Sure people who are not religious but really what is the importance of it? In religion you are making a covenant before God and it is generally held and viewed more negatively when/if you divorce. The bond of husband and wife is also viewed as being sacred. The secular view is not anywhere near that and really comes down to aligning your preferences together to work for marriage, if your preferences no longer align what is to really stop you from getting a divorce? Secular and religious marriages are viewed very differently. You can get all the legal benefits through a government marriage/union.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces 2025 Pride Band, Watch Face, and iPhone Wallpaper
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
it is all just playing in to what will sell, they don't actually seem to be supporting LGBT in countries where they are tossing people off roofs if they are gay... unless they are and it is just not public. To make real inroads all these companies should stop selling to countries where they make it illegal and people are killed for being gay. Instead you get mass marketing campaigns to places where it is legal and there is massive amount of support.
Here is a headline from a couple of months ago in The Guardian:
Republican state lawmakers galvanize to attack same-sex marriage
The recent wave of GOP-led bills comes as Trump becomes emboldened in orders against LGBTQ+ communities
I can remember when being gay was stereotyped as being promiscuous. The gays weren’t like the respectable straight married people. Then when the conversation turned to gay people marrying it was “You can’t do that. You’re not like us”. There was never a moral compass. Just ignorance and fear.
I don't think it's up to you to decide why people should get married and how they should feel about it. Plenty of people have non-religious marriages and are together for life. A secular marriage is not inherently shallower than a religious one. But there are also LGBT people that wish to get married in a religious ceremony for the very reasons you state (it is certainly possible to be LGBT and religious). Those people will likely find a church or religious institution that is amenable to performing same-sex marriages, which many are.
I'm not trying to "sell" anyone anything. All I am doing is conveying my experience in one of the most conservative areas of the nation. I think you may FEEL there's outright hostility towards gay people, from the right, and sure, there probably are pockets of it, but in my circle, nobody cares about someone being gay.
It sounds like you're in a bit of an echo chamber then. In any case, I'm not "right wing" on most social issues and you'll find that libertarian-minded folk are almost universally tolerant of letting adults do whatever they want with other adults and for living their lives as they see fit.
I don't envision there being an overturning of Obergfell with the current courts makeup. I think it's with the states, where it belongs.
What is the importance of my marriage? So religious people have important marriages but non-religious people just have the regular kind of marriage? I know many religious people who divorced.
Who views secular and religious marriages differently? I would never want to be married in a church because I’m not religious. But my marriage is a marriage.
It won't have to get overturned to make things awful. They can do a ton of damage with reducing and eliminating vital protections in education, the workplace, health care, housing, etc.
The Heritage Foundation / Project 2025 is driving all of this and they seek to return the country to an era when LGBTQ+ people lived in the shadows. Similar concerns exist for women, immigrants and POC.
Thank you for posting that. I was unaware of state issues and I appreciate the information. Those appear to be minor efforts at combating it and don't seem to have much chance of standing up constitutionally, thankfully.
Right now, my state (Ohio) is working on removing gender affirming care from adults. We have SCOTUS members who've openly said they will overturn Oberfell v Hodges. States are working to reinstate anti-sodomy and "gay/trans panic defense" laws.
Here's a handy link of current bills in state legislatures.
There's a million things THF wants to do that I oppose, so I won't disagree that they have objections to things that have come about in the last decade or so. That said, I don't see or am aware of any serious policy proposals from them that would impact women, illegals, or people of color. Again, I'll be glad to look at specifics though if you have examples.
You do need to remember that a "wish list" from a thinktank doesn't mean it's about to become law.
There are many economic and social benefits (outside of religion) to marriage in modern societies, like lower tax rates, insurance benefits, etc.
So, I'm curious.
My wife and I are lesbians, we married in 2022, we're moving to Mass from Ohio soon, if your idea of it being a States' Rights issue, then would my marriage be void when I return to Ohio to visit my parents if Ohio bans Marriage equality? How would the logistics work of hospital visitation or legal benefits given to a spouse if a queer spouse is hospitalized or in legal jeopardy?
This is frequently the problem with cries of "leave it to the States".
It continuously fractures and erodes the concept of "United States".
I'd also add that, all too often, those advocating for "States rights" are only doing so when it's a topic they'd prefer to go a certain way. As soon as a State is doing something they don't like, all of the sudden "States rights" disappears.
It's most frequently pretty disingenuous.
Example one is always "whatever California is doing" and how that's routinely under attack from others in the Country.
Obergefell took it out of the states. If you think it belongs in the states, then you're calling for the overturning of Obergefell. Several states are crafting legislation that will restrict the ability of same-sex couples to have their marriages officially recognized.
But Pride is not just about marriage rights. Since Trump took office, the US government has systematically removed references to transgender people from its websites. The website for the Stonewall Inn National monument now talks about "LGB flags".
I'm not religious at all, but respect people's views. In the UK we have the choice of Civil Partnership or Marriage. Legally, they're pretty much identical except for the terminology of what you can call your partner. I'm getting married this week (after 24 years, had to be sure....) and chose marriage because it was hard fought for by many people. It's an opportunity that you don't get in many countries around the world. It's important in a healthcare emergency as you are the next of kin, important for pensions, and it's important for tax reasons as you avoid 40% inheritance tax. That said, no self respecting homosexual would be seen dead wearing that watch band.
No, I would treat it as we treat driver's licenses. If you are legally married by a state that predates any legislation enacted by said state, you would be legally recognized. There should be no "legal jeopardy" as you have a lawfully recognized union. This is the only logical conclusion, should there be some future decision where Obergefell was overturned (which it should not be). For the record, this should be the way concealed carry permits work also.
Which is particularly crazy when you realize the single largest group of folks at stonewall were trans folks
I was never a fan of the term “LGBTQIA+” as a descriptor for non-straight people. Just keep it at LGBT or LGBTQ. Adding the + at the end made it easy for people who do not like all of this to poke fun at the movement, and all that does is take away from the mission of awareness and acceptance of gay people as regular people.
Well get ready to be more shocked. If you go look at my initial post the split of likes/dislikes, if at all representative of the population here, suggests 45% of folks agree with me. Check your cognitive bias and get off your high horse.
*also, I’m not a Conservative, I’m a common-sense liberal.
Because another letter gets added to the alphabet every couple years. Now they got lazy and just stuck a “+” at the end. Talk about watering down a brand!
It's trying to be as inclusive as possible
Everything You Wanted to Know About the LGBTQIA+ Acronym (But Were Afraid to Ask)
The LGBTQIA+ acronym is a term used to describe people who are transgender and/or attracted to the same gender. Learn what the acronym means and why it is important.