The hypocracy behind Gay Marriage

[Ducimus]

Marriage was created as a civil function, with a specific purpose. Religion got into it later.

Any supporting evidence for that? I know it's easy to make the assumption that long before any religion was thought of, a tribal cheiftan said, Caveman A and Cavewoman B were officially zug zug to their tribe; but as near as i can tell, marriage in any account of human history I'm aware of, was conducted by a holy man of one sort or another.

The problem is the civil side. What most of the protests have been about is the laws that forbid it.

I think marriage consists of two parts. The religious side, and the civil side. If im not mistaken, even with Amendment 3 to Utah's constitution, Gays could get civil unions here. IMO, that's fine, anyone should be allowed a civil union, were should all be the same with equal rights and protections as the state goes.

The religious aspect however, i think is entirely voluntary. In fact, i think an argument could be made that it is entirely unnecessary. As such, I think forcing the issue into the religious area can't really be described in a positive context.

Right after I moved to Utah the Mormon Church changed its rules on Black members holding the Priesthood (I had nothing to do with that, being neither black nor Mormon). Were black members hypocritical to push for that? I don't know the answer to that, and I don't even have an opinion, but here is the same thing.

I don't see how matters of race or color have any bearing or relevance to gay marriage. I think such comparisons are just abstractions designed to garner favorable opinions by invoking images of Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks; something we can all agree with. However, Gay people were never slaves, major highlights of the civil war, subject to Jim Crow laws, cross burnings, and the like. So I don't think that comparison fair in this particular subject. I think this subject more about forcing an alteration of religious beliefs. Beliefs that are voluntary and optional in life, and forcing these changes in the Church via the State; which i think is wrong at a fundamental level. I don't think this an issue of civil or constitutional rights. Especially when civil unions are already available.