Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Three's the charm for the Supreme Court

I personaly think it is just another degradation of the marriage concept. It used to mean a man & women "death due us part" permanant basis for family building. An Oath before God (in many religions). The symbolic core of the family unit.

With divource rates exceeding 50%, affairs exceeding 70%, a drop in families having children, even public "oaths to God" are out..marriage vows have taken major hits. Now we can drop the man & women & God parts and make it.."Do you take this person, under God or whatever, to have sex with, until death do you part or you get tired of each other"

BTW< why stop at 2 people?? If same sex is allowed, what is the rational arguement for not allowing 3,4, or 20?

I am not against homosexuals, to the contrary it is like hair color or height..it is probably genetic and is seen with most species. It is simply "whom a person is". And I do not think it unreasonable to allow certain marriage benifits (tax, insurance benifits for example). And I certainly do not want to know the details of what happens behind closed doors, nor should the government. But, marriage is MORE than a insurance break or at least it WAS..