The Marriage Issue « Christian in College

The Marriage Issue

November 9, 2009 at 7:03 am | In Life Issues | 17 Comments
Tags: civil union, civil unions, gay marriage, marriage, Proposition 8

The solution on marriage is simple. The government has nothing to do with marriage. If the government wants for legal or tax reasons, they can give civil unions and these equal rights and access to such a union is open to any couple. A marriage ceremony is done by the particular church for the faithful and no church is made to marry anyone they don’t want to. If a person with no religious affiliation wants to have a ceremony, they can. “Marriage” is between the couple and their faith (or lack thereof) and isn’t a legal issue at all.

What do you think?

- Justin
Are you really living?

17 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Good idea. Will never happen.

“and no church is made to marry anyone they don’t want to”

I don’t think this is the case regardless of what happens with the law.

Comment by morsec0de — November 9, 2009 #
I agree completely. I dont think the government has any business deciding which kinds of families are valid and which are not.

Comment by Myles — November 9, 2009 #
morsecode, I don’t think churches are currently made to marry anybody right now either. I’m just saying that becomes more of a mute point to the people who do argue that case.

I believe that marriage is, among other qualifications, only for two opposite sex people. Under my plan equal rights would be granted to everyone (the governments job). As far as recognizing a “marriage” as legitimate, it would no longer be up to the states or any level of government – It is up to each individual as to whether or not they think that marriage is legitimate. If I see a couple claiming to be married, I don’t have to check the government to see if they are. I just see if that couple matches how I define marriage.

Comment by Justin — November 9, 2009 #
Many states especially the western states have common law. Any couple that lives together and presents themselves as married for one year is considered “common law” marriage. That could apply in the same sex issue.

I’ve felt that the government could have a civil union. Not the same as marriage. Marriage would be reserved for religious groups.

I have read that some countries I believe France is one require a civil ceremony to make a marriage legal. If a couple wishes to also have a religious service that is also permissible.

While I may not approve of same sex unions. I would not be opposed to civil unions. Just leave marriage alone for church. Even if our country went to a system that required a civil service to have a legal marriage. Those who wanted a religious ceremony would still have one.

Comment by TheDeeZone — November 10, 2009 #
Actually DeeZone there is no state in the union that recognizes same sex common law marriages except Iowa, where the law is untested.

Comment by Myles — November 10, 2009 #
I also feel the need to point out that some religions do approve of same sex marriage such as most kinds of Wicca.

Comment by Myles — November 10, 2009 #
Myles,

Read my comment. Never said there was a state that recognized a same sex union. I said could in all 3 instances.

Comment by TheDeeZone — November 10, 2009 #
I thought you were saying that same sex couples could try to have our rights recognized via common law marriage. I misunderstood.

You two seem to both feel that same sex couples should have some legal recognition so I am interested in how you guys vote regarding this issue, if you have voted on it.

Comment by Myles — November 10, 2009 #
Justin,
You are right on the ticket.
“Marriage” is not an institution of “the State” but an institution of “the Church.”
The State sees all domestic unions between tweo people the same, they call it civil union. the only other union recongnized by “the State” would be business mergers, or other forms of public/Private trade union, or of cource the labor union (lobiests).

I am glad to see such bold sounding of the truth.

Dee, I don’t know much about other states but Oregon has a 7 year common law union. However a common law union is much easier to disolve if the “couple” wanted to part ways. (they just need to agree to devide their stuff and go)
In the same kind Oregon has a 7 year squater law: If you inhabited land undisturbed and uncontracted you have a claim after 7 years (the catch is you need proof you had unintrupted occupation of the land.

Myles,
What rights are not recongnized?
I see no added rights in a civil union (even marriage) than for indivisuals. Even parential rights (a streach in the term rights) are upheld if the parent is listed on the birth certificate.

What rights are being denied citizens in a union unrecongnized by “the State?”

Well God bless you all,
Ditchu

Comment by ditchu — November 10, 2009 #
Myles,

I never said that I felt that same sex couples should have rights recognized. I merely respond to Justin’s comment.

Ditchu,
Having lived in a common law state it is 1 yr and not as easy to dissolve a common law marrriage as you might think. Depends on the people.

Comment by TheDeeZone — November 11, 2009 #
Ditchu, for one a married heterosexual couple would be considered a family member by a hospital and be granted visitation rights whereas a same sex couple would not.

Comment by Myles — November 11, 2009 #
Myles,
Private hospitals can specify any regulations of classificans they want with regards to visitation.
Public Hospitals (usually county) must adhear to the letter of the Law when it comes to their polocies like visitation. They must respect a civil union (either hetrosexual or homosexual) as family.
If they would deny visitation for a sam sex couple without without an official license of civil union they must deny visitation for a “married hetrosexual couple” without an official license of civil union (commonly called a legalized marriage certificate).

The civil union license is key to proving spousalship.

Here’s the rub: even a Public Hospital can deny visitation if there is a potential health risk.

Dee,
Yah, It really does depend on the people…

God bless you all,
-D

Comment by ditchu — November 11, 2009 #
Ditchu not every jurisdiction recognizes same sex civil unions. I would be completely fine with civil unions that granted the same rights as marriage but unfortunately this isnt the case yet.

Comment by Myles — November 11, 2009 #
Myles,
Then this is what you should propose and support: a fair definition of Civil Union. What I dislike is the push for “same sex mariages” where there already exists a general definition of Civil Union. And the thinking that Mariage is a right. If it were a right then why do we need a court representitive to officiate a license for leagalizing such a union?

I think we as a Nation should take the term Mariage out of “the State’s” hands (leaving leagalized civil union to them) and place the legal term Mariage as a religous (faith based) institution.

God bless,
-D

Comment by ditchu — November 11, 2009 #
P.S. the Legalized form of Mariage is a Civil Union. there is no differance between a C.U for same sex or differing sex.
If you have a legalized C.U. you hold the same priviledges as anyone else with a legalized C.U. Your sexual orientation in a non factor at that point.

Comment by ditchu — November 11, 2009 #
This is all being said in possible theory – not how it currently stands.

Comment by Justin — November 11, 2009 #
Exactly Justin, this is a great idea but as of right now me and my life partner have no legal recognition of our relationship.

Comment by Myles — November 13, 2009 #