Progress...

[Statler Waldorf]

---

I have never understood why atheism is so closely tied to political liberalism. You call this progress, but progress towards what? Progress alone means nothing.

I'm not a liberal, I'm a libertarian. Not exactly conservative, but not exactly liberal either (generally a bit of both). It's progress towards things being defined by common sense and fairness rather than by tradition. Tradition says marriage should be between a man and a woman, but if marriage is going to get perks from governments, then it should be open to all citizens who love each other, and that includes gay people.

That said, I'm not generally "for" marriage of any kind. I see marriage today as some form of state sponsored union rather than something concerning love. Sure, love plays a big role, but I don't see why the government has to get involved in the first place. I'd much rather prefer that the government stayed out of the marriage business, and allowed marriage to go back to what it is supposed to be: a union of two people in love, celebrated by close friends and family.

This could also solve the whole problem with churches being forced to perform gay marriages. If the government didn't try to control what marriage is and isn't, then that decision is ultimately left up to individual groups of people. Some churches will allow gay people to get married, others won't. Even if all the churches rejected gay marriage, gay people could get married by holding the ceremony themselves; getting all their friends and family together to celebrate their union.

I'm intrigued though, why don't you think this step towards equality (in thinking anyway) is progress?

---

Oh ok, that makes more sense now. I have some libertarian tendencies myself, which is kind of ironic considering I am a federal employee. I don't support gay marriage because the legal benefits given to married couples are not designed for a gay marriage. Couples are given those benefits as a way of rewarding them for creating a more solid platform to raise new upcoming citizens within. Kind of a "you are helping us all my being married and raising your children in a marriage so here is some financial help." Since gay couples do not raise children the perks should not apply to them. I look at it like the fact that I can't get maternity leave from my work. Is this unfair, I don't believe so because it is designed for moms, not guys like me. If gays want to have a marriage ceremony, there is no law stopping them from doing that (although I think forcing churches to do it crosses the line between church and state). Though I would rather the government just get out of the marriage business as well rather than open it up to homosexual and multiple partner marriages.