Government shouldn't be involved in marriage

Wall Street Journal ^ | 12/30/04 | C. N.

[kenavi]

Nobody's Business December 30, 2004; Page A9

...the bans on gay marriage are nothing more than invidious discrimination. But government shouldn't be involved in the religious swamp of marriage in the first place. Marriages should all be "civil unions," and let each couple decide how they want to characterize their own arrangement. Whomever it was that made the joke, "Marriage is no one's business except the three people involved" managed to get at the essential truth. Americans seem to have gotten the notion that almost everything, from drug use to child-rearing, is appropriate grist for the public-opinion and regulation mill.

[kenavi]

Here's how'd I spin it:

Whom you share your house, hearth, health insurance... with is a civil union, regulated by government.

A union based on sacredness is a marriage, sanctified by a religion.

End of "debate".

[bahblahbah]

Thats good except I still don't want gays to be able to adopt. And how do we get away with not allowing polygamy.

[stopem]

What part of Sanctity of Marriage is between a Man and a Woman do they still not understand.

[ScottFromSpokane]

Americans seem to have gotten the notion that almost everything, from drug use to child-rearing, is appropriate grist for the public-opinion and regulation mill.

Yeah, that's it. Civil marriage is a radical new concept invented in 1962 by welfare state bureaucrats. Never before in human history has the state played any role in the institution of marriage.

[Piers-the-Ploughman]

I want to help my mother in law as she is one of the elderly poor. In fact I help her enough that I can claim her as a dependent. She does not live with us. Can I force my employer to put her on my health and dental insurance and spend FLEX money on her? Or is a civil union for sodomy and other perversions only?

It would surprise the Founders of this country that sodomy (we have them to thank for AIDS, hepatitis etc)is a civil right.

[ex-snook]

Marriage is what creates children to pay social security and defend the country. If government is into social security and defense, it is into marriage.

[sgtbono2002]

Wall Street Journal seems to believe families mean nothing.

[NCPAC]

"Government shouldn't be involved in marriage."

That concept is so basic, so obvious in its truth and simplicity, I just don't understand how anyone, of any religious or shade of a secularist stripe, could stand in opposition.

[GovernmentShrinker]

What's it to you if some guy's got 10 wives? As long as they're not underage, it's nobody's business.

[GovernmentShrinker]

It should be up to your employer, not the government, whether you can put your mother on the company-sponsored health insurance plan. The government shouldn't have one word to say about what benefits a private company does or doesn't offer its employees, and has no business offering tax incentives for private companies to do what the government wants them to do.

[GovernmentShrinker]

As one devout Christian FReeper put it: "It sent chills up my spine when I heard the pastor say "By the power vested in me by the State of ______, I now pronounce you man and wife." Silly FReeper thought it was God's power that was supposed to be in charge of this church marriage thing.

[syriacus]

Government shouldn't be involved in marriage

Does "Government" mean "Federal government" or "state government" or "county government?"

I had to go to my county seat to get a marriage license back in 1970.

[AdamSelene235]

And how do we get away with not allowing polygamy.

Why should you get away with that?

[Logophile]

"Government shouldn't be involved in marriage." That concept is so basic, so obvious in its truth and simplicity, I just don't understand how anyone, of any religious or shade of a secularist stripe, could stand in opposition.

Unfortunately, government is already deeply involved in every aspect of life, from cradle to grave. Its effects have often been deleterious. Many people fear that the marriage issue is just another excuse for more social engineering. Can you say for certain that they are wrong?

It would be one thing if the push for "gay marriage" were coming through the legislatures, but it is being forced upon us by the courts. In my opinion, that is reason enough to oppose it.

[syriacus]

Looks like some governments do regulate marriages....

May a person with communicable syphilis obtain a marriage license [in Massachusetts]?

No. However, after the applicant has had sufficient treatment and is found non-infectious, the doctor will issue the medical certificate and a marriage license may be obtained.

[hoosierham]

Hasn't government ,i.e. tribal elders or others been a fact of life in marriage for many thousands of years ?

[kenavi]

Through government we regulate a lot of things. For example, we proscribe slavery.

Seems the same would apply to civil unions. For example, it couldn't take place for a minor. It'd be a standard, contractual relationship, separate from marriage, which is a province of religion.

[Raycpa]

Gov't is involved for a very important reason, namely obligation. The purpose of Gov't is to act on behalf of society in imposing obligations on spouses to care for one another and their children so that these burdens do not fall on the rest of us.

The whole idea that Gov't is conferring rights is a re-framing of the issue that is used by gays to change the subject from one they will lose at. There is no reason to impose obligations on a couple who are equals.

[nicko]

take my wife(s)...please...

[virgil]

"Fornication Under Consent of the King" Government has been requiring permission for marriage for a very long time. Marriage is not a right. You have to get a license to be married.