I was just wondering if anyone has ever came across any good secular arguments against gay marriage. All I ever seem to hear is about how being gay is immoral, and they get that immorality thesis from the Bible so it doesn't really apply.

Tags: civil, gay, marriage, rights

Views: 2491

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Again, playing devil's advocate here, but gay-marriage opponents would go beyond just procreation, and say that gay marriage goes against the traditional family structure, so the kids would be lacking proper mother/father figures, which, they would argue, will have negative effects on their development.

But it's still bullshit.

Agreed, it is a homophobia in its most subtle form of blatancy

When you call it homophobia, that is in most circles in our culture what you might call a conversation stopper. However, I would like the truth. I'd like proof that one is better than the other. If homosexual families last longer, raise healthier and less at-risk kids than heterosexual families, heck, then let's start pushing homosexual families.

But nobody seems to want to do the research to find out the truth. Instead people blindly bet their children that their arrangement is good.

Also, it's not always homoPHOBIA (a fear of gays). Some people simply hate gays. That is called "homomisia."

we are still able to make babies as unwed lesbian mothers

Speak for yourself....No matter how unwed and/or lesbian I am I will never be a mother :P


Other than the issue above, I agree completely.

Haha, I don't really want to have a child, myself.  Which is also why I included couples that choose not to have children in my argument :) 

Ha, I love that! I hope the ceremony involves actual stomping on pancakes?

Marriage is both a religious and a secular institution. Its purposes are twofold: first, reproduction of both the masses as exploitable workers and the elites so as to keep wealth and power in the circles where they are; and second, as a means of tying people closer to religious faith, since it is considered sinful both to beget children outside of a merital relationship, and to part from a spouse.
Now, if marriage be by definition about love, then it follows that everyone ought to be allowed to marry with no restrictions as to the beloved’s sex. If we want equality in general, then there ought to be either marriage between two people of either sex, or there ought to be no marriage whatsoever.

I think that marriage is a civil liberty, not a religious/secular institution.  You can have your wedding ceremony held in a church, and you can have it in a courthouse with no mention of the word god in your ceremony - but regardless.. all paperwork must be filed through the state.  This to me tells me marriage doesn't belong to one or the other.  It is a right that we deserve as human beings to protect our families and assets.

I think just about ALL of the arguments against gay marriage are secular, since The Holy Book doesn't really say anything specifically on the subject, does it?

Well, there is some controversy over whether gay parenting (along with single parenting, foster parenting, step parenting) is as good as the traditional Ozzie and Harriett stable heterosexual permanent coupling. "Alternative" parenting styles have been alleged to expose children to a variety of risks to their mental and physical health and well-being. There is a famous article, "Dan Quayle Was Right" (googleable) which appeared, I believe, in The Atlantic. It was written by someone who assumed when she began her research that she would be proving that committed and well-intentioned "alt" parents would do about as good a job as traditional couples in raising their children. Instead she found that, in the aggregate, children of such couplings were poorer, had poorer health, were more at risk to disease, more at risk of abuse, and were unhappier in their adult lives and were more prone to be criminals or commit suicide than kids who had a mother, a father, and a home life that was stable all through their growing up.

Of course, her conclusions were "in the aggregate" and so some of her findings applied to gay marriages but some did not. At the time, it stirred up a huge controversy, as you might imagine.

At any rate, I think most objections to gay marriage have little serious scriptural basis and are at heart based on non-scriptural attitudes and emotions. This doesn't mean that the people don't believe their beliefs have a religious basis. Often they do believe that.

STABLE  heterosexual relationship is key. Too many mom & dad marriages are NOT that. Mental and physical abuse and indifference occur all too often.

Outside the necessity for legal purposes (partner healthcare benefits, tax entitlement, inheritance, etc) I see marriage as an institution becoming obsolete at some point. Commitment to a relationship is falsely bound by paperwork.

"Commitment to a relationship is falsely bound by paperwork."

Agreed!

...but add that it can also be falsely bound by monetary commitments (e.g. a ring), and a big, expensive one day ritual/ceremony.

RSS

Events

Services we love!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service