|
Race-mixing was considered equally unnatural, and was equally unpopular, but ultimately it will be an issue of civil liberties. The outcome will be the same; government cannot give benefits to some and deny the same benefits to others based on race or sex.
If it is your opinion that 'marriage' is a religious thing, then the government never should have endorsed it to begin with. The government and religion must remain seperate.
IMO we should have had 'secular civil unions' (recognized by the government) and 'religious marriages' (recognized by the church) for all committing couples of all orientations; with only the secular union granting special legal rights, and leave the religious 'marriage' ceremonial bs optional.
But too late now, the government decided to call their status-granting "marriage" too. So religionists will have to deal with it. In the law of this country, liberty superceeds religion.
People have been getting 'married' since before any religion that exists today was invented. There have been a lot of wacky versions of marriage a lot worse than two socially-equal people of the same-sex marrying for love. At its core, the purpose of marriage is to make previously unrelated people a family, and the familys people choose to form are personal and private.
|