Why bother with marriage?
- Thread starter the
- Start date
Not being a gay, and personally preferring a relationship without bureocratic involvement from any government or such agency, my two cents may not be the most valuable ones out there.
Nevertheless: I think it's about the principle rather than about the concrete issue. If the law disallows certain people from marrying each other, it is implied that the relationship those people have is wrong, or at the very least less valuable than the relationships of others. Were I to be a gay in USA, I would be infuriated. Even being a straight guy in Finland I am, if not infuriated, at least sympathetic towards those affected by the prejudiced law.
Nevertheless: I think it's about the principle rather than about the concrete issue. If the law disallows certain people from marrying each other, it is implied that the relationship those people have is wrong, or at the very least less valuable than the relationships of others. Were I to be a gay in USA, I would be infuriated. Even being a straight guy in Finland I am, if not infuriated, at least sympathetic towards those affected by the prejudiced law.
legal rights? social validation? maybe they're just sick of being excluded from doing things straight couples do? take your pick
Gays cannot get married and ironically it is marriage that is gay- perhaps even gayer than the gays who want it.
As with many things in life, marriage is a recognized formal step, a public declaraton of intent...in this case joining two seperate lives into one journey as a couple. Aside from the legal agreement, it is a statement of trust in the other. That is the theory (from my perspective) and lots can get in the way of that. I think there are other valid ways to formalize this mutual agreement, but I do think there remains a certain power in the formal expression of this profound trust and union and choice, and I do think there is power in the public expression of the same. It is a norm...if someone finds another way to to the same, that's fine with me.
In some traditions there are also sacramental meanings that add additional layers, but these are all ultimately meant to reflect spiritual qualities that might impart a deeper understanding of the union...understandings that the couple would grow in over time, both together and seperately. I mention this only because the civil cermony and the ecclesial ceremony are co-mingled....they do, however, originate from two distinct systems. If a marriage is not viable for some reason, divorce dissolves the union from a civil law perspective, but a "declaration of nullity" is a whole other (and deeper) process that examines and seeks to understand the issues at work as part of the process of healing onesself and moving forward in life.
In some traditions there are also sacramental meanings that add additional layers, but these are all ultimately meant to reflect spiritual qualities that might impart a deeper understanding of the union...understandings that the couple would grow in over time, both together and seperately. I mention this only because the civil cermony and the ecclesial ceremony are co-mingled....they do, however, originate from two distinct systems. If a marriage is not viable for some reason, divorce dissolves the union from a civil law perspective, but a "declaration of nullity" is a whole other (and deeper) process that examines and seeks to understand the issues at work as part of the process of healing onesself and moving forward in life.
Here's my take.
I think gays and straight people should have the same legal rights. I also think that the easiest solution to the entire thing is to have the government recognize "civil unions" instead of marriages. While I think this is a very unfortunate effacing of America's Christian roots, sacrificing semantics should be the least of our worries on this issue.
The reason people (myself included) dislike the term "gay marriage" is because marriage is a religious thing. I also dislike people who talk about their "eight marriages" or whatever... a marriage is a lifelong commitment to cooperation, not some half-assed agreement to live in the same house and share money and have sex.
Anyway this train of thought is getting derailed, so I'll quit ranting now. In conclusion, get off my lawn you damn kids.
I think gays and straight people should have the same legal rights. I also think that the easiest solution to the entire thing is to have the government recognize "civil unions" instead of marriages. While I think this is a very unfortunate effacing of America's Christian roots, sacrificing semantics should be the least of our worries on this issue.
The reason people (myself included) dislike the term "gay marriage" is because marriage is a religious thing. I also dislike people who talk about their "eight marriages" or whatever... a marriage is a lifelong commitment to cooperation, not some half-assed agreement to live in the same house and share money and have sex.
Anyway this train of thought is getting derailed, so I'll quit ranting now. In conclusion, get off my lawn you damn kids.
I have a thread/speech deel on Christinaity and politics today, if you get a chance dig it up you might like it.
I believe all people should be afforded the same rights
I think change is occuring all the time
I occaisionally hear the odd person say something like: 'this is just how the world is', but this mindset is to deny: the achievments of the civil rights movement, increasing equality between men and women, increasing rights for gay people etc
Change happens, its happening right now and it begins with a change in perception. Once enough people change their perception then change will become legislated
These changes usually happen gradually and sometimes they need a bit of noise to happen
Governments are consistently further right, on the political spectrum, than the general public; this is to say that policy is often lagging behind public opinion
Perhaps the most powerful influence the people have is not through their vote but by voting with their feet
There does seem to be a trend occuring in my country of more and more people living together, but without actually getting married
If this trend continues then the government will have to find new ways of structuring marriage, if they want to try and preserve it
Any governments wanting to strengthen marriage due to its important place in the legal infrastructure, could attempt to enforce common law marriage, however I think the public has got so used to having freedom of choice over such issues, I think once people have a taste of freedom they won't give it up easily
Another way governments might try to bolster marriage is to legislate advantages for married couples such as tax breaks
It does seem to me though that the people are voting with their feet.....perhaps the writing is on the wall for marriage
I think change is occuring all the time
I occaisionally hear the odd person say something like: 'this is just how the world is', but this mindset is to deny: the achievments of the civil rights movement, increasing equality between men and women, increasing rights for gay people etc
Change happens, its happening right now and it begins with a change in perception. Once enough people change their perception then change will become legislated
These changes usually happen gradually and sometimes they need a bit of noise to happen
Governments are consistently further right, on the political spectrum, than the general public; this is to say that policy is often lagging behind public opinion
Perhaps the most powerful influence the people have is not through their vote but by voting with their feet
There does seem to be a trend occuring in my country of more and more people living together, but without actually getting married
If this trend continues then the government will have to find new ways of structuring marriage, if they want to try and preserve it
Any governments wanting to strengthen marriage due to its important place in the legal infrastructure, could attempt to enforce common law marriage, however I think the public has got so used to having freedom of choice over such issues, I think once people have a taste of freedom they won't give it up easily
Another way governments might try to bolster marriage is to legislate advantages for married couples such as tax breaks
It does seem to me though that the people are voting with their feet.....perhaps the writing is on the wall for marriage
Last edited:
The more and more i think about this, the more reaffirmed my belief that Narriage should not Government regulated, if gay couple want to marry and can find some one to do it then fine, that's their right. If al they want is to make a big ceremony over joining their taxes have at it.
Just don't expect to go Church and have it done.
Just don't expect to go Church and have it done.
It might be different in the US but in the UK the religious aspect is becoming increasinlgy irrelevant.
You can't take government out of the equation; we live in a system of private ownership which the government upholds.
I know some people have ideas about marriage being a special bond, but that is a subjective perception (people interprete the meaning of marriage differently)
What the state recognises marriage as, is a legally binding contract. This is to do with rights relating to property
When everything in the world becomes about property and ownership then the law must be involved in everything.....it follows
You can't take government out of the equation; we live in a system of private ownership which the government upholds.
I know some people have ideas about marriage being a special bond, but that is a subjective perception (people interprete the meaning of marriage differently)
What the state recognises marriage as, is a legally binding contract. This is to do with rights relating to property
When everything in the world becomes about property and ownership then the law must be involved in everything.....it follows
Last edited:
I imagine it has to do with legal benefits and equal rights. For some couples, those rights include a desire to be married, but for others it's simply the right to equal treatment under the law.
I doubt I'll be alive by this time, but I look forward to the day (at least in thought) when this will be a non-issue.
I doubt I'll be alive by this time, but I look forward to the day (at least in thought) when this will be a non-issue.
Last edited:
Why?
The rule of law protects peoples' rights. Without it, brutality reigns. At best, without the rule of law there is corruption, waste, and inequity. Things are fundamentally unjust and unfair, particularly for the poor and most vulnerable members of society. At worst, you have Somalia.
You have a lot more faith in mankind than I do if you think that the rule of law causes these problems. I've met too many sociopaths, psychopaths, and narcissists to deny the importance and benefits of law. Somalia is what happens without law. You might like it there if you think laws are a problem. Or, perhaps you'd prefer the "Dear Leader's" realm. That's another horrific example of lawlessness and corruption.