Statement of Chicago's Cardinal George Regarding Supreme Court Decisions on Marriage

[Kevin_B]

In short, the legal perks of marriage are a MUTUALLY beneficial relationship between the couple and the state. Broadening these benefits to gay couples establishes a one way benefit where the couple benefits and the state (i.e. taxpayers) get NOTHING. Objecting to this is in no way an imposition of religion on the populace.

That is a very reasonable argument, although i disagree with you. If the benefits of marriage are only to encourage people to have children, then in my opinion it would make more sense to only give them to people who have children. The government gives tax breaks to people as an incentive to buy houses. But they don’t give it to everyone who is eligible to buy houses. They only give it to people AFTER they buy a house.

But you are, of course, entitled to your own opinion. However, since you have mentioned a completely non-religious way to oppose same-sex marriage, then logically i should be able to support them using a completely non-religious reason, correct?