| 12 March 2008
...Like a Horse and Carriage
How to rescue marriage from the government
By Joe Holmes
Marriage is one of the most important social institutions. It is the cornerstone of the family unit; it binds people together in spiritual, practical, and legal ways. There is overwhelming statistical evidence that children who grow up in a two-parent household are more likely to succeed in life and less likely to get divorced later in life. Thus, it seems logical that state-sponsored acknowledgment of such a valuable institution exists. However, legal and spiritual commitment to another person is also arguably the most personal decision an individual can make. As such, while the state should acknowledge certain legal rights between married parties, it should also allow individuals to define marriage for themselves, given the wide variety of religious and moral opinions people hold.
Marriage has its roots in religion. Indeed, nearly all world religions have endorsed the notion of a loving and monogamous relationship as being a vital component to spiritual fulfillment. Despite this compelling reason to get married, the state should not be involved in marriage for the sake of spiritual fulfillment. We offer certain legal privileges and rights to married individuals for social and practical reasons, not spiritual or religious ones. Coupled with the essential notion of separation of Church and State, I believe the only rational policy is that the state’s conception of marriage should be entirely divorced of its religious connotation and history.
This brings us to the most contentious element of marriage today – whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to marry under state and/or federal law. In my opinion, disallowing gay individuals to marry violates the values of equality and justice that are so very essential to our American existence. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that no state shall “deny to any person the equal protections of the laws.” And while all the social conservatives will say, “this was clearly not what the Fourteenth Amendment was about,” I will respond by saying that this was the same mentality that allowed anti-miscegenation and separate but equal policies to persist for nearly a century after the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified. The laws of every state allow heterosexual couples to marry – however, only one state, Massachusetts, allows homosexuals to marry. A number of states have legal unions for same-sex couples, but refuse to name these relationships as “marriage.” This solution, granting same sex couples similar rights but refusing to grant truly equal treatment to gay couples, is in many ways a slap in the face. Additionally, these protected legal privileges are only enforceable in the granting state and do not carry any weight outside of the state where the privileges were granted.
I believe that having a two-tiered system of partnership rights – one for gay couples and one for straight couples – offends fundamental notions of fairness and equality. The only two options are: having civil union for all couples and allowing “marriage” to retain its religious meaning only outside of the state or classify both heterosexual and homosexual partnerships as marriage in the eyes of the state. The government cannot discriminate against homosexuals in such a fundamental way. However, religious organizations should not be forced to recognize unions that they believe to be immoral or against their teachings. As a result, the most workable solution may be to abandon the notion of “marriage” as defined by the state and to adopt a universal system of domestic partnership rights for homosexuals and heterosexuals couples alike. Marriage is a loaded term when we use it in the context of the gay marriage debate. Thus, the most effective way of preserving equality and fairness while also allowing people to hold different spiritual and religious opinions may be to abandon the term “marriage” as a state sanctioned institution and substitute in its place domestic partnerships. If a couple wants to get “married” that should be the exclusive purview of their religious organization. The state should not be in the business of discriminating or deciding which couples are morally or socially acceptable and which are not.
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Mark
said:
 |
... I disagree. The state has an interest in heterosexual "partnerships", i.e., marriage, because the typical or potential result of that union is the foundation of all societies: the human person. The result of h**osexual relations is not significant to society (unless the biological results are diseases or public health threats). Thus, marriage has always had, in almost all societies, a privileged status. It was never just a simple confirmation of a man's and woman's feelings for each other or their decision to live together, which is what so-called "gay marriage" is or would be. Furthermore, the commonly accepted definition of marriage (until very recently) has been between one man and one woman. If we are to say that the sex of either partner is no longer a part of that definition, why stop there? If my THREE gay lovers and I want to marry or if I want to marry my dog, why are you not validating my feelings? Why is my partnership not privileged in the same way as other partnerships? Just because I chose to have more partners than you think a marriage should have? Or because you cannot accept my partnership with a member of another species? The logic of gay "marriage" leaves only an arbitrary stopping point for this kind of discussion. I respectfully ask you to reconsider your support for the debasing of the traditional definition of marriage. By logical extension, arguing for gay marriage is also arguing that practically anyone should be able to marry any other person, persons or even non-persons, without any impediment. |
ugg coquette clearance
said:
 |
... Great job,just as i think,i like it!I am a cheap ugg boots seller specialized in retailing and wholesaling ugg boots,ugg sale,cardy ugg boots, ugg elsey boot,ugg bailey button,ugg broome boots, ugg highkoo boots,all uggs are high quality and low price,welcome to visit |
blue camo uggs
said:
|
... YS031A3 No man is the whole of himself; his friends are the rest of him.Treat other ugg australia boots people as you hope they will treat you.Experience more than sufficiently teaches that men govern nothing with more difficult than their ugg tall boots tongues.The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes.The greater the ugg cardy boot power, the more dangerous the abuse.If you fight for yourself, only you can win; when you fight for your marriage, you both win.When you want knowledge like you want air under water then you will get it.Behavior is a mirror in which every one shows his ugg bootsimage. There is something that is much more scarce, something rarer than ability. It is the ability to recognize. The more we do, the more we can do uggs argyle knit; the more busy we are, the more leisure we have.A man, like a watch, is to be valued by this manner of going. |
ed hardy sale
said:
 |
... The tragedy of the world is that those who are imaginative have but slight ed hardy clothing experience, and those who are experienced have feeble imagination.The ed hardy hoodies way to win an atomic war is to make certain it never starts.ed hardy shirts Experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want. To make a lasting marriagewe have to overcome self-centeredness.All I am, or can be, I owe to my angel mother.Experience without learning is better than learning without experience.Experience keeps a dear ed hardy coats school, yet fools will learn in no other.Follow your own course, and let moncler jackets people talk.If you would have a thing well done, you must do it yourself.Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action. Our moncler online store deeds determine us, much as we determine our deeds.When a man is wrapped up in himself he makes a pretty little package.The secret of being miserable is to have leisure to bother about whether you are happy or not.Optimists always picture themselves accomplishing their goals. |
manolo blahnik
said:
 |
... YS0313RAll happy families are like one another; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own christian louboutin uk way.Friendship is both a source of pleasure and a component of good discount louboutin shoes health.If you don’t learn to think when you are young, you may never learn christian louboutin boots.Whoever is in a hurry shows that the thing he is about is too big for him.It takes a lot of christian louboutin pumps thought and effort and downright determination to be agreeable.When work is a pleasure, life is joy! When work is duty, life is slavery.It is no use doing what you like; you have got to like what you do.A man is called selfish, not pursuing his own good, but neglecting his neighbour’s.One thorn of experience is worth a whole louboutin sale wilderness of warning. Throughout life, we rely on small groups of people for love, admiration, respect, moral support and help. |
nike air max
said:
 |
... http://www.myairmaxstore.com Red is put into use on areas such as the lace holders, Air Max unit,Air Max Skyline Nike Air Max Ltd 2 and the tongue label. Nike Air Max 360 The outsole is done up in black, leaving the rest of the sneaker for two shades of grey. With so much success from the 2009 release of Nike Air Max Ltd 2 the Nike Air Max 1 in its Varsity Red colorway, Nike decided to release the Varsity Blue colorway just in time for the summer months. Nike Air Classic As some of you may remember, this Nike Air Max 1 Varsity Blue colorway was only released overseas back in 2009. Nike Air Griffey Max 1 |
UGG ムートンブーツ
said:
 |
... http://www.ugg6.com This is really a fascinating blog, lots of stuff that I can get into. One thing I just want to say is that your Blog is so perfect! efox. |
Chanel Outlet
said:
 |
... I do not even knI do not even know I'm here to the end, but I think this article is very good.Gently put your mouse to move the Chanel Outlet and you will have unexpected gains.This is a woman's needs.The perfect fashion casual waiting for you!Ken will be such a beautiful thing let's toast cheers! I very much agree with this view, individuals need to share the knowledge we have gained for themselves! |
Mulberry Outlet
said:
|
... Thank you for letting me came to the home of so holy and great blog! Other experts in this field do not notice this. You should continue your writing.I believe you have a huge harvest! Many people likely will share your writing. Bottoms up! |
