Posted on 03/19/2013 3:23:54 AM PDT by Reaganite Republican
I guess I missed that enumerated power in the constitution...can you point that out to me?
Sure, we can say that marriage is a church matter and not a government matter, but that really becomes the equivalent of saying "There isn't going to be much marriage in our future, because so many people have given up on religion". And so you just have people milling about having babies with various people.
We have a problem, and I'm not sure that giving up a legal (government) approach makes sense.
I agree with the marriage arguement that a stable relationship benefits the state, however these arguements don’t include the children of this stable relationship, which is why marriage entered the tax code in the first place.
Children in a stable father-mother household grow up to provide tax revenue back to the state, so it is an “investment” by the state to give tax breaks to encourage marriage and family. That is why communists and Socialist-Democrats want to break that bond and structure to put government as the father figure in single-mother homes. Majority of convicts in prison come from single-family homes.
What stops 3 men from being married?
There are many legal issues involved in marriage. The government has to be able to tell who is married and who isn’t.
There is no support in the Bible for church involvement in marriage. From the beginning it was always between the couple and God with community and family sanctions and support.
Ding, Ding, Ding! Give mdmathis6 a prize for nailing this issue. Aside from a religious/moral argument, there is an overwhelming secular basis for a State to support heterosexul marriage.
Woops, mean’t broken arrow responding to mdmathis6
I’m totally against gay partners adopting children. The government decides who can adopt. If you are deemed too old, they won’t let you adopt, but two gays are okay in many states.
Amen
I really don’t think I can keep two people from living together -or doing whatever they’re into- SO if they want to pay their taxes and visit the other one in hospital, I have no reason to care.
I don’t have to respect what they’re doing or call it ‘marriage’ if I don’t want to... that’s all I ask
Agreed in full
I am adopted from a Catholic home, so privatization of adoption services is A OK with me
Thanks, and driven by a sense of urgency to gain power as rapidly as possible in 2014 and 2016
You have to choose your fights they say
The article is correct on a very simple basis- the government obviously cannot be trusted to be in charge of marriage because it can then be taken over by those who are out to destroy it.
Nobody should ever fool themselves into thinking that you will always control the levers of power. Hence you should be damned careful with what those levers can do.
The Left has worked for 50+ years to destroy the institution of marriage, and will continue to do so as long as it remains in the public sphere.
My law professor described this marriage ceremony from the early middle ages.
“Remember, this was a time where almost nobody could read or write. So, to this ceremony they invited all the children in the town and had a big feast. They held the marriage on the groom’s land. Then the priest, or mayor, whomever they had who was the most important man they could get, would reach down and take a piece of dirt from the groom’s land and smear it on the bride’s face. Then, and this is the important part, they beat the hell out of all the children. This was to mark the event in the children’s memory. Those children would forever carry the feast and the marriage in their minds so that during the lives of the groom’s children there would be no doubt as to the children’s inheritance rights.”
The point was this is where inheritance law came from. But the idea was, the marriage was conducted by the most important individual the groom could find. As the church has faded from life the government has become the most important thing in our lives. We need to reverse this and I agree with the author. Get government and tax laws and insurance laws out of marriage.
If the spouse is to be covered by insurance, then that should be between the insured and his insurance company.
Its been my opinion for a long time.
Why do you need a license if the action is considered illegal without a license?
There was a time when cohabitating was illegal, it no longer is. So why would you get a government license?
You cannot prevent people from stating that they are married or that they are a dog for that matter.
There are few benefits to getting a government license, in fact, there are many penalities. It would be better to take the gigantic tax savings and pay a small amount for a power of attorney.
Get married in the church and tell the government to go fly a kite.
“After gay marriage is going to come polygamy. It’s going to be a constant irritant.”
BINGO!
We need to get rid of these issue politically, it will NEVER end, and it will NEVER help us... just like we should probably quit doing TV debates unless they stop it with the ‘progressive’ moderators...
By the way, whoever wrote the article is a heretic.
not as long as there is money to be made and elections to be won
common sense and logic cannot overcome political inertia
It is up to churches, mine of course would never consider such a thing.
What I am for is making the term ‘marriage’ irrelevant to government, BF- take it out of the tax code and such.
I am sick of gay issues and they never are going to help our party, going along with the left doesn’t’ help and fighting it doesn’t really help.
The government will only recognize a legal household, and only for the simplest of things. Government also needs to be out of the adoption business and all such things, I was adopted from a Catholic childrens’ home, the kind that would never have used me in a cruel social experiment with some gay couple... I can’t trust gov’t to do the right thing like that , NO way
With that out of gov’ts hands, they don’t need to care who calls themselves married anymore, it will have no legal significance whatsoever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.