With the subject of gay marriage having been brought to the Supreme Court, the US is now having a serious debate on an issue about which it is difficult for anybody not to have an opinion.
I have personal opinion on the matter of gay marriage: I think it's freaking stupid. But that's only because I am against marriage itself in the first place. It is not the first time for me to slam marriage, but for once I think that my opinion will make sense. You see, the interesting thing here is not my personal opinion but my legal standpoint on the matter.
The subject of gay marriage is problematic simply because it is nothing else than the result of a mistake we all made many years ago, when we decided that states (in all countries) would perform the civil marriage (the thing that you do at your town hall). The mistake that we did was to call it "marriage".
I personally define "marriage" as the union of one man and one woman at a church (or any place your religion pushes you to go to). The thing that we do at the town hall (which is what the gay community is fighting for) should never have been called "marriage" and can easily be renamed and redefined to mean the legal union of two (or more) people regardless of their genders. [ Yes, I did say "or more", but don't get me started on that, I am trying to keep it simple for the moment ]. This might upset atheists who will then not get "married" anymore, but as long as the effects of "civil union declarations" (let me call it that way until I find something better) do not change, I don't see why they should mind, actually I don't see why anybody should mind the relabeling of that thing we do for legal (at opposition to religious) purposes.
From a logical standpoint my idea makes way more sense for everybody than allowing gays to "marry". The fight to be able to marry is really the wrong fight and the wrong way to think about it. Additionally doing it as I suggest will at least have the virtue of having those religious freaks shut the fuck up once and for all: they can keep their marriage as a purely religious thing, and leave the rest of us live in peace.
But now remain the problem of whether or not religious gays (I am sure those exist) can marry at the church [ Technically I didn't have to add "at the church" here. If you followed what I wrote above, "marry" should always imply "church" ]. Well, the nice thing with that problem is that it's not my problem. This should be settled internally by their religious leaders....