If we should seperate church and state why exactly are marriages part of the state and somehow fags are legally obliged...

Will you leave more pics?

I can give you one more, catch

Attached: 1656943154476.png (1280x1920, 1.27M)

>Memeflags can be made horn by posting 2D German anime girls

Attached: img (2).png (2000x2177, 597.25K)

Kek, im going to yoink that expression.

The point of marriage is to create a suitable environment to raise the next generation with a father and mother figure in a stable household.
Gay couples can't fulfill this role so logically it did not make sense to extend the same legal and fiscal benefits that marriage brings as a legal contract (not a religious ceremony).

I'll argue this is an outdated point of view, having a stable couple still benefits society instead of two random single dudes having a different partner every week, so some legal protection should be extended to them to foster monogamy, even if they can't actually have kids. Not as much as actual marriage, but some at least.

For instance, currently in plenty of places, if one partner buys a house and both live in it, the house still belongs to the first one only unless they change this legally. The result is that, in case he dies, the other partner cannot inherit the house directly as he is not recognized as part of the family. If there's brothers or other family members that inherit the house, they can legally expel the dude that was living there all along.
Inheritance for gay marriage\civil unions should be the default to prevent these situations and give them something to work and build together.

However some of the financial benefits that are supposed to help with the costs of child rearing should be shifted strictly for kids and given to a couple whenever they get a kid instead.
Do that and there's no logical reason to reee about gay civil unions. In fact, they become a far better alternative than the hedonistic crap we have today.

I blame God for making girls cute.

*anime girls

The reference is still that of human female.

Real girls are gross though

My sister is pretty cute.

I don't believe in separation of Church and State but I do think marriage as is is just another avenue of state control. I think it should be purely a church matter

Attached: ahoy.jpg (819x1200, 988.21K)

got pics?

Understandable

>why pervert and subvert a religious ceremony?
Deloitte, McKinsey and their competitors advise all hands at levers of power to destroy Christian tradition to create a more harvestable human chattel (and a few probably do it for satan out and out)
but this is mostly a strategy of human husbandry - cattle class management.

The Church doesn't have to recognise the marriages. A marriage is the sacrament between a man and a woman. It is manifested in the act of sex. The Church ceremony is a blessing and a way of formalising the marriage so someone can't lie. You take vows. The only way out after marriage is a divorce, from which you shouldn't marry again, or anulment. The latter is something which essentially says the marriage never took place but should only be given out in certain situations. This is however abused. Monarchs for example could get them very easily.

So, the state celebrates the union of gay people and calls it marriage and registers it in law. The Church ought to view it as nothing more than the sin, and sacrilege that it is.

Because they want to corrupt the institution of marriage. Fags are rarely monogamous, they don't even have an use for it - it's not about them having it good, it's about tearing you down.

Fags don't care about marriage. They want total destruction and perversion of Christian believes. The rainbow flag is a perversion of God's promise. They don't care about marriage, they just want to destroy it for you. It's pure evil.