The Incest Argument and Same Sex Marriage

[cena]

It hasn’t always been the motivation behind a marriage. In times past people got married for other motivations including status, money, to avoid being single, … (and that could be found to occur in the present day too).

I asked the same thing. Depending on one’s position in life it may be advantageous to the two people to get married because of the legal and financial benefits. For some it is disadvantageous to get married. Some have no immediate interest in becoming married but would like to have the unencumbered option should their minds change later. Some have been trained to see marriage as the highest declaration of a commitment that another can make. But not everyone shares this view.

More specifically the higher wage earner may end up with higher financial liability. A previous manager of mine refused to marry her boyfriend because she was still paying alimony to her previous husband.

While there’s a **potential **liability to getting married there are also potential advantageous. It’s going to depend in part on the relationship that two people have with each other. Packaged in the status are some rights that are not available through any other means such as the person being the one other person with which certain private information can be shared without risk of being forced to disclose the information against the other. There are also some rights such as sharing health benefits that are not available otherwised based on employer policy. And there are situations that a couple may not have thought of before hand for which the status of “married” automatically gives the other person certain rights and considerations ahead of others.

Why do these financial benefits apply to marriage? Why not to couples who cohabitatE, why is marriage so special?

 

[inocente]

Strawmen set ablaze throughout. “Identify” as Christian means nothing. Given the Torah, the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament are filled with prohibitions against homosexuali acts, one of the few called an abomination, that members of the APA might (and do you have any support for your theory?) might self identify as Christian but their vote to support homosexuality as normal behavior indicates their faith did not inform their consciences. Nor does biology seem to inform their consciences but then I maintain psychology is a soft “science” at best.

Qualified psychiatrists decide, not wannabes on internet forums.

You won’t get anywhere quoting scripture at other Christians unless you obey God’s clear command in Lev 20 and demand that homosexuals to be executed. Otherwise you’re ignoring God and substituting your own commands.

Further most of the “gay marriage” laws have not been voted on deomcratically. In fact the democratic process has resulted in “gay marriage” being specifically disallowed. It has been the action of unelected judges, bureaucrats and politicians who have forced “gay marriage” despite this thwarting the will of the people.

What a bizarre conspiracy theory. Christians are the 73% majority of the US population, whatever they vote for will happen. Clearly a majority want gay marriage. Tough. They belong to Christ, not to you.

As to giving everyone the same “rights” you actually prove the slippery slope theory in saying that once marriage no longer requires a man and a woman, then all parties can call whatever arrangement they wish “marriage.” It has been rendered meaningless in the secular or contractual context. There has never been a right for anyone to marry “whom they love” without other constraints or restrictions. Homosexualists have simply tried to carve out a sympathetic approach in order to foist the charade of equivalence upon a compassionate but ill informed public.

Homosexualists? Que? You seem to specialize in fact-free emotive soap-box invective.

We are talking about civil marriage, marriage recognized by the State. I repeat, the argument for LGBT marriage is simply that a democratic State has responsibilities to all its citizens, and should seek to treat all law-abiding tax-paying adult citizens equally. Thus, whether you are male or female, straight or gay, black or white, Catholic or Mormon, atheist or theist, the State should apply the exact same rules on polygamy, incest, age of majority and so on.