Gay Marriage: Pro or Anti?

[ZuWo]

In a perfect world, the right to a civil union would be extended to both straight and gay people and marriage would remain a purely religious institution that isn't state-sanctioned. In this world, pro-gay marriage.

I don't support it.

Care to elaborate?

Does that also count for siblings and people living in polygamous relationships? "Marriage Equality", by definition of the term, obviously involves much more than gay and lesbian couples.

[ZuWo]

In a perfect world, the right to a civil union would be extended to both straight and gay people and marriage would remain a purely religious institution that isn't state-sanctioned. In this world, pro-gay marriage.

I don't support it.

Care to elaborate?

Does that also count for siblings and people living in polygamous relationships? "Marriage Equality", by definition of the term, obviously involves much more than gay and lesbian couples.

Equating gay marriage with incest. What a wonderful position.

Don't avoid answering the question. We can't speak of "marriage equality" if heterosexual and homosexual couples can marry but other people are excluded from the right to enter a civil union/get married. It's not logical.

For the record, Ralph Richard Banks, professor at Stanford Law School, put forward a similar argument. It's a significant legal question which should not be discarded by attacks on people who make such comparisons.

[ZuWo]

In a perfect world, the right to a civil union would be extended to both straight and gay people and marriage would remain a purely religious institution that isn't state-sanctioned. In this world, pro-gay marriage.

I don't support it.

Care to elaborate?

Does that also count for siblings and people living in polygamous relationships? "Marriage Equality", by definition of the term, obviously involves much more than gay and lesbian couples.

I don't see why marriage between multiple people and/or people who are related should be prohibited though polygamy would probably be harder to deal with, practically speaking.

Thanks for your answer, which makes sense to me. My point in posting in this thread was to show how problematic the use of the term "marriage equality" is if it is solely applied for same-sex marriages. While I may disagree with your point of view, it is certainly conclusive.

[ZuWo]

In a perfect world, the right to a civil union would be extended to both straight and gay people and marriage would remain a purely religious institution that isn't state-sanctioned. In this world, pro-gay marriage.

I don't support it.

Care to elaborate?

Does that also count for siblings and people living in polygamous relationships? "Marriage Equality", by definition of the term, obviously involves much more than gay and lesbian couples.

I don't see why marriage between multiple people and/or people who are related should be prohibited though polygamy would probably be harder to deal with, practically speaking.

Thanks for your answer, which makes sense to me. My point in posting in this thread was to show how problematic the use of the term "marriage equality" is if it is solely applied for same-sex marriages. While I may disagree with your point of view, it is certainly conclusive.

Bit of gymnastics there if you ask me. Man loves woman, both not related = they get to marry. Man loves man or woman loves woman, both not related = they get to marry. That is marriage equality by definition is it not? I've just filled out my registration forms for my civil parternship; it tells me precisely who I'm allowed to have the partnership with and who I can't. At present we allow people with heterosexual attractions under certain circumstances to marry each other. What is unequal is that people with homosexual attractions cannot because their attraction is to the same sex. Changing that = marriage equality. What has has incest or polygamy got to do with it?

The answer to your question is very simple: Despite the fact that incestuous and polygamous relationships have a long history - just like same-sex relationships - people who engage in these kinds of relationships still can't marry the people of their choice and are hardly ever mentioned even by proponents of gay marriage. This is a case of inequal treatment which does not change even if we introduce gay marriage across the board. I repeat: There is no "marriage equality" unless this changes and all forms or marriage are made legal, that's why the term "marriage equality" exclusively used in the context of same-sex relationships is odd.