What Should Marriage Be?

[Mare Tranquillity]

Here's my take: the state should butt out of marriage. Two people who get married should set their own terms as to what it means. This will devolve around their particular religious or cultural traditions. Like wise, the special privileges given to married people at the expense of single people should be abolished.

So would you allow all consenting adults the right to marry?

 

[numinus]

Very reasonable answer, and one that I agree with in principal. I would venture a guess this might include the unthinkable to several on this board. That it would not disallow two to marry of the same gender.

Marriage, family and the rights of children are all in the universal declaration of human rights and the un convention on the rights of children -- the principles of which the US GOVERNMENT IS OBLIGED TO PROTECT AND UPHOLD WITH LEGISLATION, if necessary.

How can the government butt out of human rights, eh?

Unbelieveable!

 

[Pandora]

My thought was that if marriage was about love and committment that the government could oversee it adequately since the churches have made it about a bunch of things that have nothing to do with love or committment..

If your thoughts are that marriage is about love and commitment then why would anyone need to over see it at all? A church? A judge? or a government? What help can your government give you in this matter? Unless…. you’re talking about benefits? But if you really are not talking about something you can get from the government then I really don’t see why anyone on this planet would WANT the government in their business. The best way to screw any social matter up is involve the government.

I note that you begin human history with the advent of Christianity, when in reality people have been sharing committed relationships since there were people. Especially among the indigenous peoples there have been many kinds of "marriages" that allowed all people to live with dignity and love as they saw fit without the religious opprobrium of organized churches..

I said the oldest known writing I know of on the matter. I would have been happy to put a Buddhist old writings, or a sun worshipers old writings anyone even a satanic worshiping cults if it was older than the quote I did give. If you know of an older written history of marriages I would love to learn it. Please post for me if you have one.

I guess that with more than 3500 sects of Christians and who knows how many sects of other religions, it might make sense to have the government set the legal standards for marriage instead of allowing all the warring religious factions to fight over control.

Do you mean Christians are against gay marriage? I don’t know what the hang up is. All they have to do is get married by any rouge preacher minister pastor legally change their name to what ever the other persons name is, write them in their will, make eachother the others power of attorney if you need want to. Then be married. No one can stop them from doing it. But nothing they do can force other people to accept the relationship. If the government ran marriage and said all gay marriages are legal it STILL wouldn’t make people accept it.

You can tell me the sky is green and the grass is blue all day and all night. You can get congress to pass a law saying the sky is green and the grass is blue and that’s that but I STILL will laugh and know better. And so will others. The government cant make people like something they don’t like, accept something they won’t accept.

It actually makes me physically ill when I hear people talk about their government like its some type of GOD or higher power.


The government is here to serve us, we are NOT here to serve the government

 

[vyo476]

Here's my take: the state should butt out of marriage. Two people who get married should set their own terms as to what it means. This will devolve around their particular religious or cultural traditions. Like wise, the special privileges given to married people at the expense of single people should be abolished.

Simple and effective. I like it.

 

[Pandora]

Why would you start human history with the advent of writing? .

Why wouldn’t I start human history with the oldest known writings on a topic?
Do you know of a better way to find out the oldest known practice of a particular thing?

There are more than 1049 legal rights and privileges reserved for married people in US Law. I have a copy of the laws if anyone is interested. .

I don’t think anyone should have special rights. I would rather the rights given to married couples were taken away.

My dream is the equality guaranteed in the US Constitution, I am not asking for any right or privilege that I would deny to anyone else.

When the constitution was written the government didn’t control marriage and they would all roll over in their graves if they knew what the government they created has slimed into. They didn’t believe in big government, nanny states or any of the things people seem to want today.

 

[vyo476]

There are more than 1049 legal rights and privileges reserved for married people in US Law. I have a copy of the laws if anyone is interested.

I'm very interested. My email is (creatively enough) vyo476@yahoo.com .

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

If your thoughts are that marriage is about love and commitment then why would anyone need to over see it at all? A church? A judge? or a government? What help can your government give you in this matter? Unless…. you’re talking about benefits? But if you really are not talking about something you can get from the government then I really don’t see why anyone on this planet would WANT the government in their business. The best way to screw any social matter up is involve the government.

Because of the legal rights that are attendent thereto in US Law, if all those laws were repealed, then you would be correct and government could be left out of it entirely.

I said the oldest known writing I know of on the matter. I would have been happy to put a Buddhist old writings, or a sun worshipers old writings anyone even a satanic worshiping cults if it was older than the quote I did give. If you know of an older written history of marriages I would love to learn it. Please post for me if you have one.

I asked why you were only going back to "written" history, people existed and had marriages long before they had writing.

Do you mean Christians are against gay marriage? I don’t know what the hang up is. All they have to do is get married by any rouge preacher minister pastor legally change their name to what ever the other persons name is, write them in their will, make eachother the others power of attorney if you need want to. Then be married. No one can stop them from doing it. But nothing they do can force other people to accept the relationship. If the government ran marriage and said all gay marriages are legal it STILL wouldn’t make people accept it.

It's the legal rights as I mentioned before, legally married people get a slew of perks under US law--rights and privileges denied to all other people--and only the government can administer those laws.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

When the constitution was written the government didn’t control marriage and they would all roll over in their graves if they knew what the government they created has slimed into. They didn’t believe in big government, nanny states or any of the things people seem to want today.

So what? Those people are dead and it's a new day, they'd roll over in their graves at internet pornography too--are you saying THAT'S bad too?

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

I'm very interested. My email is (creatively enough) vyo476@yahoo.com .

I sent them to you at the email address above. Let me know if the email is too large to deliver and you don't get it, I'll break it down into several 5 page emails.

 

[Libsmasher]

Very reasonable answer, and one that I agree with in principal. I would venture a guess this might include the unthinkable to several on this board. That it would not disallow two to marry of the same gender.

I don't give a damn what gays do as long as they don't ask for special privileges, and keep out of everyone else's face. If farmer Bob wants to marry his horse, fine with me.

 

[Libsmasher]

So would you allow all consenting adults the right to marry?

All sane consenting adults - sure, no problem.

 

[Pandora]

Because of the legal rights that are attendent thereto in US Law, if all those laws were repealed, then you would be correct and government could be left out of it entirely..

We agree then. Lets repeal the laws so no one has rights when being married. but we have to take away the wierd fee's too. like the licence, No need for that.

I asked why you were only going back to "written" history, people existed and had marriages long before they had writing..

give me an older example that can be proven . I dont know how you could do it? A cave picture of a couple with a wedding dress on ? without writing we dont know what they were thinking, doing or their social habbits.

It's the legal rights as I mentioned before, legally married people get a slew of perks under US law--rights and privileges denied to all other people--and only the government can administer those laws.

if its about perks then lets get rid of the perks but if its about love and commitment then people like that dont need perks or government validation

 

[Pandora]

So what? Those people are dead and it's a new day, they'd roll over in their graves at internet pornography too--are you saying THAT'S bad too?

Actually... Yes

I do think its bad. I think its one of the reason our moral standards have decade to sub human. Its unreal to me to see the decay of the human beings, as though Darwin were backwards. its more like DE volving.

but I have been "brainwashed: by the live and let live crowd that as long as they are not doing rape or child porn, let the porn happen and let the poeple doing it worry about the decay of their souls.

 

[Bunz]

I don't give a damn what gays do as long as they don't ask for special privileges, and keep out of everyone else's face. If farmer Bob wants to marry his horse, fine with me.

Well that is a breath of fresh air, the most liberal post in the entire thread.

 

[numinus]

You still can't read can you? I asked for opinions, you have a lot of them so I figured you'd be here bleating like a sheep--and sure enough, here you are. Read the OP, and try again.

Do give yourself a break from self-humiliation.

Without any RATIONAL PURPOSE, something you haven't provided so far, your opinion is nothing more than flights of fancy.