My solution to end the gay marriage debate

TheButterHashira

TheButterHashira

Active member
I am sure some other people have thought about this but why doesn't the government just get out of marriage altogether? I think that the government should recognize 2 people that live together and want to file their taxes together and whatever functions that a married couple would do. I guess the government could call it a "civil union" like what gays already get in some(or all?) states.

However the government should leave the word marriage up to the churches, synagogues, mosques, and where ever else someone may want to get married. For example if the methodists decide they will marry gays let them do that. And if the babtists refuse to marry gays let them. I think it would be necessary to require businesses and such to recognize all "civil unions" or whatever just like they would marriages now.

Discuss
 
easier solution- kill all the gays

j/k- your idea makes sense especially since there is supposed to be separation of the church and state and marriage is generally considered a religious thing. But, much of America doesn't separate church and state as much as some of us would like to think so making a change like that would be near impossible. Also, the general non-religious public may get angry because they might not want to be married by a preacher or in a religious setting because that means nothing to them.
 
What I say is letting the gays get married, It is just getting the government out of it altogether. Why should the government even have a say in who you can and cannot marry? It may be necessary to protect young children but two adults can decide for themselves.

But please explain why you think it would be bad.
 
I was thinking about them when I wrote this. I said where ever someone else would want to get married. And what I meant by that was if two people wanted to have a ceremony that was secular in nature they could do that as well, whether it was at their home or in some kind of facility where they would have secular weddings. People have religious weddings at their homes all the time. I am sure there are secular wedding chapels all over the place, Especially Las Vegas.
 
I know what you meant, I was just saying that it would probably cause more controversy than just saying that gays can get married. I agree with you in principle I just don't think it would work.
 
polygamy and the rape of minors is one reason it would be bad.

the government will never get out of it all together, because so many tax breaks and benefits are to be reaped once a couple is legally married.
 
if the government removes any involvement in defining what constitutes a marriage.....

then who says a 50 year old dude can't marry a 10 year old girl?

 
I said laws to protect young children. What is wrong with polygamy? It is very normal in many cultures. If the spouses are willing and no one is being abused what is the problem? I also mentioned originally that 2 people could get all the benefits of marriage but the government just not call it marriage for straight or gay couples. Don't let the government decide what you can and cannot call your relationship.
 
sorry i missed the part about laws to protect young children.

no one is stopping people who believe in polygamy from revoking their american citizenship and moving to a country that supports it.

when trying to increase one's deduction on their tax forms, its easier to get married and have a shitton of kids rather than morph into a black farmer living in alaska.
 
Yea and its not just taxes. Life and Health insurance and employer benifits are another reason the government has been stubborn on this issue.
 
More like minarchy or anarchocapitalism. Anarchy entails 0 property rights. Total government and no government have the same outcome.
 
that is also my solution. I believe it should be up to the churches to marry people. Personally I have no problem with an individual being gay. But I have a problem with them getting married on the church of Christ.
 
ohh ok now i see what you are saying...i thought you were saying that if we allow gay marriage, polygamy and rape would happen...haha my bad
 
how about this, 2 dudes or 2 chicks getting married doesn't negatively affect you so who gives a fuck? live and let live
 
i don't understand how gay's aren't allowed to get married. like seriously there is supposed to be separation of the church and state, and crazy church fucks are the one who don't want them to get married...so wtf?

you are seriously an ignorant fucking dumbass if you don't think gays should have the rights to get married...it's the fucking 21st century.

and that was directed to no one in particular...just my feelings
 
i don't see why gays still aren't able to get married. i mean if two dudes or chicks want to get married let them, it's not that big a deal. they should be entitled to the same legal rights a a straight couple too.
 
i'm not saying anything about allowing/disallowing gay marriage. its just another example of how difficult it is to get the correct level of government involvement. i believe the thread creator said government should withdraw all involvement in defining marriages WITH restrictions (such as minimum age). it seems so simple to say here's a few simple and easy-to-follow rules, and then withdraw all government involvement. shits never that easy with our bloated bureaucracy.

a marriage traditionally has been between two persons that can physically procreate. take that definition away. okay now i can marry my dog and double my income tax deduction. whoops. so we try to pass a sexless federal law that states "a marriage is between two consenting persons over the age of 18". too many lobbyists with too many agendas have overrun washington DC for this to happen anytime soon. solution would then be to leave the definition of marriage up to individual states. but that would allow insurance companies and employers to set their own definitions as well (be too lengthy and complex for a different policy per each state). i'm not sure if we're going to run out of anti-gay marriage hardliners or pro-gay marriage hardliners first, so we'll just have to continue the debate and go rent Chuck&Larry again on netflix.

summary: unfortunately due to all the legal issues (seriously think a minute about ALL of them), marriage is one institution that the government will always be involved in.
 
I think you hit it on the head with "a marriage is between two consenting persons over 18" Just because it would be a hard push for lobbyists in DC I don't think we immediatly need to skip it as the solution. As far as the government is concered, for taxes and what not, that's probably the best solution. Privatized insurance companys can set up any rules they want, don't like them? switch insurers, iif you have insurance through work, drop it or get another job that provides you with the coverage you want.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top