, something about the holy ghost, eh...i hope we stay married for the duration, and i am not thinking about dissolution...

the thing is, our marriage is a vow between us two, i couldn't care less what the state or church say, fuck em both for all the help they usually are for dealing with the world and its crises...we have found our own way because of our partnership, and better angels we've been lucky to know along the way...states regulate for money purposes, property and so on, churches for morality, or so they claim...they don't do jack for the day to day lives of folks...

in the end, a marriage is between two, or more, people, or whatever, who choose to vow to each other some sort of fidelity or commitment, something they hope will last...the church doesn't create love nor can it deny it in the end...nor can the state...at best they stay out of the way, which is the best place for both of them, most of the time...

but there are exceptions, that's the kicker...situations where they are needed...life is so fucking wiggly, ya know? :twisted:

[Veracohr]

There is no reason for the government to be in the marriage business.

Precisely my opinion. Unfortunately for me, my ex girlfriend didn't share my philosophy.  

I don't understand why marriage requires a 'license' by the government or why lawyers are required when a married couple wants to split up. To me, government involvment in marriage makes as much sense as, say, my webhost having involvment in my dental care.

[visionarybear]

The meaning of marrige has been scrapped through the dust hasnt it..
i see it as 2 distinct entitys
1. personal 'love' marrige
where the commitment bond is between the couple and is an emotional commitmant - the metaphysical portion

2. State 'legal'marrige
where the monetary and legal rammifications of forming a long term alliance to another memeber of society comes into play..this is a paperwork commitmant - the physical portion

value is given to the physical portion as it is assisiated to the admittance of the metaphysical...

so basically,. unless ur partner believe in the metaphysical without physical, marrige isnt marrige without a certificate...