Happy Friday Kiddies!
Unca Billy's back with yet another rant.
Seems all the hubbub about Same-Sex marriage legislation is still brewing. I thought some lawyer worth his salt would have put this one to rest by now. Guess I was putting a little too much faith in them. Guess I'll have to do it for them ...
I'm gonna make this short and sweet:
1. Marriage is a spiritual union.
2. The institution of marriage is outlined and defined and has it's foundations in The Bible.
3. The United States Constitution clearly states that there SHALL be a clear seperation of church and state.
4. Hence ... There can be NO legislation governing who may or may not partake in a matter which is the sole domain of the church, i.e. marriage, baptism etc.
5. The requirement for a "Marriage License" is moot and should never have been allowed to come into existance. As it is now a requirement, it needs to be done away with ... Are you listening Lawyers?
6. If you want a "Legally Binding" union with someone, rather than a purely spiritual union, you need to go to the Justice of The Peace and have him/her perform a ritual known as a "Civil Union" for you and your chosen mate.
Of course, it's not all as simple as that. But it should be. But, over time, we have allowed the government to slowly creep across that line which is meant to define that affore-mentioned seperation of church and state. And it is the opinion of this ranter that members of the clergy need to hook up with some really good lawyers and take back the territory that has been stolen from the church.
As for Civil Union: That is 100% a legal matter and serves only the purpose of defining the legal aspects of the rights of two people who have chosen to declare their co-habitation as something binding as per the letter of several pieces of legislation. ANYBODY should be able to have a Civil Union.
'Nuff said.
Now ... stop bickering and get your butts to work straightening this mess out.
Thanx for spending a little time with me.
I appreciate it.
Billy
I think your argument contains premises that ignore the majority of human communities and their history.
ReplyDeleteYour first premise of marriage as a spiritual union has not been a constant through history or across cultures.
Your second premise has a Christian bias. It also ignores the tradition of marriage within Christian history and ignores the vast majority of human history and cultures.
There is a marriage license issued by the state that allows the participants to partake in a civil marriage ceremony or a religious marriage ceremony that completes the process of making the union official (plus some filing requirements by the one officiating the ceremony.) What you are suggesting is that there is a civil union license issued by the state that allows the participants to partake in a civil marriage ceremony or a religious marriage ceremony that completes the process of making the union official. So in the end, both are civil unions and the only difference is the name of the marriage ceremony that is performed.
I doubt highly that the pro-marriage movement will embrace this line of thinking.