Well, society, rightly, does not. Once same sex couples have been able to marry for a century or so, this will become traditional marriage too. Traditions change. Within marriage, it's been for the better. https://twitter.com/AndersEigen/status/980926280659972097 …
-
-
"Marriage" has been taken over by the state from the church and is treated like a contractual relationship. Accordingly, the state should acknowledge and enforce any consensual relationship between adults no matter the gender or number in the contract.
-
Actually, marriage was taken over by the church from an evolved social institution. This worked because the way the church treated marriage reinforced its social function. State marriage laws originally did the same thing, but now they undermine it.
-
Long history of "marriage." Initial licensing of marriage in US was based in racism (miscegenation.) State has no business making marriage laws, imho.
-
Marriage is very important to society. States make laws for the good of society. So there is an intersection which is unavoidable. The anti-miscegenation laws were based on a view of the good of society that we no longer believe in.
-
Unpragmatic enough of a libertarian to think that state should stay out of area of personal relationships. Only area state might get into is 3rd parties, ie children. Prolly best discussing details over a beer.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I don't think that is the reason. I think the reason cited is that by allowing single sex marriage, the state is diluting the meaning of marriage. I don't agree with this, before mytimeline blows up.
-
Not ”diluting the meaning”. Rather, ”lowering the status” which is the way marriage functions. Married people get social status (and socially acceptable sex) in return for the effort put into having and raising children.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.