Question for those who oppose same-sex marriage on religious grounds:

[Coriolis]

Im talking about christian marriage, not marriage in general. I agree christians were not the first to have such a thing. In context its what we all think of though.

Since marriage is not limited to Christians, we need to broaden the discussion. Marriage provides important rights of inheritance, child custody, recognition as next of kin in emergencies, etc., all rights that gay couples have historically had to cobble together through a patchwork of legal documents like power of attorney, etc. Marriage is one-stop-shopping for this, and should remain a legal option for all couples. Any religious or cultural dimension to marriage can be provided separate from government involvement.

As for those who believe that same-sex marriage is wrong on religious grounds, the way forward is easy: don't marry a same sex partner. You are also free to advise relatives or friends against doing so, and to share your reasoning with them. What you are not free to do is to impose your religious beliefs onto others.

 

[rav3n]

Im talking about christian marriage, not marriage in general. I agree christians were not the first to have such a thing. In context its what we all think of though.

Since the opening post doesn't narrow the focus to christian marriage, why would you narrow the scope like that?

From my perspective, since there are legal benefits to marriage, religions shouldn't be able to legally marry people. They can perform ceremonies but these ceremonies will be meaningless, relative to state provided benefits. This would enforce the separation of church and state.