Hallelujah!
When will the religious lobby admit that they have no privileged access to morality (or history), but are a lot unthinking zealots following their own particular prejudices?

I think it's probably time that Christians (followers of Christ) ditched the Old Testament and just focussed on the Gospels (Books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John)within the New Testament. Even St Paul was a bit of a worry, especially regarding women, though, as my dear late father (a man of the cloth) pointed out, his views were a great improvement on the attitudes of those in the Old Testament. It would be nice if Jesus did return at this point and offer his views on same sex marriage. Given his compassion for the woman caught in adultery and his generally loving attitude to all, I'm sure he would take a progressive stance. He did, of course, separate church and state ("render under Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God those that are God's") so maybe he would advocate civil unions for gays (with all the attendant rights) but differentiate between that and a marriage between a man and a woman. I don't know really, but I do know that Jesus would have taken a compassionate stance, whatever that was.

Selectively quoting from the Old Testament, and attributing everything that prophets and Jewish people did and said about marriage as coming directly from God is unscholarly.

The clearest indication about marriage comes directly from Jesus Christ himself. For example what about Matthew 19 amongest many others? A clear specification from Jesus Christ (i.e. God himself) about marriage. The authors argument is simply unsustainable.

"Moses by reason of hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives": but from the beginning it was not so" (Matthew 19:8); "He who made man from the beginning, made them male and female. And he said: For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder" (Matthew 19:4-6). The indissolubility of all marriage is here affirmed as between one male and female. The permanence of marriage for the whole human race according to natural law is confirmed by Divine positive ordinance.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05054c.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09707a.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09693a.htm

Here is another longer Matthew translation. Please read more so it is not taken out of context. I suggest the same for OT quotes in authors article. "3 Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? 4 Who answering, said to them: Have you not read, that he who made man from the beginning, made them male and female? And he said: 5 For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. 6 Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder. 7 They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? 8 He says to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

This is certainly a strong case against biblical support for monogamy. But it seems to reinforce the requirement for opposite sexes doesn't it?

Frankly, now that marriage is largely a state matter, I think it's best if heterosexuals reject it. Let the gays have it.

Now I better understand so many people's preference for civil partnerships - much easier to understand.

In case I change my mind, I just want to be clear that I've got this idea of a Biblical way of married-life thing correct… Wouldn't want to upset Dr Jensen, etc. without good reason.

Can I do a two-for-one offer? Can I buy the daughter off some bloke to simultaneously be my slave and/or a wife? Because the idea of having to refund the money - if I am unsatisfied - seems significantly more straightforward than a divorce.

In the unlikely event I need to deal with 'my own clan' how close to my father's family can I negotiate before the question of incest becomes an issue (is it less of an inadvertent pun to say problem)?

The Bible seems unclear as to how many generations from Adam and Eve and/or Noah and his sons there were before God didn't have an incest concern.

If I'm going to do this I want to do it correctly.

And by the way, there isn't much said about love - is this necessary, or an optional extra?

I am surprised that Alan has not quoted a Scripture that presents sodomy as a natural or good thing. He certainly draws warped conclusions from other Scriptures he has quoted. I think he deliberatley ignores that Judaism was far from perfect as the Perfect One who made God's original intension clear about marriage was yet to visit earth. I am surprised Alan is not a lawyer with the twisting, omissions and deceitful interpretation of Scripture.