Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin
That was a single, significant point but not the thrust of my argument. My point, as I so cleverly summed up, is that it is time to separate the "right" to marry from the "rite" to marry. Neither need be destroyed - they just each need to be true to their own underlying structures: contracts = govt./laws; sacraments = churches/rites.
|
Agreed and understood. As far as the governmental aspects, anyone should be free to enter a contract with whoever they choose. But, the contract does not have to be a marriage contract. It can simply be a contract, like you said, depending upon its underlying structure: i.e.,
I want to put my friend on my health insurance plan, who is down on his luck and can't afford his own. So, we enter into a contract of health insurance. No prerequisites required, it's completely up to me to decide.
In this example, it solves, or at least greatly helps, a lot of issues for everyone. First of all, gays could put their partners on their health insurance, straight singles could put their friends on their health insurance policy (which would help a lot of young college kids who a lot of times do not have health insurance policies of their own,) and the need for the government to step in and either subsidize health insurance or create a national health insurance policy would be greatly reduced. Also, those who are against gay marriage would not have to feel that they have to honor something that is against their beliefs, so everybody wins. I'm sure it's not that easy, but then again, maybe it is?
The big problem is, this argument has snow balled into something completely different from where it started out as. In the beginning, it was about gays being able to have the same marriage benefits as straight people. Then, it snow balled into gay marriage should be legally recognized by all - the heck with your personal values and beliefs. So, it turns into you're either going against your Christian or Muslim beliefs, or either just your beliefs in general, if you support gay marriage, and your called a bigot and a hater if you stand up for your beliefs. And all the while, no matter which way the government sides, there would still be discrimination of the singles out there who want access to the same rights.
That is why, the "rites" should be completely separated from the government completely. The "rights" should be rights held by
all people, regardless of prerequisite. If I vote for the ban on same-sex marriage, I'm a bigot according to NC_Skins. However, if I go against my beliefs and I vote against it, then I'm forced into legally recognizing something as valid, and no matter what anybody says, your vote is an endorsement. Either way I vote, it's still discriminating against a group of people (singles for instance). In my eyes, as long as I feel God is endorsing my marriage, I could care less what the government thinks. Keep in mind, if we truly live in a free world, then
we own the government, not the other way around. Get marriage out of the hands of the government, and put it back into the hands of the people!