Are there any non-religious reasons to oppose same s*x marriage?

Question

The average argument being marriage is between a man and a woman. Dig a little deeper and ask why? And the only reason I find is Genesis and church and state are separated so that is indecent justification. Also, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that no government can restrict a person's right to marry and have family.

Answer 1

Yes there are but I don't want to get into it on here, sorry!

Answer 2

It goes against the order of things.  

Any half way intelligent person, let alone a doctor will tell you an a**s was not designed to be a sexual receptor.

Answer 3

It would depend on your answer to the following question:  

What is the purpose of marriage?

Is it the legal joining of two people for the purpose of tax breaks and other legal and financial benefits, or is it for the purpose of two people joining together to start a family?

Marriage historically has been for the purpose of producing children; as such a g*y couple cannot produce offspring (at least, not without MAJOR medical support!).  Under this argument they should not be allowed to marry.

Many states allow the same or about the same financial and legal benefits as marriage under same s*x union laws, so there the argument remains that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

In my personal opinion, homosexuality is essentially genetic suicide, as you are not passing your genes to successive generations.

Answer 4

YES, THE PARTS DON'T FIT!!!

Answer 5

Whether people agree with it or not, there are reasons to oppose it. I'll pull it up in a little bit.

Added:

Remember you yourself have asked for reasosn for people to oppose it, so I am giving it to you as you have asked.

Alright this article should be interesting for you then, as it takes place in an area where homosexuality has been accepted the longest. 60% of people born in Denmark are out of wedlock, marriges declined as well as fathers supporting their children. As well as the population of Europe now is heavily dependent on mass immigration. Also what makes g*y marriage alright but not poligamy? All the reasons and sources I have stated are not religious at all, even though marrage is a religious institution. They had civil unions (which is marrige without religion being invovled in it) which recieved simular benifits, not sure what was wrong with that. Overall you have to look how it will effect society on the whole, not just individuals.

You can disagree with this, thats just fine, but these are possible reason people might disagree with g*y marriage.

Answer 6

I will play devil's advocate here so here it goes:

If we allow same-s*x marriages, should we also allow polygamy as well? Where do we draw the line? Should we be able to marry our pets?

If we allow civil unions, then why must the title marriage be applied when the traditional definition is between a man and a woman. If a couple can have legal remedies same as if they were married, then wouldn't that suffice?

What is the point of marriage when so many people get divorced? Why should we take them serious at all? Is this just a way to get recognition and acceptance or is there real discrimination?

Those are some arguments I have heard and thought weren't too bad, but I personally don't care what anybody does and feel that anybody should be able to do what they want. Sometimes I like to point stuff out so we can all gain some perspective.

Answer 7

Yes!

Answer 8

None that I'm aware of.

Answer 9

Yes.

First of all - marriage is not a Constitutional Right - marriage is not mentioned in any shape or form in the United States Constitution. Of course, those who subscribe to the "living document" theory of interpretation will obviously "find" it - just like how they "find" abortion rights and conveniently can't find the right to bear arms.

Once we start saying that the Constitution means whatever we say it means and doesn't say whatever we say it doesn't, according to however the social mores and popular opinion evolves, then we might as well not have a constitution - because we can simply make it up as we go along.

As far as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is concerned - it is a non-binding international joke. It is on par with the International Criminal Court. When is the last time the United States has had a trial there? Happy hunting and research!

Second, once you open the door to allowing two people to marry because "they are in love" or a "why not" basis, then what is to stop three, four, five, or more people from being married (polygamy)? What is to stop a incest marriage? Yeah, I know. You're probably thinking "that could never happen because it's just rediculous!"

Well, people less than 10 years ago were saying the exact same thing about g*y marriage, and guess what? It is here.  

Answer 10

everything in the world is the way it is for a reason and works together like a complicated puzzle. Even nature has it's limits. Cats don't mate with possums. Boys and girls fit together like puzzle pieces, you don't need the bible to figure that out. It's like trying to fit a square block into a circle hole: you learned in preschool that it doesn't work.

Answer 11

Marriage is for procreation.

Answer 12

What does a person who wants to marry someone of the same s*x seek to gain by it?

Is it for leaving  their estate to someone?  is it for medical and other benefits like being able to visit someone in the hospital?

Or is it wanting others to accept them as married the same as a man and woman married?  

some sort of civil union if done properly would accomplish all the secular issues.  

If its wanting others to accept it as being called married... hate to tell you but alot of people never will.  

So if its just about secular issues, which it should be because as you say 'marriage' is just a religious thing, then well... I know will there will be alot less people fighting against it if its called something other than marriage.

Answer 13

AIDS

Answer 14

i dont think so

Answer 15

A good friend of mine is not against same-s*x marriage at all, but he did give me many, many reason on how it would mess with our government and such. They were very good points and I was suprised that I never thought about it. Unfortunatly I do not remember these reasons (sorry) but just know that yes, there are some good reasons out there on why they shouldn't.

Answer 16

No.

There aren't any valid religious reasons, either.

Answer 17

How about biological?

Answer 18

Well, my wife was obsessed with comparing our wedding to those of our straight friends and family.

If she had tried to compete with weddings of our g*y friends and family as well, we'd have gone broke.

And since when has the United States EVER paid any attention to international agreements or organizations?

Answer 19

Yes the lawyers will be able to suck the blood of same s*x couples and line their evil pockets where now they can't profit from a break up of g*y couples

Answer 20

i doubt it...it's always related to religion.  i love how politicians ASSUME everyone in america has the same beliefs as them or are religious at all.  

Answer 21

There are no NON religious reasons.  Only closed minded ones.

Answer 22

When it comes to government policy "reasons" are usually about money or maintaining the status quo.  LGBT are a highly organized and unified group.  Extending marriage rights now gives sets a powerful precident that makes a lot of politicians, insurance companies, and employers nervous.  "Normal" married people are not officially an organized group with any specific agenda while LGBT's are and do (realistically and justifiably) want more including legal protections.

Answer 23

Bigotry?