Replies

The religion issue is irrelevant. Priests are generally notary pulblics who execute the marriage license. No government agency recognizes a "religious" ceremony.

The institution of marriage is the model we use to raise children. If government is removed from marriage, then government must be removed from all issues of all forms of property since marriage follows inheritances and property interests.

If you follow Dean's statement. You "observations" are exactly in line with is view point. The democrats would like nothing more than to make no marriage recognized ONLY civil unions are recognized under the law.

Homosexuals have no special right to marry. They can execute the same legal documents an unmarried couple can choose to do. This whole judgement is based on the flawed notion that marriage is just about love.

'The religion issue is irrelevant. Priests are generally notary pulblics who execute the marriage license. No government agency recognizes a "religious" ceremony.'

My feelings precisely. So why have I heard so many people, during the debates over same-sex marriage, claim that marriage is a religious institution? Why does Pres. Bush refer to it as "sacred," wishing to preserve its "sanctity," if this is not in the religious sense?

In any case, only the *civil* part of marriage is recognized under the law as things stand now; the law doesn't care which supernatural entity you have called upon to bless the civil contract, and, as you correctly point out, the religious part alone doesn't qualify.

I think we are more in agreement than disagreement here.

This whole judgement is based on the flawed notion that marriage is just about love.

Actually, the whole issue is based on the decades long plan of homosexuals and their supporters to destroy the fabric of civilization so that they can feel comfortable in a sexual mayhem. I'm starting to think that the socialists/marxists are on the same page, as a morally destroyed society soon becomes totalitarian, since no one can control themselves any more, the government must step in.

Priests are generally notary publics who execute the marriage license. No government agency recognizes a "religious" ceremony.

Pastors and priests are witnesses, not notaries, to the marriage covenant that is executed between the husband and wife and God. That's why the most a pastor does is "pronounce" the two husband and wife. He doesn't make them so. They do, and what they start in the ceremony they must subsequently consummate in order to complete. So while this is such thing as a religious wedding ceremony that the government recognizes, the pastor doesn't marry anyone.

The institution of marriage is the model we use to raise children.

Parents raise children, not "we" the village.

If government is removed from marriage, then government must be removed from all issues of all forms of property since marriage follows inheritances and property interests.

The state should record and recognise these interests (in order to punish criminal actions such as theft), but I agree that it should not meddle with and constrain them to the extent it does.