Gay marriage looms as 'battle of our times'

I ordered a large "Supreme."

Should be here in about thirty minutes.

I just came back from McDonalds. Somehow I prefer German food this evening. Well, at least The Sarge must have given Debra_Law a chuckle when he called me "Mr. Gay 'Marriage'". That's better than nothing.

Thomas, you disgusting, left-wing, pinko, commie activisit . . . just how the hell do you suggest that McDonald's is German food ? ! ? ! ?

You easily can ask some educated and knowledgeable perons about the history of hamburgers ...

And Pomm Fritz are German origin as well.

Why don't i just ask Hamburger . . . i mean, you'd think he knows . . .

That's what "easily" meant ...

What'smore, I saw McDonalds franchises in Germany, and throughout Europe. Junk food is now international.

Has nobody even noticed that "marriage" is essentially a religious rite The Government has no business conferring benefits simply on the basis of having completed a "religious rite".

Since many of governmental benefits; survivorship, transfer of property rights, inheritances, welfare benefits, etc.; to name a few are often only routinely availiable to persons who have completed a "religious ceremony" the persons who would prefer not to live with a person of an opposite sex are deprived of these benefits.

This is why homosexual and lesbian persons should be allowed to marry any where they want to in any ceremony that makes sense to them. No government benefits, or protections should be dependent upon a persons religious convictions, if any. The government should make no laws regarding marrige. It' a religious matter, period.

The care and welfare of minor children is a separate matter and certainly can be handled without recourse to some imaginary religious principles

Personally, I think "marriage" should be strictly a religious designation. In addition, any two people, regardless of gender, who want to formalize their commitment in a court of law should be able to do so in a "civil union" (or whatever you want to call it.)

I don't see how it can possibly benefit society to deny legal protections to gay and lesbian partnerships.

If marriage were formalized and encouraged, that is to say if homosexual marriage were increased, the incidence of promiscuity and aids might decrease. That would be a benefit for society.

I think it probably works to society's detriment to deny them... I'm sure there must be plenty of contested wills, co-adoptions etc which are clogging up valuable court time. civil partnerships would remove the need to even be in court to fight for these rights!

I'm just very glad I come from a country where civil partnerships have been legalised, and participate in a religion (reform/progessive judaism) where "gay marriages" do occur - certainly in my congregation/community