So...

[Kevin]

On the other hand, if marriage is just symbolic and often more trouble than it's worth, then we could either disband it (unthinkable!) or ask this question:  *why* do these people want to be married?  I'm sure they've already made their love clear to each other, and their friends.  But why does the world need to know about it?

I'm honestly curious, and no, I don't know if marriage is a beneficial privilege.  Off-hand I'd say it's outmoded and detrimental.

Because I am very proud and happy with the bond I have with my wife and I want to brag about it. The marriage isn't for us. It is for everyone else. It gives predefined chances to celebrate our love with ours (anniversaries, the wedding). I like the idea of being bound to my wife forever and I want the rest of the world to know that.




There are a few legal benefits too. Insurance is extendable to my wife but it wouldn't be to a girlfriend. The idea is that, the bond between spouses is strong enough that the insurance company can reasonable expect to get enough payment to justify the potential added costs. (It takes a good 10 years of payments to justify average payouts I think, been awhile since I looked at the numbers). You can't rely on a girlfriend or declared love to count that long. However with the average lengths of marriage are going down.

There are lots of other legal remifications of it. Some beneficial, some negative. But if you are getting married for legal reasons alone you shouldn't get married.

Civil Unions don't have the same legal rights as marriages in all states. I don't think gays would be happy with that compromise either. I think they want to be able to declare for the same reasons I do. Some of it is about the legal side of things, some of it isn't.




I also agree that polygamy should be in the same category, like Occhi mentioned.



My views are that this is a big red herring. That it is meant as a political distraction. It deserves attention, but not this much. The states vs federal rights that is tied to it might be a bigger and more important issue though. That is a very debate worthy subject I feel. That debate can have lots of ramifications on how this country is run. Some of those were raised in Jarulf's thread about the election.

My opinions on it? I think it should be state level decided (I still think states should have strong rights). I find nothing wrong with gay marriage. I believe that homosexuality is natural and not a lifestyle choice based on the homosexuals that I know and have spent a fair bit of time around. (Most of the bi's I have met are by choice though, many have admitted that they aren't attracted to one sex at all, but choose to engage in sexual activities with them for various reasons, that is not the case with the gays I know). I don't fully trust the bible because I know that it has been rewritten several times and I can't be certain that it really is against gay marriage. From an evolutionary standpoint gay marriages are mostly pointless (there is a lot that is pointless about non gay marriages. while I am proud to declare my love, that is pretty much pointless from a species survival point of view, it does serve to help keep others away from my wife in a small capacity and thus in a small way helps insure that my genes are passed on, but I'm not doing a full evolutionary psychology synopsis). Gay's don't really help species procreation and to me that is a stronger argument against than any religious argument. All religion is human interpretation of the Lord and you can't always trust that interpretation. Even pious people can lie and sin.

So I think that covers what I want to cover. A lot more than just a response to the quote.