saden1
02-15-2012, 01:11 PM
I got no problem with it. Except: It shouldn't be called "marriage" not for hetero or homo sexuals. It's a contract pure and simple. Although originally called a marriage contract that term is outdated and has created an unneccesary blurring of the lines between church and state (for example: when he performs a marriage, completes and signs the marriage license, my priest signs as an officer of the State of Maryland).
Constitutional equal protection, to me, requires that anyone entering into the same promises and obligations associated with two people entering into a permanent shared living arrangement and that have been traditionally known as a "marriage contract" should receive the same benefits, under the law, as anyone else. You make the same legally binding promises, accept the same legally binding obligations, you get the same benefits and penalties as everyone else. Rename it a civil union contract, have the legal obligations set out (i.e. Party A promises to do x, y & z, Party B promises likewise) and have it properly witnessed and notorized by a court official.
If your church doesn't want to perform the sacrament of marriage, fine. The state shouldn't have any say in that. It is then up to you whether to belong to that religious institution or not. Further, I would have no problem with the State saying "if, as part of a religious ceremony, the parties agree to x, y, & z, and proof of that is provided to the appropriate State official, then no separate civil form is required to evidence the civil union contract". Church's would then be free to incorporate the State legal requirements into their sacramental services. If they chose not to do so, then participants simply have to fill out the forms at city hall.
Give unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's, give unto God that which is God's.
You're just playing word games. Over time, the roles of men and women within marriage have changed. Social views on multiple wives, interracial relations, and divorce have changed. Legal rules regulating everything from the treatment of children and division of property to the grounds for divorce have changed. If you want to qualify and classify what marriage is that is your prerogative, just don't expect us not to keep evolving and keep it moving.
Constitutional equal protection, to me, requires that anyone entering into the same promises and obligations associated with two people entering into a permanent shared living arrangement and that have been traditionally known as a "marriage contract" should receive the same benefits, under the law, as anyone else. You make the same legally binding promises, accept the same legally binding obligations, you get the same benefits and penalties as everyone else. Rename it a civil union contract, have the legal obligations set out (i.e. Party A promises to do x, y & z, Party B promises likewise) and have it properly witnessed and notorized by a court official.
If your church doesn't want to perform the sacrament of marriage, fine. The state shouldn't have any say in that. It is then up to you whether to belong to that religious institution or not. Further, I would have no problem with the State saying "if, as part of a religious ceremony, the parties agree to x, y, & z, and proof of that is provided to the appropriate State official, then no separate civil form is required to evidence the civil union contract". Church's would then be free to incorporate the State legal requirements into their sacramental services. If they chose not to do so, then participants simply have to fill out the forms at city hall.
Give unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar's, give unto God that which is God's.
You're just playing word games. Over time, the roles of men and women within marriage have changed. Social views on multiple wives, interracial relations, and divorce have changed. Legal rules regulating everything from the treatment of children and division of property to the grounds for divorce have changed. If you want to qualify and classify what marriage is that is your prerogative, just don't expect us not to keep evolving and keep it moving.