Gay marriage should never be recognize by the state because...

[MikeH]

We're bombarded daily with stories of religious idiocy, it is hard to stay reasonable. Whether it be Islamic extremism, catholics blocking contraceptive programs for hiv or protecting abusers, anti-evolutionists etc. etc. When the examples are so poor it's hard to have respect for religion.

[Flubber]

If it was up to me, I wouldn't limit marriage to just 2 people.

Have whatever configuration you want. On the condition that it's entered into freely by all parties and is not in anyway abusive or coercive. But that goes for a traditional marriage too, so same rules for everyone.

There are some obvious practical problems with that. Lets take medical decision making-- Which of my 4 spouses decide for me if they deadlock 2-2 and I have not done a healthcare directive and am not competent to make my own decision . . . Do my 4 spouses continue to live together on my death? What if they all chose different new spouses etc etc? Nothing insurmountable but usually marriage makes many of these things EASIER by creating a set of rights for the single individual known as the 'spouse"

Marriage rules today in most jurisdictions would allow an anullment of a coercive marriage but the test for coercion can be tough-- If I wish to wed some 20 year old from sub-Saharan Africa and she wishes it since she knows my western affluence will mean her whole family will be lifted from poverty . .. there was no coercion but hell it isn't a marriage of equals either. But this type of thing will go on no matter if its state, religious, tradiditional or even some new form of union.

[C0ckney]

well your post certainly proves that it's hard for some people to stay reasonable. people see what they want to see i guess...

edit: x-post, was responding to mike.

[MOBIUS]

I know, but at the risk of sounding like an even bigger pansy than I probably already do, collateral damage is still damage.

Sorry, but when it's clear all religions are nuts, it's difficult for that not to rub off onto the believers of said religions. For example, in my eyes Christianity is no more worthy of belief than Scientology...

[Ming]

I have no problem with relgious people. What people believe is personal and their business. If you want to believe that God created the world, or that Aliens seeded the planet, fine by me. What I do have a problem with is when relgious people want to cram their beliefs on everybody else. Do what you want in your churchs or temples... but don't expect the rest of the world to believe like you do, and follow the same rules you do.

The whole "marriage is only for religions" crap is just that... Total BS. Love and commitment aren't restricted to just the religious. There is nothing about some Deity or Alien blessing it that makes it any more special or important than a civil service.

[C0ckney]

you're actually one of the worst offenders moby. your arguments against religion are always badly thought out, puerile and insubstantial, and you then present these crappy arguments as QED... it frustrates me on occasion and i can see why others get frustrated.

[MOBIUS]

I guess if I felt I had to work harder to prove what utter nonsense that religion is, then I would...

So, you don't think that religion is nuts?

Or that you can prove that Scientology is more fake than Catholicism?

That is why I contend that Scientology is at least as legitimate as Christianity - at least we know that L Ron Hubbard existed!

[C0ckney]

well that's kind of the point, if you think you've proved anything with the arguments i've seen you deploy about religion, then you are sadly mistaken.

i think that some religious people are nuts, but religion itself, no.

[Asher]

It's unfortunate so many otherwise intelligent people suffer the indignity of religious beliefs.

[MOBIUS]

well that's kind of the point, if you think you've proved anything with the arguments i've seen you deploy about religion, then you are sadly mistaken.

i think that some religious people are nuts, but religion itself, no.

Why is religion itself not nuts? It is based on fiction, to insist that some made up mumbo jumbo is real and should be worshipped is nuts - plain and simple!

So, tell me, why is religion not nuts then...?

[Lorizael]

It's not any more nuts than anything else we stupid humans believe, really. For some reason, we believe that happiness is inherently valuable, that our memories are accurate, that our eyes see the physical world, that unlikely but frightening dangers are more worthy of attention than likely but less frightening ones, etc. We believe a lot of really dumb things, but for some reason some of us choose to pick on one particular aspect of our dumbness. *shrug*

[DriXnaK]

I think over time that religion will eventually play itself out. If you look at the most advanced nations, they become more secular every year. That being said, secularism often goes hand in hand with progressive political views, which invariably leads to the destruction of a nation. Therefore, I'm not interested in destroying religion unless the political mindset of atheists changes. That being said, I'm all for the complete destruction of Islam. Why Christianity is attacked and not Islam, which is the most barbaric ape cult on the planet, is testament to the anti-western bias that the progressive atheist agenda pushes. I don't think there has ever been a people in the history of humanity that has attacked itself and displayed such incredible self-loathing than the western progressive movement.

[germanos]

To be honest, it has been going downhill since the Enlightenment DriXnaK.

[Ming]

Why Christianity is attacked and not Islam

Because we don't have anybody here talking about how great or superior Islam is. I'm sure that if somebody did, they would get similar if not worse treatement

[DriXnaK]

I'm talking about in the west as a whole. It's completely acceptable to say and do what you want to Christianity, but you can't even print cartoons about Islam lest the PC police jump out and tell you you are an insensitive racist. I guess it's fine though. Eventually it will boil over into a violent backlash as the majority of the population is oppressed by the minority. That suits my purposes just fine.