Marriage
I read two articles online today. The first one was how some Minnesota suburbs where starting to look into domestic partner registries. The other one was on how Americans are changing their thinking on gay marriage.
This got me thinking, what is marriage? I know what some would say. Marriage is one man and one woman. That's not what I mean. Is marriage a legal contract between two consenting adults to live together sharing their possessions, debts and caring for any children that may occur from their union? Or Is marriage an agreement for two people to live together according to the dictates of whatever faith they practice and to raise any children they might have in that faith?
This may seem like a silly question to ask, but it isn't. When C and I got married we had to get a license from the state we would be married in. We had to provide information about our parents,prove we were of age to marry without permission,swear that we were not related and in addition C had to prove that his previous marriage had been legally ended. We were married in a church by a person authorized by the state to witness such unions. We had to have the license from the state before we could be married in the church. We are married
When Jake and Mariah were married, they too needed a license. They had to prove the same things that C and I did. They were married at the Como Conservatory in St. Paul by a judge. A person that is authorized by the state to witness such unions. They are also married.
There is no difference in the marriages. The four of us have the same rights and responsibilities. Our marriages are recognised in all 50 states and overseas. The only difference is that C and I were married in a religious ceremony and Jake and Mariah were not. So that brings me back to the question, what is marriage? If it is a legal contract only, then banning homosexuals from it is discrimination. If it is a religious sacrament/covenant only then it would depend on the tenets and doctrine of the religion(s) involved.
Another question I have is regarding what seems to be the primary argument against gay marriage. It will have an adverse effect on families. It would ruin the family unit. Could someone please explain this one to me? I'm serious. If anyone reading this can explain how allowing two consenting adults of the same gender to marry would endanger my family or any family I would appreciate it. I don't understand the argument.
To me, the event that has the biggest adverse on families is divorce. If you are promoting families and want a definition of marriage then it should be one man and one woman. Not one man at a time or one woman at a time. I read somewhere about a man who was circulating a petition trying to get a law banning divorce on the ballot in California. His reason was that since divorce breaks up families all pro family groups should be in favour of banning divorce.
I know this is never going to happen, but he does make a good point.
I'm not quite sure where I'm going with this. Right now would be the time for a good firm conclusion, but I don't have one. I do have a few thoughts. This is not an issue on which agreement of the opposing sides is possible. I do hope that the opposing sides will at least respect each others right to speak and will listen to what the other side is saying. This is going to be a long conversation.
This got me thinking, what is marriage? I know what some would say. Marriage is one man and one woman. That's not what I mean. Is marriage a legal contract between two consenting adults to live together sharing their possessions, debts and caring for any children that may occur from their union? Or Is marriage an agreement for two people to live together according to the dictates of whatever faith they practice and to raise any children they might have in that faith?
This may seem like a silly question to ask, but it isn't. When C and I got married we had to get a license from the state we would be married in. We had to provide information about our parents,prove we were of age to marry without permission,swear that we were not related and in addition C had to prove that his previous marriage had been legally ended. We were married in a church by a person authorized by the state to witness such unions. We had to have the license from the state before we could be married in the church. We are married
When Jake and Mariah were married, they too needed a license. They had to prove the same things that C and I did. They were married at the Como Conservatory in St. Paul by a judge. A person that is authorized by the state to witness such unions. They are also married.
There is no difference in the marriages. The four of us have the same rights and responsibilities. Our marriages are recognised in all 50 states and overseas. The only difference is that C and I were married in a religious ceremony and Jake and Mariah were not. So that brings me back to the question, what is marriage? If it is a legal contract only, then banning homosexuals from it is discrimination. If it is a religious sacrament/covenant only then it would depend on the tenets and doctrine of the religion(s) involved.
Another question I have is regarding what seems to be the primary argument against gay marriage. It will have an adverse effect on families. It would ruin the family unit. Could someone please explain this one to me? I'm serious. If anyone reading this can explain how allowing two consenting adults of the same gender to marry would endanger my family or any family I would appreciate it. I don't understand the argument.
To me, the event that has the biggest adverse on families is divorce. If you are promoting families and want a definition of marriage then it should be one man and one woman. Not one man at a time or one woman at a time. I read somewhere about a man who was circulating a petition trying to get a law banning divorce on the ballot in California. His reason was that since divorce breaks up families all pro family groups should be in favour of banning divorce.
I know this is never going to happen, but he does make a good point.
I'm not quite sure where I'm going with this. Right now would be the time for a good firm conclusion, but I don't have one. I do have a few thoughts. This is not an issue on which agreement of the opposing sides is possible. I do hope that the opposing sides will at least respect each others right to speak and will listen to what the other side is saying. This is going to be a long conversation.
Gay marriage would not affect existing marriages,but they affect the institution of marriage. In Sweden for example, when gay marriage was legalized normal marriages declined to the point where now there are more people living together without marriage then there are marriages. Some states and countries allow civil unions and they are not called marriages. This may possibly not have as a severe effect on normal marriages, but it has not yet been determined. This whole argument comes down to whether you believe homosexuality is immoral or not. The gay community would have you believe it is just another lifestyle. It has been proven that it is destructive to societies in general, and that is why most religions have been against it (or were against it.
ReplyDelete