Great article – compassionate but rational. I was influenced by “The Secular Case Against Gay Marriage” by Adam Kolasinski (another excellent essay).

http://tech.mit.edu/V124/N5/kolasinski.5c.html

It seems that some of us haven't evolved very far. I remember being very puzzled when I was told that when a Roman Catholic married a person of another religion the children were always brought up Catholic and their marriage was considered a "mixed marriage." We even had a priest who refused to officiate at interfaith marriages.
I could not understand why religion carefully nurtured divisiveness.

As for same-sex marriage? What business is it of anyone as to who marries whom? Marriage is such a personal commitment - and it should only concern the people involved (as long as it damages nobody else).
It's a matter of personal choice and should remain so. How dare anybody tell us who we should sleep with, who we are to marry, what we do with our bodies, who can have children and how. And we should all be concerned that in a country where state and church are separate there are still antiquated laws that place the church first and people second. We can not allow politicians whose integrity and roles are compromised by their religious positions to be in control of our lives.

Jon J: It is odd that gay activists are trying to mirror middleclass heterosexuals. Perhaps that’s a form of self-hatred too?

Dear Lexi,

"How dare anybody tell us who we should sleep with, who we are to marry, what we do with our bodies, who can have children and how"

Hear, Hear - so far so good.

"What business is it of anyone as to who marries whom?"

It is indeed no one else's business - so why then do people go and ask the state to bless their marriages? why don't people simply get married and not even inform the state/government/politicians about that fact?!

Surely if you ask the devil for his services, he may at his pleasure oblige, refuse, or place conditions. Better don't ask!

Parenting a child is only something hetro people can (?) do but we want gays around to enrich our children’s lives as long as they keep the one back at home in the closet before and after death?

Maybe we could “celebrate” them by not telling them who they are and what they want let alone why they want it or what they believe in.

It’s one hell of a way to show love and respect for someone Ian.

I agree with your post Yuyutsu.

It is agreed that religious institutions are exclusive in nature. If you do not believe/follow their rules then you are not 'one of them'. I'm fine with that.

What I'm not fine with is the fact that they then claim to place these rules on people in general society. This is done by allowing marriage to become a state institution, while still claiming moral ownership. Their rules apply to all, but are owned by a few.

Thus, we need to make a decision. Either marriage is a state institution, and can be changed/evolve with public opinion as normal laws do, or it is a religious institution, and has no place as a law in our secular society. If we decide about this question (and I'm happy either way) then marriage can either be opened up to all, without religious influence, or the marriage act can be repealed and churches, mosques, synagogues can decide who they do or don't marry. I'm open to debate regarding this argument, but I'm yet to hear any one else's opinion one way or the other.