Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The goal and agenda of the church is to prevent us gays and lesbians from having any union legally recognized that may in any way resemble their oh so sacred weddings. Yet they do nothing about divorce.
So if the government removed the word "marriage" from their lexicon, and instead reduced their involvement to a role of contract enforcement (as it should be, IMO), and any church could choose which couples they would perform "marriage" ceremonies for, you'd be ok with that?
I believe the Constitution originally never had anything about marriage. If Im wrong, correct me.
The easiest way to settle this is for the government to except all contracts between two consenting adults as a domestic partnership. Thus, allowing those who enter this partnership no matter who each other are, to get the same benefits.
Then, marriage can be used as the definition of those depending on their religion if they have one. Man and woman can continue to get married at a church if they choose. Gays and whomever else (polygamy folks, relatives, etc) can have an institution of their own perform ceremonies.
Marriage can then stay as man and woman for their own religious purposes. And the others can have their partnership with equal benefits.
What is so bad about that?
Why two consenting adults? What right does the government have to tell me who and how many I can marry.
I'd like to see this also. Government does not define "marriage." Any two people can get a civil union, and then you can go to a church or temple or whatever to get "married."
The end.
Why does it have to be people? What gives the government the right to tell me I cannot marry a goat or a worm or seven hampsters?
I believe the Constitution originally never had anything about marriage. If Im wrong, correct me.
The easiest way to settle this is for the government to except all contracts between two consenting adults as a domestic partnership. Thus, allowing those who enter this partnership no matter who each other are, to get the same benefits.
Then, marriage can be used as the definition of those depending on their religion if they have one. Man and woman can continue to get married at a church if they choose. Gays and whomever else (polygamy folks, relatives, etc) can have an institution of their own perform ceremonies.
Marriage can then stay as man and woman for their own religious purposes. And the others can have their partnership with equal benefits.
What is so bad about that?
Yes finally a voice of reason. The government should not be in the relationship validation business. Anyone, should be able to sign a "family contract" at the county courthouse - two people, a group, even a adults who have children, with the children's grandparents.
They agree to share property, credit, assets, be next of kin and rear and children together.
The State's only interest in marriage is with regards to ownership of property and the rearing of the next generation of citizens.
One of the reasons for gay marriage is to have marriage become a civil right and then when a church refuses to marry a gay couple they will lose their 501c3 designation.
When my kids were little the government didn't have to support them or me because I was married to their father and he paid everything. It has been repeatedly shown that fathers that are married to their child's mother are more willing to financially and emotionally support their children.
I believe the Constitution originally never had anything about marriage. If Im wrong, correct me.
The easiest way to settle this is for the government to except all contracts between two consenting adults as a domestic partnership. Thus, allowing those who enter this partnership no matter who each other are, to get the same benefits.
Then, marriage can be used as the definition of those depending on their religion if they have one. Man and woman can continue to get married at a church if they choose. Gays and whomever else (polygamy folks, relatives, etc) can have an institution of their own perform ceremonies.
Marriage can then stay as man and woman for their own religious purposes. And the others can have their partnership with equal benefits.
What is so bad about that?
It's not in the Constitution, which means it's up to the people in each state to define the purpose and function of marriage.
Marriage started as in institution for the people, and once the people created a representative government, they demanded that their state government create a legal framework to enhance the institution of marriage, thereby making a marriage a legally binding contract.
The purpose and function of marriage is to provide the best framework for a man and woman to raise their children, so they become grow up to become healthy, well adjusted, functioning adults in society.
It's up to the people in their own states if they want to change marriage into something else. Or we could just leave marriage as it is, since no one knows what changing the definition of marriage will do to it. We can easily create a few new laws to help domestic partners share property rights, and get them other things like hospital visitation rights, etc...
And people need to understand that all the hooey about "building blocks of society" and "procreation" and "we've done it this way for (insert arbitrary number) of years" are legally irrelevant and sure as hell don't jibe with the Constitution.
What does that have to do with the fact that marriage is in state jurisdiction? As is it does jib with the Constitution. Now the social security transfer payments some people are looking to get out if it, not so much a jibe with it. So in other words a Federal marriage law allowing benefits between two parties who do not reproduce biologically or culturally are a multiple of such violations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
