Any secular justification for "Defense of Marriage"?

[voltran]

One thing I notice about ethical conversations with Christians is they can give me a non religious explanation for Christian ethics - except when it comes to Gay Marriage, in which case their opposition seems to rest entirely on a handful of bible verses.

Can anyone provide a reason for opposing gay marriage - without invoking scripture or theology?

 

[selfinflikted]

A thread just like this already exists. And the answer then, as it will be now, is "No."

 

[keith99]

IF mankind were in danger of dying out then I could come up with a reason. In that case there would be a secular reason.

However our current problem is over, not under, breeding.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Can anyone provide a reason for opposing gay marriage - without invoking scripture or theology?

Such arguments exist:

The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage - The Tech


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[KitKatMatt]

Such arguments exist:

The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage - The Tech


eudaimonia,

Mark

Eeeh, I was hoping for something better than the reproduction argument in that link.

I don't get the reproduction argument, like, at all.

 

[Belk]

Such arguments exist:

The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage - The Tech


eudaimonia,

Mark

I'm underwhelmed.

 

[keith99]

I was in before that link.

Again we are not under but rather over breeding.

The argument fails miserably in a modern world.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I'm underwhelmed.

No one said that it had to be a good argument.

Personally, I support gay marriage.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[ananda]

I cannot comprehend why any two people would ever create a legal trust (aka "legal marriage") that binds themselves to the whims and dictates of the trustee (govt)?

People are better off creating their own private contracts if they want to create a personal relation-ship.

 

[Belk]

No one said that it had to be a good argument.

Personally, I support gay marriage.


eudaimonia,

Mark

I know you do.

 

[KitKatMatt]

I cannot comprehend why any two people would ever create a legal trust (aka "legal marriage") that binds themselves to the whims and dictates of the trustee (govt)?

People are better off creating their own private contracts if they want to create a personal relation-ship.

Legal marriage comes with certain benefits, and I think that's why some people seek it.

Hospital visitation rights, stuff about partner death and inheritance, different tax breaks, etc.

Not to say that's the best reason to get legally married, but it does have its benefits that some people may pursue.

 

[keith99]

I cannot comprehend why any two people would ever create a legal trust (aka "legal marriage") that binds themselves to the whims and dictates of the trustee (govt)?

People are better off creating their own private contracts if they want to create a personal relation-ship.

Except creating yuor own contract won't get you into the ER when your significant other has been hit by a car and may be dying. It will not get you (or your significant other) the tax benefits if either should die.

Heck in some countries it will not even work to allow you to leave everything to yuor significant other at all if you have greedy relatives.

 

[poolerboy0077]

IF mankind were in danger of dying out then I could come up with a reason. In that case there would be a secular reason.

However our current problem is over, not under, breeding.

Why would this be relevant to ethics?

Suppose I and a woman are the last two people on Earth. We decide not to procreate and thus the species ends with us. Why would this be a moral question? Isn't it amoral -- neither good not bad?

 

[ananda]

Legal marriage comes with certain benefits, and I think that's why some people seek it.

Hospital visitation rights, stuff about partner death and inheritance, different tax breaks, etc.

Not to say that's the best reason to get legally married, but it does have its benefits that some people may pursue.

Except creating yuor own contract won't get you into the ER when your significant other has been hit by a car and may be dying. It will not get you (or your significant other) the tax benefits if either should die.

Heck in some countries it will not even work to allow you to leave everything to yuor significant other at all if you have greedy relatives.

Most can be accomplished via other means, whether via common law marriage, power of attorney, other trusts, etc.

 

[KitKatMatt]

Why would this be relevant to ethics?

Suppose I and a woman are the last two people on Earth. We decide not to procreate and thus the species ends with us. Why would this be a moral question? Isn't it amoral -- neither good not bad?

I had a thread on this particular subject, lol.

 

[Paulos23]

Most can be accomplished via other means, whether via common law marriage, power of attorney, other trusts, etc.

And more vunnerable in the courts. A marrage has to practacly be dismissed before the rights go away. Heck, there are marrage rights that stick around after a divorce.

 

[dgiharris]

Except creating yuor own contract won't get you into the ER when your significant other has been hit by a car and may be dying. It will not get you (or your significant other) the tax benefits if either should die.

Heck in some countries it will not even work to allow you to leave everything to yuor significant other at all if you have greedy relatives.

I saw a story about ten years ago that broke my heart.

There was a lesbian couple that had been together for 30 years. One of them got deathly ill, and the family REFUSED to let her companion in the hospital room during her last days on Earth.

Can you imagine, you are dying, literally dying and your family prevents you from spending your last moments with the person who you love the most. I swear, human beings can be so awful to one another...

I've argued the gay marriage issue at least 50 times and to date, I've never heard a decent secular argument against gay marriage. Every single person I've argued with that is against gay marriage is against it because of their religion. I've yet to argue with an atheist who was against gay marriage.

When the spirit, motto, and creed of your country is Freedom and Equality, then there is simply no logical argument you can render that allows for you to discriminate against gays. And I swear, if someone says, "Well, if you allow gays to marry then what's next allowing someone to marry their dog" I will hunt you down, and kick you football style between the legs

 

[ananda]

And more vunnerable in the courts. A marrage has to practacly be dismissed before the rights go away. Heck, there are marrage rights that stick around after a divorce.

Then I suggest making a trust with a trustee that is not the government

 

[JustMeSee]

One thing I notice about ethical conversations with Christians is they can give me a non religious explanation for Christian ethics - except when it comes to Gay Marriage, in which case their opposition seems to rest entirely on a handful of bible verses.

Can anyone provide a reason for opposing gay marriage - without invoking scripture or theology?

Employer paid family benefits. More family benefits may increase Co pays.

Devil's advocate response.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

Can anyone provide a reason for opposing gay marriage - without invoking scripture or theology?

Disclaimer: I am neither in favor of nor opposed to legal recognition of same-sex marriages.

Now, you want a secular argument against same-sex legal marriages. Well, it is bad economics. It requires redistributing resources away from real need.

Where did anybody come up with the idea that if two people love each other and, based on that love, are committed to each other in an exclusive relationship that the government owes it to them to reward them with certain benefits and protections?

The argument in favor of such government intervention is, of course, that without it society will implode.

There is nothing in the above paragraphs about religion.