If marriage is a religious institution...

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by atlasshrugged, Aug 2, 2012.

  1. theDoctorisIn
    Online

    theDoctorisIn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2009
    Messages:
    32,973
    Thanks Received:
    6,405
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    East, but still West
    Ratings:
    +14,414
    There was nothing "religious" about my parent's marriage, or my aunt and uncles.

    They were performed by a member of the Society for Ethical Culture. Under your definition, does that qualify as a "marriage"?

    The Society for Ethical Culture are more than happy to marry two people of the same sex, yet it's not recognized by the government.

    Under your plan, would a same sex marriage performed by a member of the Society for Ethical Culture be considered a "marriage"?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Luddly Neddite
    Offline

    Luddly Neddite Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    61,751
    Thanks Received:
    9,453
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +26,598
    Its not and never has been. Its a civil contract and always has been. If you want to stand in a church to make this civil pact, go for it, but no, it has nothing at all to do with religion.

    If it did, you would not be able to get married in front of a JP or in the local courthouse.

    Think it through.
     
  3. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    15,807
    Thanks Received:
    2,319
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +5,356
    This is an argument in semantics and rather pointless. I don’t care what the state calls ist quite frankly and changing what they call it benefits nothing what so ever, Simply make the government part of the contract equal. That’s all there is to it. Using different terminology does nothing and those that oppose gay marriage are not going to jump on the bandwagon because you changed the term. The reality is that people are opposed to the state recognizing the union of a gay couple and giving them incentives to be in a relationship. It is not the term that so many people are upset about no matter what hogwash they say.
     
  4. Luddly Neddite
    Offline

    Luddly Neddite Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2011
    Messages:
    61,751
    Thanks Received:
    9,453
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +26,598
    You could not be more incorrect.

    The difference between a church sanctioned union and a civil contract are quite simply, enormous.

    I hope you will say why you believe otherwise.
     
  5. whitehall
    Offline

    whitehall Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    32,244
    Thanks Received:
    5,328
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    Western Va.
    Ratings:
    +16,067
    Here's a quote from another religious leader. "The only reason Obama was elected is because of the Civil Rights movement" I was a leader in the Civil Rights struggle and I didn't walk one foot or one mile to make sure a man could marry a man and a woman could marry a woman".
     
  6. Sky Dancer
    Offline

    Sky Dancer BANNED

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2009
    Messages:
    19,307
    Thanks Received:
    1,159
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1,167
    Marriage is completely made up. It started by a couple making their own vows and just being with each other. Then it progressed to the couple "announcing" their commitment to community and eventually to Church.

    Since Church likes to muscle in on every aspect of life, some religions made religious ceremonies for marriage, and eventually legal aspects demanded civil law cover marriage too.

    Marriage is NOT a religious institution. It is a commitment between two adults to make a family intentionally, to bind to one another as kin.
     
  7. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    15,807
    Thanks Received:
    2,319
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +5,356
    ?

    ??
    Where did you get any of that from what I posted?

    The sematic and pointless argument lies in trying to call church marriage, marriage and changing the state marriage to civil union. What’s the point, the contract is the same no matter what you want to call it. There is nothing gained by changing the names of things.

    I am not comparing the state act to the church act, they have nothing to do with each other.
     
  8. sfcalifornia
    Offline

    sfcalifornia Silver Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,276
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +496
    What you are failing to understand is that whether you get married by a religious institution or the government, you have to register your union with the government in order to take advantage of the benefits offered by the government. The government only recognizes hetero unions at the moment. The LGBT community is fighting to have same-sex unions recognized also. THAT is the issue here. Not whether it's called a marriage or a civil union.

    The whole debate about what it is called is stupid. Nobody cares (except certain religions) what it is called. There are churches which have been marrying same-sex couples for decades. I have been to plenty of these weddings. They are Episcopalian, Methodist and even some Catholic weddings. You can argue about whether these are "real" religions on some other thread. The point is, in the government's eyes, all religious institutions are created equal and if they call it marriage, so be it. The Catholic church is no more a religion than the Westboro church in the eyes of the government. A marriage by any institution is the same. Gay people aren't fighting to have churches marry them. Gay people are fighting to have the government recognize their marriages.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. jillian
    Online

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    73,764
    Thanks Received:
    13,488
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +25,350
    however only those who have a religion would be able to say they are "married".

    i'd say that in and of itself is violative of the equal protection clause.... all other issues aside.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. syrenn
    Offline

    syrenn BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    47,839
    Thanks Received:
    10,386
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +10,406


    That is a hard concept for many to graps.
     

Share This Page