Scoey
Tony Shaw (54)
The point is that the couple having a religious wedding can't rationally claim that their wedding is more meaningful than the couple who have a civil wedding because they said their vows before God. Likewise the couple who have a civil wedding can't rationally claim their wedding was more meaningful because their wedding and vows were only about each other and didn't incite a fictitious deity.
The argument boils down to accepting that society is made up of a wide group of people who believe in different things. One couple's marriage has no impact on another couple's marriage.
I agreed with you up until you used the word 'fictitious'. If you think that the concept of religion is BS that's fine. But the use of that word undermines the importance that religious people place on their beliefs and is entirely as discriminatory as the anti gay marriage argument. Discriminatory may be a strong word but it's certainly not "accepting that society is made up of a wide group of people who believe in different things."
I don't see how it is trivializing marriage by arguing pro-gay marriage?
That is my point. Supporters of gay marriage often fail to see the importance of marriage to religious people and often dismiss their beliefs. It doesn't trivialise marriage by arguing pro gay marriage. It often trivialises religious beliefs by arguing pro gay marriage.