User: JustCurious

Then the State should have NO part of it.

Marriage, from a State point of view is a legal contract regarding tax benefits, inheritance, durable power of attorney, etc. It was coopted from the religious arena to promote social stability. The State encourages Marriage (with those legal/financial benefits) because the State has found that marriages provide more stability for families (children) and, therefore, a more stable, secure social structure which helps the State grow. Nowhere in the State's documentation does it require 'love' as an element for a marriage license. Two people (of opposite genders, in most states) could apply for a marriage license simply to ensure power of attorney, and inheritance rights, without ever having a romantic/loving relationship.

In fact, Marriage, being a RELIGIOUS term that is being utilized by the State, should NOT include homosexual/same sex partners. The State does not have the right to redefine what a religious term such as Marriage means.

What the State SHOULD do is no longer issue "Marriage" licenses, but issue Civil Union Contracts/Licenses to all couples (same sex or not). Then, the term "Marriage" could be returned to the religous arena and this whole issue would become far less significant.

Those that oppose "gay marriage" do so mostly on religious grounds, as they have every right to, but they would have less standing to oppose "gay civil unions" since a 'civil union' is not a religious term.

Then the State should have NO part of it.

Marriage, from a State point of view is a legal contract regarding tax benefits, inheritance, durable power of attorney, etc. It was coopted from the religious arena to promote social stability. The State encourages Marriage (with those legal/financial benefits) because the State has found that marriages provide more stability for families (children) and, therefore, a more stable, secure social structure which helps the State grow. Nowhere in the State's documentation does it require 'love' as an element for a marriage license. Two people (of opposite genders, in most states) could apply for a marriage license simply to ensure power of attorney, and inheritance rights, without ever having a romantic/loving relationship.

In fact, Marriage, being a RELIGIOUS term that is being utilized by the State, should NOT include homosexual/same sex partners. The State does not have the right to redefine what a religious term such as Marriage means.

What the State SHOULD do is no longer issue "Marriage" licenses, but issue Civil Union Contracts/Licenses to all couples (same sex or not). Then, the term "Marriage" could be returned to the religous arena and this whole issue would become far less significant.

Those that oppose "gay marriage" do so mostly on religious grounds, as they have every right to, but they would have less standing to oppose "gay civil unions" since a 'civil union' is not a religious term.

First Thong/G-String experience: http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/347883

Underwear Drawer: http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/235892

Sex Preferences: http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/238364

First Thong/G-String experience: http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/347883

Underwear Drawer: http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/235892

Sex Preferences: http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/238364

http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/347883