Well i believe there are laws in place against discrimination in service industry no ?

I remember they had to call off women only cinema screening

For law issues in states no ?

did they have to call that off?

i don't recall.

but that would also depend on the state i believe

My perspective is on separation of church and state. The religious Rite of marriage should not be protected by the courts, nor enforced by the courts. The right to the benefits of marriage however, should be.

They did call it off

What about gay marriage

it is not a sustainable thing, they cant have children

Nothing concerning the ceremony of marriage including birthday cakes and pastors should be enforceable by government.

should the govt have a contract with a gay couple?

The paperwork involved is it right

@Ivanfr should the government block them from adopting?

idk

there are lots of kids in foster care

i would think even 2 same sex parents is better than a foster home

I would have to look at the stats on mental health of kids that are adopted by gay couples

plus suicide rates and all that

i doubt they are worse than those of kids in foster care

You guys just have to drag it back to the GQ don't

whats GQ

You

The gay question

Let it be known that I'm actually laughing right now...

idk what you are talking about

@RyeNorth this is why i want to break up the benefits and protections into different pieces with different criteria.

rather than needing a giant list of exceptions and different clauses.

"want to raise a kid? be under the same roof with at least 1 other person, you get these benefits for as long as the kid is under working age. (or legal age, or whatever age we decide is good enough)"

"living together in an environment that is basically no different than a married couple, even if you guys are just friends? Here, get these benefits"

Let it be known, I don't actually think being gay is moral, but it's none of my business what two people do, and valid points have been made for the basic protections. At the same time, most of the incidents such as this that have put the right under a under attack has been an attempt to undermine marriage anyway. And it's not your average same sex couple that does it. I don't think that marriage should be ruined for those who wish to partake in it, nor do I think they should be required to marry two people they disagree with. Secularizing marriage is the best way to preserve liberties without destroying tradition.

in other-words, the government ruined marriage

as they do everything they touch eventually

imagine my shock

You're not entirely wrong

The real problems come from reactionary meddling without foresight

government itself is reactionary meddling.

i think government is just a tool,

The issue lies that the overwhelming majority has no interest in what is being done, not know how, nor care to participate
As long as they FEEL like things are going well

So all you need is a group of people to lie and tell people what they wanna hear
And then you can just control things with peoples blessing

Secularizing would not be a drastic change in text, what revolutionary socially

But revolutionary

Essentially, it disarms the debate without any real significant changes being made