I've been reading a lot from both sides of the same sex marriage debate and I've come to the conclusion that the Republican party as a whole is wrong. Not that the argument the raise aren't valid, they are. Allow me to explain...
The crux of the argument comes down to two things and that's religion and morality.
While I can understand the morality argument it isn't the job of the government to legalize morality. As a parent I don't want to have to explain to my children that sometimes men choose to be with other men rather then with a woman but what to consenting adults choose to do whether I like it or not is none of my business. Likewise what two consenting adults choose to call themselves is none of my business. If a man or woman wishes another man or woman to be able to make life or death choices for them should they fall ill is that any business of mine? Nope. If they wish to share finances and be legally liable for the other is that my business? Nope.
This does become a problem when business owner are forced against their will to carry additional expenses of insurance and benefits for same sex couples but this I think would be a whole additional topic in and of itself as private business are already forced by law to follow rules and regulations which may go against the owners own moral views.
The other issue is religion. Some faiths view homosexuality as a sin. They likewise view marriage as a religious act. So for a government to define marriage to include homosexuals, government is essentially defining a religious act. What's telling is that this bill has an exception built in for regions. This concept is discussed very nicely on Contratimes in an article found HERE. The telling question is asked very clearly in that article.
If same-sex marriage is a civil right, how can a bill conferring that right also include an exemption (HB 457:37) for those religious who do not wish to solemnize and confer such a right in their churches?
Exactly! It would be like putting exceptions in the laws that say churches can refuse to allow handicapped people or people of a certain color or race. That wouldn't be acceptable because today we do not allow discrimination so why would it be ok for a church to refuse to accept a civil right if it is indeed such a thing.
Now that all said it would sound like there are clear cut arguments against same sex marriage and as I said much of the arguments from the right are valid. The ideal argument would be to define ALL "marriages" as civil unions in the eyes of the government and allow churches etc to be free to recognize which ones they choose.
So if this is the case they why should are Republicans wrong and why should they stop fighting it?
Mainly because it is pushing away homosexuals. Homosexuals have every reason to be aligned with the Republican party. Couples made up of two males tend to be in higher tax brackets and in many cases tend to be viewed as "the rich" that Democrats seek to take more and more from. Since it is impossible for two men or two women to make a baby, homosexual couples tend to seek to adopt, abortions kill babies that would otherwise be available to these loving couples seeking to take care of them and put roofs over their heads. I could go on but I think you see my point.
Secondly Republicans should stop fighting it because it will be easier to get out of the government marriage business once government gives everyone "equality" and some of the problems expected such as lawsuits against churches begin coming true.