Originally posted by Ganondorf
Get the government out of marriage. Problem solved.
currently they are out of marriage (kinda)...it is the people who want to make a constitutional amendment that will limit marriage to their small defined "picture" of what marriage is that want more government involvement (the "i want smaller government" crowd, which is really the "i want smaller government that i don't like, but much bigger government that i do like"...which i don't mind so much, everyone wants what they want and don't want what they don't...that is common sense...i just don't like how they rant that they want smaller government when it is not true, they just want lots of government of the type they approve of...just like the other side)
but then telling people how to live their lives is pretty big in the states...comes from our puritan roots...hell, we fled england because they were too liberal and "randy" for us...and the english are fairly damn (shit, what is the word...frigid, up tight, reserved...argghhh...somebody give me the term i am looking for please)...
i say we make a constitutional amendment to make marriages religious only...can't get married except at a church you have belonged to for at least a year...have to sign an oath to god before marriage...make one very religious, the other not religious at all...or else how do you justify not letting gays marry...it has to be on religious grounds...
but any constitutional amendment is bound to fail, just like the flag amendment never saw the light of day...for two reasons
one...flag burning was rare, but everyone knew that as soon as someone made an amendment, people would have been burning the flag everyday in protest...so it became better to let the flag issue slide off the map...why make a "protection" for something that didn't really need protecting, especially if that "protection" would have actually caused more flag burnings?? this is the same...if they ever make an amendment, new churches or challenges would pop up every day...it would be bedlam...admittedly colorful and well dressed bedlam, but bedlam all the same
two...we (the good old USA) couldn't pass an equal rights amendment...so we were gonna pass a flag amendment? we are going to pass a "non-gay marriage" amendment?? how would you justify that?? saying, "hell, we don't really care enough about the 50 plus percent of the US population that is female to grant them equal rights status, but we sure as hell care about the flag and about marriage enough to protect them!"
it won't fly (pardon the pun)
and nick...as for government regs for age and such...there are reasons...you are a minor etc...a reg against gays would be only because being gay is illegal?? don't think that will work...there is no way to accept this limitation except by saying that marriage is inherently religious...